It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Washington State United Food and Commercial Workers Union has voted to authorize a strike because of Obamacare regulations. Approximately 30,000 workers could walk picket lines as early as next week and the vote to strike was approved by 98% of the membership.
One of the new proposals in the current contract negotiations is to provide health insurance only to those employees working a 30+ hour work week. "As with all employers, the Affordable Care Act will impact how we deliver health benefits to our employees," said Allied chief negotiator Scott Powers. The previous contract provided healthcare for workers with 16+ hour work weeks.
Union officials say the President Obama's signature Affordable Care Act is being used as a convenient excuse to cut benefits."The reason why the employers are doing this is it's a big money grab," said Tom Geiger of UFCW Local 21.
This could be the beginning of strikes around the country as the consequences of Obamacare become apparent.
Under the most recent contract, workers got health care insurance if they put in a minimum of 16 hours per week.
Union officials say the President Obama's signature Affordable Care Act is being used as a convenient excuse to cut benefits.
“We are preparing for a strike” unless Seattle supermarket operators come forward with an acceptable contract offer by the end of this week, UFCW Local 21 spokesperson Tom Geiger tells Working In These Times. A total of 30,000 grocery workers across the Seattle metropolitan area stand ready to hit the picket lines at four separate supermarket chains that are united in demanding health care cuts, wage freezes and other give backs, Geiger says. Last week rank-and-file members voted “overwhelmingly” to authorize a strike, he reports.
“They are trying to make a bogeyman out of Obamacare," Geiger says. "Obamacare is supposed to provide coverage for the uninsured, but our members are insured right now. There is nothing in the law that requires them to eliminate coverage. It’s just an attempt to save money."
buster2010
Obamacare is being used as a scapegoat by the greedy owners who think people should work for slave wages.
The AFL-CIO, at the convention, passed a resolution calling for Obamacare to be amended so that union-sponsored multiemployer plans, often called Taft-Hartley plans, would be eligible for special government subsidies. “The ACA should be administered in a manner that preserves the high-quality health coverage multi-employer plans have provided to union families for decades and, if this is not possible, we will demand the ACA be amended by Congress.”
Earlier, President Obama had spoken to AFL-CIO head Richard Trumka, asking him to “soften the harshly worded resolutions that several unions planned to push” at the convention, according to the New York Times. Trumka agreed to do so, and “made sure to strip out some proposals that called for repealing the legislation.”
BTW, the only people making money on Obamacare IS the insurance Companies. The very ones Obama has blamed.
Priceless.
The last lesson stresses the role of NGOs. Many Korean NGOs, including progressive labor unions and health care–related professional organizations, aggressively called for government intervention in health care reform in response to the failure to regulate the supply side of the market. They asserted that market-driven health care reform in Korea weakened the financial structure of NHI.8As Beauchamp argues in Health Care Reform and the Battle for the Body Politic, “the purpose of reform is not simply to solve the health care crisis, but also to reconstruct the disorganized public.”9(p41) Given the strong interest-group influence, NGOs remain the only sector that can empower the public to demand a financially stable national health program, in Korea as well as in the United States. Furthermore, Korean and American NGOs should share their experiences in health care reform in order to strengthen their unique position in the health care system, independent of both governmental dominance and medical professional autonomy.
The idea of an individual mandate was popularized by the Heritage Foundation and other conservative think tanks as early as 1989. Today, Heritage cites differences between their idea and the Obama version. Yet the basic principles are the same.
In 1992, Heritage proposed a sweeping reform it called the Heritage Consumer Choice Health Plan. Among the plan’s features:
“Require all households to purchase at least a basic package of insurance, unless they are covered by Medicaid, Medicare, or other government health programs. The private insurance market would be reformed to make a standard basic package available to all at an acceptable price.”
As President Bill Clinton began to push for a government-run system in 1993, Republicans introduced bills that included an individual mandate. At the time, Newt Gingrich hailed them:
“I am for people, individuals — exactly like automobile insurance — individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance,” he told “Meet the Press” in 1993. “And I’m prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals, on a sliding scale, a government subsidy, to ensure that everyone as individuals has health insurance.”
Battleline
reply to post by xuenchen
I wondered when the union membership would start thinking for them selves.
What's interesting about the unions is they were all for passing Obamacare without reading it because they believed what Obama said and the membership believed there union leaders, now the member's are finding out they were lied to by Obama and there union leaders.
Point being when the members get together and find how bad they have been scr***d they can vote to strike even when the leadership says not to.
If they organize with other unions this country could be in a situation no one has thought about....tell now.
Kali74
reply to post by badgerprints
Gotta love the irony of your post.
You don't like the ACA so you just assumed the OP posted an article that was correct.
Except it's not.
One of the new proposals in the current contract negotiations is to provide health insurance only to those employees working a 30+ hour work week. "As with all employers, the Affordable Care Act will impact how we deliver health benefits to our employees," said Allied chief negotiator Scott Powers. The previous contract provided healthcare for workers with 16+ hour work weeks.
Union officials say the President Obama's signature Affordable Care Act is being used as a convenient excuse to cut benefits."The reason why the employers are doing this is it's a big money grab," said Tom Geiger of UFCW Local 21.
www.sourcewatch.org...