Unionizing Grandma

You've already set things up. You and your spouse have to make a last-minute lengthy meeting with your tax preparer -- so you call your mother, the grandmother of your children, to babysit. Your mother isn't happy; you can tell by the sound of her voice. But she grudgingly does it.

A month later, you receive a summons from the State of California to appear at the local State Board of Labor Relations, because your mother has filed a grievance with CALWORKS; she felt it was unfair to force her to babysit the children and, besides that, you and your spouse were three hours late from the originally agreed-upon time.

Sound far-fetched?

Not at all, ladies and gentlemen, if you live in Fornicalia. And, as you well know, the lunacy that begins here eventually makes its way to the rest of the nation.

To wit:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, CA State Senator Dave Cox:
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
CONTACT: Nghia Nguyen Demovic @ 916.651.4001
Sacramento, CA - In a year when the State of California is facing a budget deficit of $16 billion, Senate Democrats in the Legislature rushed to pass a measure to allow for the unionization of child care workers. Without policy or fiscal committee review, the Senate passed SB 867 by Senator Gil Cedillo of Los Angeles along party lines at its Monday meeting.

“It is irresponsible for the Senate to pass a measure that will cost the state an estimated $60 million at a time when the state has no money,” said Senator Dave Cox, Vice Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee – a committee whose members are in charge of reviewing proposed bills that require state funding. “This bill should have had a hearing in the Senate Appropriations Committee.”

“Think about this for a moment: Increasing the cost of subsidized child care in a state with a $16 billion deficit will cause the state to pay more for less service. Unionized child care workers will receive higher payments forcing the state to fund fewer child care placements. The bottom line is that the state will be spending millions more for fewer services to families,” Cox added.

Through a program called CALWORKS, family members are paid by the state to take care of their children while the parent(s) work or receive training to become less dependent on welfare.

Check it out: Fornicalia wants to UNIONIZE child care providers: i.e., mom and dad, grandmother and grandfather. Oh, but just you wait, it so gets much better:

SB 867 will allow licensed “family child care providers to form, join and participate in ‘provider organizations,’” which is another word for unions. The stated purpose for this bill is to ensure higher quality day care through increased pay and state funded benefits for child care workers.

SB 867 further allows a union that becomes the representative of all family child care providers to charge “fair share” fees to all child care providers.

Even if a grandparent or aunt or uncle objected to unionizing, they could still be subjected to paying union dues.

Do what I call "the logical extension." If these family members are mandated to pay union dues, then does it not follow that grievances shall thusly issue forth? Won't these people want something for their "dues"? Higher wages? Better working conditions? Contracts and negotiations? Benefits? Health care? Retirement benefits for those already retired?

The child-care providers -- grandparents, aunts, uncles and siblings -- would pay dues and be represented collectively in negotiations with the state over pay, benefits and working conditions. Child-care providers who did not want to join would still have to pay fees.

Please read all of this article.

Future phone conversation:

"Grandma, can you watch the kids this Thursday morning?"

"No dear, your father and I are on strike this week, our Local 867 just called. I'm so sorry." Click.

BZ