Obama sneaks a payoff to Big Labor with an Executive order media ignored
April 17, 2010, 7:05 am

By Kevin “Coach” Collins

It’s kickback time

In 2008 unions gave Democrats $68,272,996 and Republicans $6,022,906 meaning 92% went to Barack Obama and his Democrats. For this money Big Labor thought it was buying the un-American Card Check scheme which would force all workers to “join” a union. Although Card Check has failed the reason for its necessity has not changed. Union membership is shrinking and with that contraction union dues are falling sharply. Since 92% of all union campaign contributions go to Democrats, having unemployed union workers not paying dues, which eventually turns into Democrat war chest cash can not be tolerated.

Obama paying his bills

In February Obama quietly signed Executive Order 13502 ordering federal agencies to accept only union shop bids for construction projects over $25 million. Since only 15% of construction workers are unionized this virtually guarantees: every union construction worker a job and that nonunion workers will be banging down the doors of union halls.

The “$25 million” threshold will provide work for just enough non-union workers to give credibility to the lie that “Oh no we don’t hire ONLY union workers, why take a look at our books.”

Permanent cost overruns

In this worst economy since Democrat Franklin Roosevelt’s Administration paying union workers merely because they are union workers makes no sense. The average weekly salary for a unionize construction worker is $908.00, but the average non-union worker earns just $710.00 or 22% less.

Double whammy

Obama’s sellout will cost us more for each federal project because it slams a double edge sword into our heart. It means federal projects can only be completed with union work that always costs more, and actual free market costs have been obliterated as jobs will be regularly over bid.

Pension bomb

The average union pension program has been looted and is only 62% funded. Plans with just 80% of necessary funding are labeled “endangered” and those under 65% of funding are called “critical” by the same federal auditors who will be ordered to look the other way when these contracts are signed. Bet on this.
Collins Report
Regardless whether you are a union supporter or not, my question to all is:

Is it fair to the taxpayers of the U.S. to require them to favor union workers over non-union workers?