DETROIT (AP) — Peggy Mashke tends to 12 children for 12 hours a day at her home, so she was surprised to get a letter welcoming her to the United Auto Workers union.
AP
“I thought it was a joke,” said Mashke, 50, of northern Michigan’s Ogemaw County. “I work out of my home. I’m not an auto worker. How can I become a member of the UAW? I didn’t get it.”
Willing or not, Mashke and 40,000 other at-home providers are members of a labor partnership that represents people across Michigan who watch children from low-income families. Two unions receive 1.15 percent of the state subsidies granted to those providers, or more than $1 million a year.
Mashke has given up about $100 this year, and while she says it’s not a huge amount of money, she’s among a small group of home-based providers suing in federal court to break free from organized labor.
“It’s the principle. It’s my constitutional rights,” she said.
The plaintiffs claim they were driven into the union and forced to support it financially even though they work at home, are hired by families and are not state employees. In some cases, they are even related to the children in their care.
In 2006, the UAW and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, or AFSCME, were formally approved as partners in a union called Child Care Providers Together Michigan. Only 15 percent of the providers cast ballots, but 92 percent were in favor.
The lawsuit, filed by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, claims that Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Democrat, and her administration cleared the way for the union in exchange for valuable political support from the UAW and AFSCME.
Michigan is one of at least 16 states where unions are mandatory representatives of personal-care workers, according to National Right to Work.
The state and the unions have defended the arrangement as the legal result of a process that was blessed by the Michigan Employment Relations Commission. They say there is no role for a federal judge to second-guess what has occurred.
Union attorney John West acknowledged it’s a “novel approach” to bring home-based workers under the labor umbrella.
“This is really a pretty important issue,” West said at a July 13 court hearing. “We have a problem that’s been festering for a long time in a lot of states where you have a large group of generally poorly paid, often not-very-well-trained employees.
“To try and resolve this issue and improve the situation, unions in a number of states have put a lot of effort into trying to organize these people, successfully in many instances,” he said.
On its website, The UAW says the partnership “gives a much-needed voice and power” to child care providers who have problems dealing with the state’s bureaucracy.
“They might not get their check from the state. You wouldn’t believe how much that happens,” a UAW vice president, Cindy Estrada, told The Associated Press. “Or they don’t know they can get an increase in their subsidy if they get more training. … You wouldn’t believe how much an extra 10 dollars a day can help.”
And there are providers who say the union has been helpful. Elizabeth Hall, 61, who looks after three children at her home in suburban Detroit, said she was having trouble getting paid by the state but the UAW “cut a lot of corners and got right to the source. I was very elated.”
“The UAW is very resourceful,” Hall said. “If there‘s anything you’re not aware of, they bring the information to us.”
Robert Jonker, a federal judge in Grand Rapids, Mich., has ruled that the seven-month-old lawsuit can proceed, at least in the early stages. The Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a Midland-based think tank that promotes free market capitalism, is suing in state court to stop the union on other grounds.
Mackinac Center lawyer Patrick Wright called it an “underhanded scheme.”
“It’s an interesting issue,” said Gary Chaison, professor of industrial relations at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.
“The idea is for unions like the UAW and AFSCME to have a fertile and expanding area to organize to offset the membership losses because of plant closings — in the case of the UAW — or state and city downsizing in the case of AFSCME,” he said.
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (73)
norway1516
Posted on September 13, 2010 at 12:59amIts going to piss alot of union memebers off but the free ride off our backs is almost over.
Report Post »dazyann010501
Posted on September 13, 2010 at 12:43amThe Unions just want to keep lining their pockets!!! :( This is sickening!!! :(
Report Post »pscully17
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:57pmLAme duck / CardCheck Bill- Union will quadruple in size, and Money!! if Card check gets through, which it will, look for 25-30 percent unemployment!! Heil Obama!! ths is exactly how Hitler got into dictatorial Power!! then, he Slaughtered The Unions and the Poverty set in!!! and his ARMY took over the whole country!! read up– oh wait, Im guessing Google wiped out all the references to how Hitler became a Tyrant!! try Bing search!!
Report Post »The Bees
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:29pmAnother triumph for the Socialist Party – whoops – I mean Democrats.
The Unions can’t get members so they pay the Dems to get members for them. How lame and pathetic.
Please God let us skip October this year……
Report Post »carol m
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:25pmCan you believe the audacity of these union heads. They lost their income because they made their workers so high priced that the car companies could not afford them. So what do they do they go intimidate poor women who only want to earn a living taking care of children out of their house. You know I grew up learning that the unions were started to help employees that were being exploited. So who is exploiting the employee now. It certainly isn’t the president of the of the company these poor workers work for. All the unions did was change who exploits the worker as far as I am concerned. Someone please tell me where I went wrong.
Report Post »Mike777
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:17pmUnfortunately I live in Michigan the Unions run this state. Granholm and the dems. have completely destroyed this once great state. The only hope is this nov. we can vote some of them evil dems. out of office.
Report Post »FreeTheAmericans
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:15pmI mowed my lawn. I guess they’ll force me into the UAW now, too.
Report Post »PunditPawn
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:14pmThe only way this survives the court challenge is if the judge plays golf with the union thugs. Binding someone into a union because of their career choice is clearly discriminatory, predatory, and just more of the 8 years of Granholm fiscal holocaust bull**** that Michigan has had to put up with.
Report Post »Asher
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:05pmThey’d have trouble getting my money. I’ll tell you that right now. I refuse to pay Unions and if they think they can take the right for me to earn a living away, well they got another think coming. I’ll find a way to live and they can just bugger off to hell.
Report Post »JeffW65
Posted on September 14, 2010 at 4:44pmIf you want to opt out of these unions it usually costs you almost the same as your dues would for the “right’ to not belong to the union. Refuse to pay that and you won’t be able to work for that employer. The unions don’t care which way you go because they will get their money one way or the other.
Report Post »ConservativeJane
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:05pmAll the more reason I will never buy a car made by the UAW. Interesting thing happened last week…the 2011 Audis are now coming in. I spoke to the salesman last Wednesday about a new car that was set to arrive in mid October. He suggested that I “put my name on it” because he had already sold 4 cars that morning…I was the 5th for one salesman in one dealership….
My take–people are fed up with unions, the auto bailouts, etc. They said car sales are down 25% but I would like to break that out by manufacturer/brand….
Report Post »Mike777
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:24pmI agree! I have always bought GM products, but my next one is going to be Toyota. That way I won’t support a union and will be supporting a right to work state. Its the union leadership so i don’t have a beef about the rank and file folks. But maybe i do they keep voting in there leadership so I don’t about them either.
FOR DBAG
Report Post »BUY A CAR FROM A RIGHT TO WORK STATE DON”T SUPPORT THE UAW!!!!!!!!!!!!
CruzerDog
Posted on September 13, 2010 at 12:48amYes, Buy American, BUY Non Union. Free Americans working in an smaller free market.
REPEAL Executive Order 10988, giving federal employees the right to organize, make it a Tea Party Plank
Report Post »thegr8restoration
Posted on September 13, 2010 at 1:15amHope you don’t gamble in Atlantic City the dealers are UAW!
Report Post »CruzerDog
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:02pmNext thing you know they will pushing Dad out of the way as there handing out Mother her Union Ticket, (and dues invoice) as she is giving birth.
The Democrats don’t even surprise me any more….They just SUCK.
Report Post »wingedwolf
Posted on September 13, 2010 at 7:07pmthat’s demolibersocialcommie. That’s what used to be the democratic party. More and more, if you listen, you hear people like Aunt Esther maxine waters, charlie rangle and Bertha of acorn leadership fame saying out loud that it’s perfectly great to call yourself a democratic socialist. There are over 80 elected lawmakers in the house and senate both republican AND democrat, who are confirmed members of the dsa…democratic socialists of America. They plan on cramming that down our throats like the medical takeover law. And please don’t forget the dear daughter of John, Megan McCain, who’s like, a progressive, like, republican…can only wonder where she gets like, her progressive views, like…. They think we are just cowed and beaten dogs, but they have merely awakened the sleeping giant, to quote Admiral Yamamoto. LOL
Report Post »Taquoshi
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:59pmIn my state, the childcare providers who are not home based but now receive state subsidies for the families who are low income have to be accredited. From what I have heard, it’s a long, difficult process and not necessarily inexpensive. Also, our state has decided that all formal child care workers must obtain a four year college degree within the next two years. This is all being done under school readiness and early childhood education flags. The state would like to have more home based child care providers involved, but the home based providers are flying under the radar and I can’t blame them. When you get this kind of interference from unions or from the government, it produces an underground economy. And Michigan is going to see more of that as time passes, simply because bureaucracy is too difficult to manage this type of business properly.
Report Post »rolandg79
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:57pmThats extortion(mob like)! Hey welcome you have to pay or will get the state involved.
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:53pmunion leaders and government officials who are in their pockets need to be publicly tarred and feathered
Report Post »every other tuesday, and put in the stocks every thursday
Timothy1922
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:52pmOh my god, really? REALLY?
Report Post »Classicallib
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:46pmNothing wrong with a little fun at the Danletroll’s expense. Midwest Belle needs to grow a sense of humor. Keep up the good work Big Daddy!
Report Post »mtnclimberjim
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:44pmunions suck big time
Report Post »RESTORATION1787
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:44pmProbably out pawning his food stamps. I’ll let him know.
Report Post »USAMama
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:41pmThe gov‘t probably doesn’t pay these people and fails to mention stuff on purpose so their union buddies can come in and “save the day”. I don’t trust any of them anymore.
Report Post »redneck
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:40pmThat boy of yours is prohibited to blog when ever children are involved.
Report Post »RESTORATION1787
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:38pmLike it or not, Everyone of us is now supporting union pensions through the wonderful bailouts that have so improved the Summer of Recovery. Even if you are not an UAW worker, You’re supporting the great retirement benefits.
Report Post »Midwest Belle
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:36pmYou’re as bad as he is. Get a life!
Report Post »Midwest Belle
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:36pmThis is so wrong on so many counts. [Day care] Workers at home shouldn’t be affiliated with ANY UNION, especially UAW or AFSCME.
Report Post »Joseph
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:41pmNo doubt! I think people in the midwest have been so brainwashed in being in a union like Californians with their bottled water. What a pathetic joke. I was part of SEIU and a stuard and quit once I saw what was going on. I didn’t need a mommy looking into my life and directing my every step, like I don’t need welfare even though I live off of $637.00 a month. I’m sorry to say that these people are just, the “R” word meanning slow…and have no desire to think or work for themselves. They just need a mommy or daddy all the time…These are the Stooges…
Now these people, forced into this situation wish to break free from mommy and daddy and they are going to grt trashed by union thugs…then locked in the cellar….Why? because they wish to be hard working idividuals, unlike the Robot Leftist Stooges…These people are the Patriots…
Stooge Patriot…Who do you identify with?
Report Post »Jeff in Miami
Posted on September 13, 2010 at 7:02amI am sure that once she stops the children playing with toy cars the UAW will forget about it. Or is she training these kids to build cars in her living room?
This is totally insane.
Report Post »Endstatism
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:35pmI work for local government in a right to work state. But if your position is classified as bargaining unit, you are compelled to work under the terms of the union contract. You are a defacto union member whether you like it or not. It doesnt matter if state law forbids compulsory union membership as a condition of employment. Somehow there is a exemption for government employees
Report Post »broker0101
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 10:35pmNo worries. I’m sure N.O.W. will be rushing to Ms.Mashke’s defense any second now…… Oh, she isn’t being denied an abortion. Never mind.
Report Post »M31Sailor
Posted on September 12, 2010 at 11:25pmThere bis a solution Leave Michigan
Report Post »Ellie
Posted on September 13, 2010 at 12:05amBetter solution: Constitutional Right To Work Amendment that also denies collective bargaining agreements for all tax payer supported public service jobs.
Report Post »xZEVENx
Posted on September 13, 2010 at 4:21amThe one thing I think would solve the whole mess about unions, or atleast deminish there power, is to take away the mandate of having to join a union no matter how many people in that work field are part of one. Freedom of Choice Act?
Report Post »Jeff in Miami
Posted on September 13, 2010 at 7:00amI’m sure the ACLU will protect your rights. Oh you are against the Union, never mind.
Report Post »birsterj
Posted on September 14, 2010 at 6:50pmEllie is right on
Report Post »