SEIU Collects Union Dues From Disabled Kids’ Medicaid Checks

@xfahctor (14128)
Lancaster, New Hampshire
November 17, 2011 5:29pm CST
I don't even know where to start to describe the outrageous lunacy this demonstrates. Even if I ever had a shred of respect for the SEIU before (and I didn't really), I would have lost it entirely over this. Hopefully, if you are a current SIEU supporter, you will too. So, who do the parents complain to when they don't get union level pay or benefits? Are they allowed to strike or collectively bargain for the amount of SSI or medicaid they receive? This is the fault of both the Michigan state government and selfish greed of the SEIU. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/forced-unionization-seiu-collects-union-dues-from-disabled-kids-medicaid-checks/ Forced Unionization’: SEIU Collects Union Dues From Disabled Kids’ Medicaid Checks "....The Haynes family receives monthly checks from the state of Michigan through Medicaid, allowing the parents to care for their son and daughter themselves instead of institutionalizing them. But because a Michigan law classifies Robert and Patricia as “home health care workers,” they are considered public workers and therefore automatic union members — meaning the SEIU gets a $30 cut of the family’s Medicaid subsidy as union dues....." Michigan forces parents of special needs kids to pay SEIU dues (video) http://usactionnews.com/2011/11/michigan-forces-parents-of-special-needs-kids-to-pay-seiu-dues/
3 people like this
6 responses
• United States
17 Nov 11
That is ridiculous. There is low, and there is LOW, and that is LOW. These people are taking away from people who need that money the most, and it is wrong of them to do so. They should not do that to people. California doesn't do that.
1 person likes this
@bagarad (12151)
• Paso Robles, California
18 Nov 11
Give them time. Maybe they haven't thought of it yet.
@xfahctor (14128)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
18 Nov 11
"California doesn't do that. " Watch for it. Expect it. You have a pretty union oriented state government. Keep your eyes peeled and watch for it to rear it's head.
1 person likes this
• United States
20 Nov 11
I don't think they will because when it comes to the disabled and special needs, there are a lot of safeguards for them. If anyone tries to do that in California, there will be some whistle blowing going on. California is a sue happy state, and a whistle blowing state. If something like that were to go on, it wouldn't for very long.
@andy77e (5165)
• United States
18 Nov 11
But without unions, imagine how bad the world would be? I mean... unions created the 40 hour work week! Are you against the 40 hour work week? HOW GREEDY AND SELFISH! You flat earth, Christian coalition people make me sick! *cough cough... * Whoa... I think I was channeling Micheal Moore.
18 Nov 11
Just some constructive criticism...do you work any less than 40 hours a week in total (including your mylots earnings hours) to provide for your family. It's nice to get 40 hours but nobody serious about making money and being successful works less than 40 hours. Unions were created to provide a voice to the worker, but now we have the internet and the media to do that. In fact people have never been more empowered to speak their mind than ever before. We're not greedy or selfish we just work hard to help others.
@andy77e (5165)
• United States
18 Nov 11
I was being sarcastic. Unions have absolutely no purpose, except to ruin whatever they have control over, both for the country, and the specific people they represent. In 2007, the Unions attempted a massive push against Toyota, and to a lesser extent Honda, to Unionize. They failed. But thankfully they Unionized GM and Chrysler a long time ago. Which companies crashed massively? Was it Honda and Toyota? Or GM and Chrysler? Of course the answer is obvious, and no one at Honda and Toyota, are wishing they had been employed by GM or Chrysler. But there's a bunch of people who formerly worked at GM and Chrysler, who likely are second guessing the massive benefits from being unionized. Unions served a specific purpose during a specific time in American history, which saw companies completely dominating employees, even if they didn't mean to. For example Mining towns. Little towns in the middle of nowhere, with no way in or out, except by rail car. Employees paid with company dollars, only redeemable through the company store. The company would pay for your rail ticket to the town, but of course why would they pay for a ticket so you could leave? And since you were paid in company dollars, you couldn't purchase a wagon and cart, or a rail ticket out. You were stuck. Trapped. You had no options. Unionizing was the ONLY option. That was then. This is now. No one is trapped or stuck anywhere. Alex Spanos, earning minimum wage at a bakery, no college degree, no skills. Ends up a multimillionaire from his construction company. Unions serve no purpose, except to destroy whatever industry they control. Like the steal industry. We led the world in steel production, then the unions ruined it, the companies closed, Japanese companies bought our steel mills, dismantled them, shipped them to Japan, put them back together, and sold us steel made with our own equipment, back to us from non-union steel mills. In some cases, they even bought the iron ore from *US* to make into steel, to sell to *US*. Ridiculous.... but that's what unionizing does. Unions should be nearly outlawed. They are nothing but a drain and a waste to our society.
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
19 Nov 11
"nobody serious about making money and being successful works less than 40 hours" Unless the union FORCES them to work less. Since I'm in New Jersey, a forced-union state, I'm stuck working 35 hours a week. I can NOT, under any circumstances, work more than that because the union doesn't want people who go the extra mile to get ahead. The union wants to appeal to the laziest employees, not the hard workers. If the library allowed me to go a single hour over that, there would be penalties.
• United States
18 Nov 11
What is the SEIU response to this? Any reply yet?
@xfahctor (14128)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
18 Nov 11
I have not seen one yet and I did look. It is not getting the attention it deserves, even on right leaning media venues. I would really like to see what they have to say about this though. This is, with out any doubt in my opinion, the direct result of this union lobbying state governments for laws that allow this exact thing to happen. I suspect as well it isn't the only state. I am doing some research that may or may not turn up more. Stay tuned.
@dragon54u (31617)
• United States
18 Nov 11
I heard of this earlier this week and have been looking for a response from SEIU but I don't see that they've tried to defend themselves or justify these thefts from some of the neediest Americans. SEIU is incredibly corrupt. The Occutards should be demonstrating outside the union boss' huge houses where they have luxury cars in the garage. Educate themselves on who's really the 1% sucking the life out of the 99%....
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
18 Nov 11
Dude, this goes so far beyond disgusting. I honestly don't know how any decent human being can support this kind of forced union garbage. All it is is a way for Democrats to force people to donate to their campaigns. After all, that's where all these dues go.
@bagarad (12151)
• Paso Robles, California
18 Nov 11
I was outraged when I heard this or read it earlier this week. I would be willing to bet that money goes to campaign contributions that these parents would never make on their own. Truly this is a case of taxation without representation. It's too bad all those people being forced to pay these dues don't have time to go to union members and vote the leaders out, except I'll bet they aren't allowed to vote. I'm only guessing, of course. Maybe they should attempt to get the ACLU to help them. Or maybe it's not the kind of case they take, but it does seem some right is being violated.