Archived Story

Democrats go to extreme with day care union bill

Published 9:47am Friday, May 31, 2013 Updated 11:51am Friday, May 31, 2013

The Minnesota Legislature’s decision to bypass good sense, good government and federal labor laws seems likely to be a bigger benefit to lawyers than to the day care providers that a new law is supposed to help. The rapidity with which a new law allowing day care providers to unionize drew a court challenge is a testament to just how bad the law is.

It came as little surprise that newly empowered Democrats used this year’s legislative session to enact some extreme legislation. They were, after all, only playing tit-for-tat with Republicans who had previously used their control of the Legislature to similarly push an extreme agenda.

The Democrats’ work this year included the law which, with Gov. Mark Dayton’s backing, takes the unheard of stance that day care operators, a group of private business owners, can join forces in a labor union. Opponents of the measure — among them many day care providers — argue that the sate law violates federal labor laws and the Constitution.

It also defies good sense to expect that day care operators would quickly, if ever, recoup the dues they would be forced to pay unions. Nor does it sit well with many Minnesotans that lawmakers’ venture into new territory came on the heels of an election when labor unions poured vast sums into Democratic Party campaign coffers.

Predictably, the law is so suspect that it has already drawn a legal challenge from a group of day care providers who oppose unionization. That suit will probably spawn others and, before all is said and done, generate more profits for attorneys than for any day care provider — union or no. That’s bad legislation.

The real problem, of course, is the tendency of both political parties to look at any moment of control as a chance to enact their agenda – which is not the same as good government, which almost always is built on compromise and accommodation. The day care union law, which faces a well-deserved legal challenge, is merely another sign of a broken political system.

  • Richard Olson

    It’s time for some truth. The first truth is that this editorial is nothing short of the management of one business(newspapers) sticking up for the management of another business (day care providers).

    I have never ever seen an employer that allows the employees to set policy, determine methods of production or encroach upon any rights that management reserves for itself. Nor do editors and publishers allow lowly workers to write editorials for their newspapers.

    What do you think this newspaper would say if the government told this newspaper “yes, of course you have freedom of the press. But we think it would be unwise of you to exercise that right. We in the government will determine what is best for the newspaper business, because we have your best interest at heart, we’ll take care of you.”

    Yet the management of the Fergus newspaper has no problem telling day care workers the verbal equivalent. “yes of course you have the right of free association as guaranteed in the constitution but we think it would be unwise of you to take advantage of your rights. We, your paternalistic employers will determine what is in your best interest. If you need a raise we will make that determination, don’t worry, we’ll take care of you because we have your best interest at heart.

    Too many people like to pretend that all day care providers are all single proprietorships with no additional employees. But that’s not true and it’s the owners (for the most part) that wail against this vote because they may have to pay their employees more. (never mind that they’ll get more from the state, they just don’t want to share it with those who do the work)

    So this newspaper thinks allowing people the right to vote is “going to extreme(s)”, workers using their rights as guaranteed in the United States Constitution is “going to extreme(s)”.

    Lastly, the newest lawsuit would have been filed whether someone considered the law “suspect” or not, if for no other reason than to delay a vote. Additionally one would think that those who consider this law a violation of so-called labor law could eventually provide “chapter and verse” of the violated section and sub-section before asserting it’s a generic violation.

    • camobabe

      Curly, your rant here is mendacious hogwash.
      Your government employee union thugs are the ones who want to deny the daycare providers the right to run their own businesses. You want to use the legislature as a battering ram to stamp out peoples’ right to work when, where, and as they please. No wonder the socialist controlled unions are so terrified of right to work laws which so many States have in place. For, wherever there is the right to work without having to pay “protection money”, AKA union dues, to obtain or hold on to a job, there resides freedom of employment.

      You conveniently overlook that close to 88% of the daycare owner/worker/providers do NOT want the unions to take control of the services thay have worked long and hard to establish and perfect. They don’t want to have to tell the parents of the children they care for, “Sorry, I have to raise my rates to care for your children because ACORN and the Teamsters and the Public Employee Unions are levying dues upon us which will raise our cost of doing business by 50 to 150 percent”. Dues whuch will then be transferred to the campaign war chests of 0baama and his socialist minions in Congress.

      And, why do you conceal what you have frequently boasted of as a long and successful career organizing union takeovers of schools and other organizations serving the public? With your history you are hardly a fair or impartial observer or commenter.

      The most pathetic tale you tell here is that this editorial is crafted by a greedy conservative corporate writer. This paper is dominated by libs and Democrat sympathizers, but even they can see that your fellow socialists in the MN legislature have gone too far this time.

      • Richard Olson

        As usual, Mrs. Mullins. Your childish anti-union, anti-worker, anti-American and anti-constitution breathless and hysterical scold contains nothing but one lie after another. Further your sheer contempt for the truth is outweighed only by your jealously of the wages and benefits enjoyed by union members.

        Perhaps if you weren’t so lazy and dependent upon the largess of your employer, you could rise above your current station where you have such “freedom of employment” that you feel the need to lash out at others who have the courage to take control of their own economic destiny.

        Lastly, if free American Trade Unions weren’t a wonderful benefit to union members, their families and the American Middle Class they wouldn’t even be on your corporatist radar and you wouldn’t be trying so hard to discourage membership in organizations that empower working people. And we all know that empowered working people are an anathema to the corporatist and their servile toady’s like you Camilla.

    • littleguy56289

      RICHARD, you don’t know what you’re talking about! The “day cares” are business owners!!
      RICHARD, earth to Richard, this “union” is not for employees of those business owners!! IT’s a union that forces the business owners who have state-subsidized children in their care into a union through the Fair Share law!!!!

      Richard, study up on the issue a little more and then come back and comment.

      • Richard Olson

        It is for both, owners and employees. Study this, Randy….there is NO LAW in Minnesota or any other state in the United States that forces anyone, owner or employee to join any union. That has been the law since the “Beck” decision of the Supreme Court.

  • Walt Henry

    Acorn? The nuts squirrels collect? What do nuts have to do with daycare? (That’s a loaded question. :)) Might be wise to update someone’s information.
    A few facts–over 12,000 daycare providers depend on state subsidies to cover their costs and a give them little profit. (huge profit?) Who currently sets the rates they charge and the service the child’s parent receives for our tax money? (Less than 6,000 don’t receive subsidies)
    Why are daycare costs currently so high parents can’t afford to pay the going rate on their own? It seems the subsidies distort the daycare market.
    Why are the wages the parents earn so low they can’t afford to cover the cost of their own kids?
    What happened to supportive families that cared for their own and then each others?
    The Journal disappoints me with this editorial. It seems to be little more than union bashing and offers little in the way of facts or math. I realize editorials aren’t known for facts and math but considering the comments, I wish they had done a little more research first.
    It might be a good idea to inform the readers that if a majority of daycare providers vote against union representation there will be no union. Seems all the DFL did was try to give them a vote.
    (BTW–what happens if the power of collective purchasing/price setting increases the profits or decreases the costs of daycare providers? Does the Journal or its readers think this would be a bad thing?)

    • J Mullins

      Larry alias Walt, I would be interested in seeing a reputable financial analysis or case study where union organizing and collective bargaining for wages and benefits actually lowered the costs of goods or services provided by the targeted enterprise – in the private or public sector. Increasing wages always are passed through to the consumer/purchaser as cost increases.

      I await enlightenment.

      BTW, Curly Ackermunk, Camilla is not, nor ever has been, my wife. She has a husband who is a good and decent man, and his family name since his birth is Ryan.

      • Walt Henry

        Jerome–consider the cost of health insurance to the daycare provider. Purchasing a policy as an individual is MUCH more expensive than buying into a group policy where the risk is shared. Unions create a shared risk pool. (I realize Obamacare makes this example less relevant but it makes the value of bulk purchasing rather obvious.)
        Consider the bulk purchases by one of the two big wholesale “clubs.” The prices they charge to consumers are lower than full-service retailers and one of the reasons is their ability to buy in bulk. (And one of them, the most profitable one, pays higher wages with better benefits than the other. How can this be?) Unions sometimes act as wholesalers for everything from gasoline to chain-link fencing for their members. Why wouldn’t we think the daycare union would do the same for the most costly of daycare supplies?
        Consider price containment as a by-product of competition. Competition between daycares, those union and those not, is what will ultimately set the market price for labor. Granted, those that are inefficiently run, ones trying to pay off a huge mortgage on their house for example, might have less/no profit at the going rate but why should taxpayers pay for their inefficiencies?
        AS one of the group vice presidents of a division of a major dairy co-op once told me years ago, “Unions aren’t such a bad thing. It certainly gives us the advantage of knowing what the rules are and lets us plan accordingly.”
        (Compare the financial statements between Costco and Sam’s Club. This information is readily available and shows the difference between pay rates/ labor costs is NOT necessarily an indicator of profitability IF the company is well run.) Do you feel enlightened?
        Lastly, the DFL didn’t create a union–they only tried to let people have the opportunity to vote. (Underline tried)

        • littleguy56289

          Larry, I won’t argue with your Costco information, it all looks pretty good, but you are denying one major fact here…the DFL won’t allow all day care business owners a vote. That’s Russian-style politics at its worst.

          What is the DFL afraid of by letting all licensed child care business owners a chance to vote?? They’ll ALL be affected by the union’s activities…why shut them out from the democratic process???

          • Richard Olson

            To be an eligible voter you must have had a current CCAP registration in the last 12 months. YOU DO NOT NEED TO HAVE ACCEPTED A CCAP PAYMENT.
            Randy Olson apparently thinks that people who receive no state subsidy or are not affected by the vote should be able to influence the vote.

            Gee, we don’t allow management to vote in union elections either, because it’s not about them and it’s not about days care providers who haven’t registered to receive a subsidy.

            I think it’s amazing, the excuses some people can gin up to cover their hatred of unions and working people helping themselves.

          • Walt Henry

            Randy, I understand the eligibility to vote is determined by who is the owner. Employees of a daycare provider are not eligible as they already have the right to request a certification vote, just as any other employees of any business can. Personally, I think the word “union” is misapplied. I don’t see how private owner-operators can form a union; association certainly, union in the traditional sense I don’t understand. However, there is an organization effort by a major International Union going on and the word union is in the language as this is described so I will leave it to those who know more and the courts to determine if the effort is prohibited or allowable by labor law.
            Again, all the DFL did was allow private owner/operators the right to vote. Others already have that right.
            And I see we have another squirrel looking for nuts.

  • J Mullins

    Curly Ackermunk, your mendacious remarks about the status of daycares being NOT businesses only serves to show the truth of Camilla’s statement about you own history of taking over entities and placing them under the jackboots of labor unions. You insist on repeating the phony propaganda of the radical leftist ACORN and public employee unions and tell us that in the case of small business , operator owned, daycares, that businesses are actually employees, not self-employers. Typical statist union baloney, equivalent to telling us that the sun is actually the moon, up is actually down. And the falsehoods of the unions which you swear are accurate are then “explained” by Larry alias Walt as factually supported by (false) math, science, and a “correct” interpretation of history. During the reign of your fellow Marxists over the soviet union the government propagandists re-invented history to the extent that historians in other parts of the world came up with a term for socialist historians, that being “revisionist historians”, because of their relentless pattern of revising facts to further the advance of communist dominion over humanity.

    Your disingenuous rambling attempt to invert, reverse, and obfuscate economics and history lump you in with the long parade of Marxist revisionists.

    • Richard Olson

      Hey Jerome, if you can get off the Joe McCarthy band wagon long enough, why don’t you just show all of us where I said day care is not a business.

      When you can’t, or go silent on your charge, it will prove once more that like all your other comments on virtually any issue they are nothing but puffery from a know nothing gas bag blowhard internet troll crying for attention.

    • Walt Henry

      Hunting nuts? How old IS your information, Jerome?

  • Richard Olson

    Hey Jerome Ryan, how come you and the person posing as Camilla, your wife, always use the same words when you’re bouncing off padded walls? Like.. mendacious, obfuscate, jackboots, ACORN, Marxist, Socialists, Union Thugs, libs, rads. We both know the reason don’t we Jerome? Because you’re both the same person. (with no imagination)

    By the way Jerome, it’s been nearly 2 hours since you said that I said “day care is not a business”. I asked you to show us where I said that…..2 hours and you still can’t provide the evidence. But that’s nothing new is it? Not for a gasbag, blowhard that just blurts out anything for the sake of attention. Two hours and counting……..

    • Richard Olson

      Six (6) hours Jerome. Where’s your proof? Once again Jerome Mullins let his big fat mouth overload his minuscule brain. It’s not the first time is it Jerome, remember the phony union thugs you said were intimidating your tea bagging Senator in the halls of the capitol. You got caught up on that one didn’t you. Then there was the whopper about all those union members tearing up their union card after a few words from the mesmerizing speech by that same Senator…once again not true and you got caught in another lie.
      You just can’t help it can you. Six hours and counting……..Hey I can see Jerome’s nose growing from my house. Sorry Sarah.

      • Mandy P.

        Richard, how can it be that since Jerome has not responded to your attacks within minutes of your spewing them, you can make so many unsupported claims and accusations against him?
        Has it ever occurred to you that Jerome might be at work earning a living, and doesn’t have the luxury of living on a cadillac union pension like you get? That he has more important things to do than troll the internet all day, like you do, to attack anyone who differs with your radical viewpoints? Some of us have to earn a living so we can surrender the tax payments which fund your angry existence.
        And how can you fault like minded people for using like sounding terms, adjectives, descriptions to describe persons such as you? I note that you and your cohorts here use the same kind of language to insult your detractors. May we thus conclude that you and Larry and Elliot and Phaerus are all the same person or a group of people using false identities who coordinate your attacks against those who fail to measure up (or down) to your warped standards?
        I have read here on several occasions that Camilla and Bill and Jerome have offered to meet you and Larry and Phaedrus anywhere you want for a coffee
        and to show to you that they actually exist and , I gather, for them to learn whether you are three separate people or one person with several characters to play. And, all three of you, Phaedrus, Larry, Richard have refused to meet. Now, who is fearful of being identified as the one or the many when you won’t come out of the shadows? Camilla and Bill and Jerome have challenged you to come out into the light, but you refuse and then accuse them of being non existent people.
        BTW, all those words and phrases which you claim are evidence that there is only one person with several identities writing in opposition to you? I have seen many of those words in use in both conservative and radical liberal talk shows, newspaper stories, being uttered by members of both parties in the Congress and state governments. Using your logic, that must mean that there really are not 535 memebrs of the House/Senate, there are just two, one from each party, quickly changing from one disguise to another to argue their positions.

        • Walt Henry

          Mandy, Jerome wrote “in the private or public sector. Increasing wages always are passed through to the consumer/purchaser as cost increases. I await enlightenment.” Notice he used the word ALWAYS. Always is an absolute and absolutes are rarely if ever true. I suggested he compare the profitability for two similar enterprises. I hear crickets in response. Is he enlightened; the error in his logic now exposed and corrected? Or is it likely we will hear him make the same false claims in the future?
          But to your point of a meeting–I don’t write for your benefit or any of the others who claim conservative dogma as their political ideal. I write to those silent readers for I know I am not likely to change the opinion of someone who listens to “conservative and radical liberal” talk shows. There are many grey viewpoints between the extremes you cite though most of the “conservative” commenters here fail to see them.

        • Richard Olson

          Mandy if you want to defend Jerome and his wife Camilla have at it. It’ll only make you look more foolish than you already do.

          Had you bothered to check before you defended Jerome’s refusal to back up his big mouth you would have found that at 1:49 am he was on another page of this forum http://www.fergusfallsjournal.com/2013/05/31/legislative-session-reveals-truth-on-myths/
          As a matter of fact, so were you. You posted the very next comment after Jerome at 2:50 am. Then you came here to make your phony red herring defense of Jerome at 3:35am.

          Another more clear way of putting it is that when you made your comment above you knew at the time you were writing a lie. You know Jerome was awake after I left my last comment last night and fully capable of providing proof of his allegation if he had such proof. He doesn’t and that proves he is a liar. And I thank you for drawing more attention to his lie by your misdirection defense.

          The remainder of your childish comment deserves no response as each and every point you make has been answered countless times. Try and keep up Mandy. If you want to have coffee with a bunch of phony liars and reactionary anti-Americans go ahead enjoy yourself. I assume your shot record is up to date.

          In any case, it has now been 17 hours since Jerome Mullins can not back up another of his comments.
          I can see Jerome’s nose from my house and it appears his pants are on fire also. Get fire hose Mandy.

          • Richard Olson

            It’s been well over 24 hours since I asked Jerome to provide that proof of what he alleges I said. He has not done so. It is reasonable to conclude that he cannot provide the proof. Therefore it is also reasonable to conclude that once again Jerome has been proven to be an unmitigated liar. It is also apparent that Jerome fails to possess the honor necessary to admit his willful lie.

            Remember this the next time you see a comment from Jerome Mullins a man willing to lie.

          • Mandy P.

            Richard, just because Jerome Mullins and I both happen to be awake at the same time DOES NOT prove that we are coordinating our comments. I know for a fact that Jerome has been out of state on a work assignment since June 1, and gets to his computer to read your far fetched opinions when he is able to fit it in between work and sleep.
            My job requires me to work three , 12 hour shifts per week in Fargo, so I find it difficult to fit in a mandatory instructional in Marxist ideology which you and your crew want us to endure, along with my two days a week obligation to a group of us who home school our children to protect them from the Minnesota public school system. That means I will post here whenever I darn well please, regardless you want to manufacture some kind of conspiracy among the other conservatives in the area. Yes, I know Jerome, and Camilla, and Bill and several hundred other people here, my home county, and often visit with a lot of people and exchange ideas with them. We trade information and jokes about you redicals and the kind of people you are able to gull with your utopian dreams. But, the bunch of you do the same thing, so quit insinuating that conservatives are involved in a conspiracy just because we visit with each other.

            A friend who is talking with me as I write this to you has suggested that since you are always the one who demands proof from those who offer differnt opinions than yours, how is it that you can say that two people who use the same English language and get on their computers within a few hours of each other are necessarily and conclusively “conspiring” to commit some evil act? And, how can you apply that same illogical nonsense to the fact that your and Larry and other leftists comments show up in swarms within minutes of each other? By your reasoning, we would have to conclude that the bunch of you are just accusing others of using your own tactics.

          • Richard Olson

            My response to Mandy’s comment is caught in the papers filter and I have asked Joel Myhre to release it.

  • Richard Olson

    Mandy, with every comment you become more transparent. But now I wonder how you can home school your poor children when you are provably unable to read yourself.

    Go back and re-read or have a random public school third grader read my comment to you, because I’m not going to take the time to explain how Jerome can make a comment on one article of this site and is therefore one click away from proving his ill-founded comment on another article ON THIS VERY SAME SITE. Home schooled indeed, sounds like child abuse and/or neglect to me. And then some wonder how some adults grow up to believe humans co-existed with dinosaurs like in the Flintstones. (which by the way, is not a documentary)

    I guess that after two days it still has not dawned on you, that despite Jerome’s 24-7 work schedule…..if Jerome’s charge were true even you (presumably) or any other so-inclined tea bagger could point to proof of Jerome’s charge. After all, there are only four comments by me prior to Jerome’s idiotic charge to choose from. And like you said there are sooooooooooooo many of you conservatives, it’s amazing that not one of you can come forward to save Jerome’s bacon.

  • Walt Henry

    The American Dream–to build a better life for one’s self and their family than the one they inherited from their parents. Some of us kept our eyes and ears open and followed that dream. For some of us that meant we get “Cadillac pensions.” For some of us we saved 16% of every paycheck for 40 years and are able to continue to live our pre-retirement lifestyle. If we know it can be done because we did it (and yes, there was a time when I paid more than 50% of my paychecks in federal income tax and yes there were years when I max-ed out my Social Security contribution before the end of the year) my question is why can’t EVERYONE do it? The follow-up questions are why do people denigrate those of us who achieved the American Dream. Are you lazy, jealous or have an Eeyore complex?

    • Richard Olson

      Excellent points Larry. It demonstrates the hypocrisy of Conservatives who celebrate achievement in fellow conservatives who are automatically assumed to gain their lifestyle by hard work and determination against all odds.

      The same achievement by Liberals must have come about by government largess, stealing from the wealthy, or a cushy union job where you never had to work and couldn’t get fired.

      I earned my Cadillac pension by 35 years in an excellent union job, where myself and my fellows stood up for our rights and took charge of our own economic destiny. We didn’t act like a bunch of sheep who let the boss make decisions for my future. And along the way I’ve met a lot of jealous weenies with a lot of excuses and no backbone. And even a few Judas goats who will sell their class and their fellow workers out for a promise and a tickle from the boss. It’s just like Jay Gould said “I could hire half of the working class to kill the other half”

      • Mandy P.

        Careful, Richard, you are coming close to revealing how you and your fellow unionist agitators manipulate your fellow union members to maintain a constant state of anger and animosity toward the employers who created companies which provide jobs for their employees.

        • Richard Olson

          It doesn’t take anger to stand up for yourself. It does take anger and jealously to demonstrate your hatred of union members who have made something of themselves. Rather than drive to Fargo to work 12 hour days at a job with no pension.

          • Mandy P.

            Nice try at trying to learn where I work or what my occupation is Richard. I have noted the many times you have boasted of stalking Camilla and Jerome to learn where they live and the details about their work and families. I do not intend to subject myself nor my family to your harassment or attempts to intimidate us.

            Suffice it to say that my occupation is one which requires a graduate degree, the skills and occupation are transportable to any town I choose as a home, and I don’t have to belong to a union to earn a decent wage and benefits package, including a pension plan.We live here because we like it here more than we would in Fargo, and many of my relatives live here.

            Keep your distance from us.

          • Richard Olson

            Get over yourself Mandy. I couldn’t care less where you live, work or pretend to exist. I was merely quoting you and your former comments about your own job. It’s easier to remember what you wrote when it’s the truth.
            The more you write the more convinced I become you are nothing but another persona for Camilla.

        • Walt Henry

          Mitbestimmung–ignorance of the unionist movement is no excuse for saying things that are not accurate. It’s great that women work outside the home, I don’t agree women are “workerettes” like we heard from Dobbs, Williams and Erickson the other day on Fox. But both sexes should consider the goals of Republican Motherhood (yes, that’s a term your kids should learn as it is part of our history) and try to teach them to our children.

  • Richard Olson

    Hey Mandy, one would think that someone like you with a graduate degree could show me where I said “daycares are not businesses”. Jerome has had four days to do it but alas, he can’t back up his big mouth.
    I was thinking that a genius like you could find that statement in a heartbeat. If you can find your way to Fargo, you should be able to find one sentence in four comments. I’ll check beck to see if you’ve made any progress.

  • Richard Olson

    Nothing yet Mandy? Are you sure you don’t have a hall pass rather than a degree?

  • Walt Henry

    Since 2007, the number of jobs in the US is 2.1% below where it was. In highly unionized German jobs are up 5.8%, yes, even when their economy is tied to the Eurozone. Do these facts help to confirm conservatives are either more likely to lie or more likely to disregard facts and math that doesn’t serve their ideology? I think they might just be too busy talking and not willing to do the work of research. (Listening to radical right wing conservative propaganda is NOT research.)

Editor's Picks

Beach Bums raising the bar: Remodeled restaurant brings Hawaiian feel to Otter Tail Lake

Guzzlers Bar & Grill on Otter Tail Lake has a new look this spring as it has been purchased and revamped into Beach Bums Bar ... Read more

Seasoned debaters to duke it out

Great American Think-Off chooses contestants The Great American Think-Off has announced its debaters for the event’s 23rd annual philosophy debate, which is June 13 this ... Read more

New biking rules coming to downtown: ‘Sharrows’ to mark Lincoln Ave.

Shared lane markings — commonly called “sharrows” — will soon be placed on both sides of Lincoln Avenue from Union Avenue to Cascade Street as ... Read more

Henning student starts Relay for Life

Idea came after family member diagnosed One Henning student is taking a big initiative this month after her family was hit with tragedy. Henning High ... Read more