IAFF: Only Ourselves to Blame

The Supreme Court and Right to Work

The Time’s reports it:  “The Supreme Court dealt a major blow on Wednesday to organized labor. By a 5-to-4 vote, with the more conservative justices in the majority, the court ruled that government workers who choose not to join unions may not be required to help pay for collective bargaining.”

To add insult to injury the court based their decision on the First Amendment, “Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the majority. “We conclude that this arrangement violates the free speech rights of nonmembers by compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern,” he wrote.

It’s the national scab/free-ride act.

Harold Schaitberger, as general president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, did his part in paving the way for this dramatic weakening of unions.


Schaitberger, Mr. Political Action, lacked the balls to make an endorsement in the 2016 presidential election thus ensuring that the IAFF was sidelined in every way.

No matter the winner, we have been silenced because we sat on our hands.

Why, many may ask?

Schaitberger saw that his cushy deal might be endangered if he took a tough stand for labor rights so he decided it was safer to take a pass.

What resulted was the election of a president who despises unions and working families.

That president is in favor of a Supreme Court which will decimate and destroy unions, including ours.

It is deeply ironic that on the 100th anniversary of the IAFF, we have a “leader” who has utterly failed to lead where it matters most, at the level where our rights are both determined and guaranteed.

Perhaps at the 100th anniversary celebratory convention Schaitberger can invite Trump so he can further explain what he has in store to destroy the union movement all together.

They make a great duo–neither gives a damn about the firefighter or paramedic on the street and the proof is right in front of us.

Everyone, especially Schaitberger, knew what Trump would do to us and yet he was so cowardly he couldn’t even make a choice, instead wringing his hands in indecision.

In our 100th year we have proven to be weak, timid and ineffective.

Perhaps we are getting a dose of what we deserve when we elect a leader who is only really invested in his next expensive meal.





  • Amica Nostra says:

    What took you so long to address this? LOL

    Yep. It’s a shame really. I was at the Vegas Convention when spineless ODL announced this decision. He even ruled motions from the floor out of order. Not just that, from his bully pulpit, he took shots at HRC.

    One of the explanations I heard was that there were organization efforts going on in areas where an HRC endorsement would have been distasteful to the potential members and possibly derailed new Locals. That, of course, is bullshit. A solid DVP would be able to deflect any related criticisms of an HRC endorsement.

    I don’t always agree with our Local or state endorsements of candidates. There are some that are downright scumbags but they always support us. It is what it is.

    The sooner ODL retires the better for the IAFF. Unfortunately, the wing waiters are not much better.

  • Mike Mohler says:

    At this point the only thing odl is concerned about is the size of his retirement party and what’s left to siphon off before he goes.

  • Mack says:

    Hey Eric, when DOES he go? I remember some early exit theories from you a few years back, aren’t we getting close to that?

  • Alex Thomas says:


    While I agree with your characterization of ODL, I disagree to some extent with the premise that Trump hates all unions. Arguably some of the trade tarrifs imposed, wisely or otherwise, were intended to appease many union workers through protectionist policies. As you are aware, this case went before the SCOTUS before and failed only due to the death of Scalia. Trump was not in the picture then. Unions are a part of the business plan Trump has..a part of ‘the deal,’ if you will. He uses them, and everyone, to his own advantage be it financial or political.

    If we are honest about this, we should not fear this ruling. You have stated we need to earn the dues of our members or what is the value they provide to us? So let’s do just that. You have been honest when assessing the shortcomings we have experienced. Let’s fix those when possible and work to regain the standing we once held.

  • Joe Blow says:

    We should be forced to contribute because people like Harold Schaitberger know what’s best for us.

  • Joel says:

    Personally, I think it was a great decision. Unions were created for a good reason, but they are now (mostly) corrupt and only in it to pad their own pockets.

    If you do not want to be in a union, then there is absolutely no need for you to pay union dues! Why would you? Youre not in the union!

    To make someone pay union dues, when they dont want to be in the union, is nothing more than theft and simply proves the point that unions are a money racket.

    • Dlorah the great says:

      To give someone who’s not a union member the same benefits that a dues paying union member gets is the real theft and simply proves that you’re a POS Scab who wants everything for free.
      I got a 2 piece and a biscuit for ya totally free.

  • Charles Francis says:

    To give someone who’s not a union member the same benefits that a dues paying union member gets is the real theft and simply proves that you’re a POS Scab who wants everything for free.
    I got a 2 piece and a biscuit for ya totally free.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *