The California Federation of Teachers produced the perfect solution with “Trouble in the Hen House: A Puppet Show.” To spare you the unpleasantness of reading this bilge, here’s the basic plot: a bunch of hens feel “oppressed” by the farmer, so they band together and create Hens United. The angry unionized chickens are too powerful a force for the farmer to handle, so he capitulates to the hens’ demands. Here’s a key excerpt:


Henrietta (the hen): Farmer Brown, we have something to say. This is what we chickens want:

1. More and better food. No mold, no sand in our corn.

2. Freedom to walk around outside and a bigger hen house.

3. Each hen will lay an average of four eggs a week.

4. Stop punishing us. Let Hortensia come back.

Farmer: No way! Who ever heard of chickens telling the farmer what to do? Shut up and get back to the henhouse!

Chickens: No, Farmer Brown, not this time! And besides those things, you have to recognize our union, Hens United, or we’ll all stop laying eggs!

Farmer: OK, OK, if I have no eggs to sell, I’ll go bankrupt. We’d all starve, so I guess I’ll have to do what you say. Since you’re all together, what can I do?

Chickens: We won! We stuck together and we won! Si, Se puede.


With this puppet show, educators now have a way of teaching children how to use mob tactics to get what they want from those in positions of power. This puppet show fits very nicely into a kindergartener’s school day – right after finger painting and just ahead of snack time.

Lest readers are tempted to dismiss this as some wacky lesson plan that never sees the light of day in an actual classroom, consider this story about the 2009 California Federation of Teachers convention, as reported in the May 2009 newsletter of the San Mateo Community College Federation of Teachers:

Just to remind you, the “students” the newsletter is referring to are kindergartners and first graders.

Connecticut’s public sector unions have voted to reject a $1.6 billion concession package that was previously agreed to by both their union leaders and Governor Dannel Malloy, the first Democratic governor the state has had in 20 years...

The concession package, guaranteed no layoffs for four years and no furloughs. Wages would have been frozen for two years, then followed by three annual 3 percent raises. Though cost-of-living increases for pensions would have been eliminated, the retirement age would have been raised by only two years, and not until after 2022. Changes in health benefits included mandatory annual physician visits and mail-order prescription plans, a detail that seemed to hurt local pharmacies more than union members.

As a result of the rejection of the agreement by the unions, Governor Malloy says he will now have to lay off 7,500 state employees in order to balance the state budget. In addition to the direct loss of jobs, in a state in which the unemployment rate is already at 9.1%, citizens will undoubtedly be dealing with the closing of state offices, elimination of services, and cuts to municipal aid...

The governor’s Democrat-controlled legislature already passed a budget that included the highest tax increase in the history of the state, scheduled to go into effect on July 1st. Also initiated in the budget was an earned income tax credit of about $1700 for those who do not pay taxes.

Minority parents in New York have a message for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the United Federation of Teachers (UFT): you are hurting our children.

In New York Monday, charter school parents staged another of several rallies to voice opposition to a lawsuit brought by the UFT and NAACP against the New York City Department of Education. If the organizations are successful with their suit, it would prevent enrollment or re-enrollment in 17 charter schools and stop the closure of 22 public schools.

The UFT and NAACP’s decision to sue has roiled inner city parents who depend on charter schools to ensure their children get a good education.

On Monday a slew of parents appeared before UFT headquarters to protest. Nearly a month earlier the NAACP felt their wrath when another estimated 3,000 people showed up at State Administrative Building in Harlem, carrying signs reading “NAACP don’t divide unite,” to protest the NAACP’s involvement.


“I am the product of the public school system that allows 70 percent or more of its black men to not graduate from high school,” said Candido Brown, a charter school teacher at May’s rally. “I could barely believe my ears when I found out that the NAACP was trying to shut down some of the most successful schools serving black and brown children in our city. NAACP, do not take away this awesome education from our children.”

Lyman described the mass “sickout,” which forced some districts, including her own, to cancel classes, as “four exhilarating days, four confusing days, four stressful and exhausting days.”

For the record, she’s speaking on behalf of the self-serving school employees. She’s not talking about the working parents that had to scramble to find child care because their children were not in school.


At first Lyman, who already has a warning in her personnel file for violating the school’s “controversial issues” policy, claimed she simply invited students to share their personal observations of the recent protests.

One student said Walker would “send (illegal immigrants) back to Mexico.” Lyman apparently didn’t correct this idiotic notion. Another said, “Does he want to be rich?” “Yeah, he wants to be rich!” Then there were the assorted “He’s selfish,” “He’s crazy,” “He’s guilty,” “He’s greedy” and “He should go to jail, even though he’s governor.”

We’re certain their teacher was pleased with their responses, and her own successful effort to transplant her own thoughts into their minds.

Lyman’s efforts went even further. She created math problems with the attendance numbers from the protests.

Lyman’s student teacher created a PowerPoint presentation, with side-by-side pictures of the Madison protests and images from the civil rights fights in the south. Then, she went lower than I thought was possible even for union activists. Quoting Lyman:

“I hesitated to ask this last question as the students were examining a photo of white segregations (‘We want a white school!’) juxtaposed to a Walker supporter (‘WisSCOTTsin’). But we talked extensively about rights, in the context of both the Civil Rights Movement and the Capitol protests.”

I bet you can’t guess how old these kids were. Surely if they were tuned into the news, they must be high schoolers. No, Lyman is warping the brains of 2nd- and 3rd-graders.

This is a perfect example of what the professors’* paper was calling for. Brainwash them while they’re young and they will support the revolution when they’re older.

We don’t believe Wisconsin taxpayers would agree with this strategy. They pay taxes so children will be taught the fundamentals of learning. They do not pay to send the kids to leftist indoctrination camps.

The superintendent of Madison schools should make sure Lyman understands that point, once and for all.

Andrew Buikema, a music teacher with Grant Public Schools for the past nine years, is tired of being forced to belong to a union that he says doesn’t “stand up for kids” and “always seem(s) to put adults first.”

Buikema expressed his displeasure in a recent email to MEA Secretary-Treasurer Peggy McLellan.

In her response, McLellan wrote, “You’re right that MEA stands up for adults; that’s because it’s the adults who are under attack, not the kids.”

Every week the NLRB publishes a summary of NLRB decisions. In the Board’s latest weekly summary, there was one decision summary that seemed rather unique since it stated:

The Board granted the Acting General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judgment based on the Respondent’s failure to file an answer to the complaint. The Board found that the death of BLSI, LLC’s owner and the insolvency of his estate did not constitute good cause for the Respondent’s failure to answer the complaint.

AFSCME: Big Government Bully or Ward of the State?

In Illinois, prior to his reelection, Governor Pat Quinn negotiated $75 million worth of raises for state workers, only to rescind the promised increases after he was reelected due to a lack of money. Now, AFSCME bosses are suing Quinn in court for breaking his pre-election promise. If AFSCME is successful, with no money to fund the increases, Illinois politicians will have to make some tough decisions—do they lay off more employees? Or, do lawmakers pass the costs on to Illinois taxpayers who are still reeling from a 67% income tax hike earlier this year?

In Democrat-controlled Detroit, AFSCME has refused to face reality when it comes to dealing with that city’s fiscal morass. AFSCME’s refusal to accept concessions, according to Detroit’s Mayor David Bing, was costing the city $500,000 per month. Yet, AFSCME’s response has been to call for tax increases and declare Bing’s plan ‘racist,’ despite the fact that Bing is black.

In Connecticut, the state’s union-friendly Democrat governor, Daniel Malloy, raised taxes a record $2.6 billion on all taxpayers earning more than $50,000. His budget plan was contingent getting the state’s government unions to agree to concessions. However, the unions—principally AFSCME—balked at the concessions. Now, without a deal, Malloy has announced he is laying off 6,500 government employees and closing motor vehicles branches, welfare offices, as well as other state services.

In New York, Democrat Andrew Cuomo negotiated concessions from government union only after threatening to lay off nearly 10,000 workers.In Maryland, though, the politicians continue to reward union bosses while delaying the inevitable. While the state has a $33 billion pension shortfall, AFSCME bosses received a windfall, courtesy of the politicians who passed a “fair share” bill requiring all non-members covered by a collective bargaining agreement to pay $360 yearly to the union, netting the union up to $4.7 million per year.

Meanwhile, back in Wisconsin—center-stage of the fight over government union power—AFSCME thugs began bullying business owners with threats of boycotts if businesses did not display pro-union signs in their windows. This occurred even as AFSCME bosses were selling out their members by negotiating concessionary contracts to keep their dues flowing.

Government Union Power is Dependent on Dues

Unions collect more than eight billion dollars per year in union dues. As private-sector union membership has dwindled to a mere 6.9%, government unions have overtaken their private-sector counterparts in both power and political influence. As NY AFSCME boss Victor Gotbaum once declared: “We have the ability, in a sense, to elect our own boss.”

Last year, Larry Scanlon, the AFSCME’s Director of Political Operations raised eyebrows when he spoke of his union’s spending $87.5 million on the 2010 mid-term elections.

“We’re the big dog,” Scanlon told the Wall Street Journal. “But we don’t like to brag.”

Scanlon’s matter-of-fact non-boast of AFSCME’s political expenditures came as something of a surprise to those who may not yet have been familiar with unions’ influence in the political process. However, the fact that union bosses (in general) spent nearly $2.2 billion of their members’ money on politics from 2007 through 2010 (including $1.1 billion on the 2010 election cycle) is not at all surprising to union watchers. As it turns out, AFSCME was the biggest dog in the pack during the 2010 mid-term elections.

According to Duquesne University Professor Anthony Davies, union bosses have given twice as much money to politicians as the telecommunications, insurance, tobacco, pharmaceuticals, and real estate industries combined. However, that is really no surprise either.

According to AFSCME’s Scanlon, it’s a simple equation:Since the growth of government unions has come at a premium price, paid for by taxpayers, it is ultimately the union members who are experiencing the wrath of those who foot the bill. As understanding grows about the fiscal nightmare AFSCME bosses (as well as other government union bosses) and their political puppets have placed states, counties and municipalities in, many taxpayers across the country are completely fed up with the power government unions wield.

In fact, as AFSCME members across the country face layoffs, concessions at the bargaining table, and ridicule from an angry and unsympathetic electorate, about the only ones who have not suffered are the AFSCME bosses themselves.

In Florida, for example, AFSCME bused members to the statehouse to protest the legislature’s move to stop the state from collecting union dues. As ridiculous as it seems, however, while Florida state workers have not had pay increases in several years, the president of AFSCME District Council 79, Jeanette Wynn, saw her salary increase 18% from 2009 to 2010, to over $150,000. In fact, Ms. Wynn has averaged $9,700 worth of salary increases every year since 2006–a far cry more than the government workers she represents received. It’s little wonder why Ms. Wynn and the rest of the AFSCME bosses are protesting efforts to remove the collection of union dues.

At AFSCME’s headquarters in Washington, over the last five years, according to reports on file with the US Dept. of Labor, AFSCME members’ dues have paid the union’s pinstripe-suit wearing president Gerald McEntee nearly $3 million. During that same period, from 2006 through 2010, AFSCME’s now-retired secretary-treasurer William Lucy was paid over $2.3 million. In fact, in 2010, in addition to paying Lucy’s replacement, Lee Saunders, over $179,000, AFSCME paid Lucy $847,810.

In 2009, AFSCME’s McEntee applauded the Senate adoption of an amendment capping CEO salaries at $400,000 for banks that received bailouts while he raked in over $479,000.

Ironically, in a Huffington Post piece, McEntee wrote:McEntee’s call on Congress to pass legislation that would give shareholders a voice on executive compensation is more than AFSCME’s top boss gives to his own members. Yet, the government union boss is unrepentant on his own fat cat lifestyle, which is paid for the union dues taken from workers (sometimes against their will) who are paid by governments funded through taxpayers’ money.

As states, counties and municipalities wrestle with the havoc wrought by AFSCME’s influence in the pushing politicians who pass unsustainable debt onto taxpayers’ shoulders, perhaps it’s time for Congress to pass legislation giving taxpayers a say on how much of their taxes should be funneled back to government union bosses to line their pin-striped pockets.