It seems, however, that as we looked into the Maoist media controller more, the more the hypocrisy surfaced that puts Ms. Dunn, her husband and the entire Democratic establishment (including its Organizer-in-Chief) in a very awkward position with their union bosses.
For years, union bosses, have been running a campaign to push a job-destroying and hallucinogenically-named law called the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Simply put, EFCA is a bill that effectively eliminates secret-ballot elections on unionization and lets the government dictate workers' wages and benefits through a process called 'binding arbitration.' [More on EFCA here.]
Over the last two election cycles, union bosses spent hundreds of millions of dollars (estimated at well over $1 billion) of their members' money bankrolling Democrats' 2006 takeover of Congress and the 2008 election of Barack Obama.
Indeed, before any Democrat candidate garnered a union endorsement, the candidate was required to pledge an oath of allegiance to the union bosses that included passing EFCA. As a result of this union influence, union bosses have so taken over the Democratic party (and consequently, the Administration) that the DNC seems to be nothing more than the de facto Labor Party in the U.S. In fact, the Purple People Eater, the Service Employees International Union has even pledged $10 million to target politicians that broke their allegiance to the union's agenda.
Given the fact that union bosses like the SEIU's Andy Stern are considered the hand inside Barack Obama's puppet, that both the Obama Administration and the DNC would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a law firm that, among other things, touts its union busting services seems, at the very least, embarrassing, as well as hypocritical.
Nevertheless, we must thank Ms. Dunn for having a Communist dictator as a favorite political philosopher, as it is for that reason that her name stands out and for which she will be remembered. That said, it is Ms. Dunn's notoriety than enabled us to detect the spiderweb of hypocrisy that goes all the way to the White House:
You see, Ms. Dunn, according to Politico and other web resources, is married to a man named Bob Bauer. Mr. Bauer is a partner and Chair of the Political Law Group of Perkins Coie LLP.
Interestingly, according to the bio on his law firm's website, Mr. Bauer is Counsel to Obama for America and General Counsel to the Democratic National Committee, and he has been counsel for many years to the Democratic Senatorial and Congressional Campaign Committees. Mr. Bauer is also the President's personal attorney.
However, apparently already well-connected, Mr. Bauer's ties to the Obama White House have helped he and his firm enrich themselves and gain even more influence in Washington, as Politico notes [emphasis added]:
Team Obama even installed its own lawyer at the DNC, replacing longtime general counsel Joe Sandler with Bob Bauer, an Obama insider who is married to White House communications director Anita Dunn, another participant in the weekly political meeting. Bauer’s firm has pulled in $306,000 in legal fees from the DNC this year.
According to WorldNetDaily [emphasis added]:
...Federal Election Commission records show $1,352,378.95 in payments were made by Obama for America to Perkins Coie while the law firm was representing him in various court cases which have sought to obtain his long-form birth certificate.
Yet, with all the influential union bosses influencing the White House these days, one cannot help but wonder if the connection has been overlooked or ignored by the union bosses. Or, rather, was it hidden from them?
This could be particularly embarrassing to the White House and the DNC--especially since this same firm appears to have a well-developed practice defending employers...against unions. [Not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you--unless you're a politician pandering to union bosses.]
In fact, it would appear that Ms. Dunn's husband even works for one of those so-called "union-busting" law firms that unions rail against when pushing the delusionally-dubbed Employee Free Choice Act!
From the firm's website [emphasis added]:
...Now, with the Obama administration in power, the labor movement has advocates in the highest offices in the land. If more labor-friendly legislation is passed, such as the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), unions will be stronger than ever.
Developing and maintaining productive employee relations is more important than ever. Employers who do not currently have a union presence will need to take action if they wish to preserve that status. Addressing issues that arise during a union campaign can present unique challenges to preserving both employee morale and an employer's economic sustainability.
Perkins Coie's Labor & Employment lawyers have a unique wealth of experience born from decades of representing employers of all sizes who have union issues, from organizing campaigns to negotiating labor agreements to responding to strikes and picketing. We have been at the bargaining table for some of the largest union employers in the United States. Not only have we directly negotiated collective bargaining agreements, we have also worked closely with management to develop strike contingency plans, effectively manage strike activities and defend unfair labor practice proceedings and related litigation before the National Labor Relations Board and in state and federal court.
Indeed, it would appear that the law firm representing President Obama and the DNC not only helps companies during strikes and picketing, but it also gives legal advice to their clients on how to avoid unions altogether.
In other words, the DNC, as well as President Obama, are represented by a union-busting law firm, as this seminar handouts points out [emphasis added]:
Employers who believe it is in their best interests, and the best interests of their employees, to remain union free must take proactive preventive steps to maintain that status. Employers should take immediate steps to ensure that their employees are treated fairly and consistently at all levels and will not feel the need to seek union representation to achieve the dignity, respect, and competitive wages and benefits they deserve. To that end, employers may want to implement additional training for supervisors so that they become more effective leaders. There is nothing more important in a union prevention program than effective first-line supervision. Now is also a good time for employers to review their employee policies to ensure that they provide meaningful and effective avenues for resolving employee complaints.
There are a number of other steps employers can and should consider to make it less likely that employees will sign union cards and to be in the best possible position to fend off a union drive. Studies of NLRB elections show that it is too late to prepare properly for a union organizing drive, much less deter organizing efforts, after a union has knocked on the door. In the current political and economic climate, employers are strongly encouraged to have a candid discussion with experienced labor counsel about what they can do now to adequately prevent unionization.
It sure sounds like Mr. Bauer's law firm Perkins Coie is one of those union-busting law firms that union bosses are always railing against. We wonder, though, why is it the union bosses have been kept in the dark about the DNC-Obama partnership with Perkins Coie? More importantly, we wonder how Democrats in general can push a democracy-busting, job-killing piece of legislation like EFCA with a straight face, while keeping a union-busting law firm on retainer.
Apparently, in Washington, the word 'hypocrisy' begins with a capital 'D'.
Cross-posted on RedState.
Follow LaborUnionReport on Twitter.
Posts
Hi! I read that in some of the "birther" cases that the Judges ruled that the plaintiffs had no standing, had "no injury", etc.
ReplyDeleteHave any of the plaintiffs complained that on the Presidential Executive Order that Obama signed into Law immediately after becoming President, that at the bottom of the document there is a billing code proving that all the American taxpayers were charged for the cost of the drafting of this document and the cost of advising the President to sign it into Law, creating a Presidential Executive Order to SEAL his PERSONAL RECORDS FROM THE PUBLIC, THE VOTERS, & THE TAXPAYERS;
THEREFORE,
IS THIS THE MISSING CAUSE OF ACTION?
THE "INJURY" TO ALL OF THE VOTER-TAXPAYERS?
ACTIONABLE IN THE
U.S. COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov
for the over $10,000. in legal fees
as proven by the billing code at the bottom
of the Presidential Executive Order?