Let me say this about that
...Gov. taps Fletcher
(From Page 2)
IRV FLETCHER of Woodburn, a former president of the Oregon
AFL-CIO, has been appointed by Governor Ted Kulongoski to the Advi-
sory Committee to the Director of the Oregon Department of Veterans
Affairs.
The Salem-based department’s newspaper,
Vets News, said Fletcher is a Korean War veteran
who was “honorably discharged in 1954 after
serving in the U.S. Navy as a machinist aboard
the USS Corregidor (CVE 58).” The department
said that Fletcher will be on the advisory panel
until the end of 2006, filling out the term of a
committee member who died.
THE VETS NEWS quoted the department’s
director, Jim Willis, as saying: “Having an expe-
rienced advocate like Irv serving on our Advi-
IRV FLETCHER
sory Committee is a big plus for all Oregon vet-
erans. He brings with him integrity and
commitment.”
The state agency’s publication went on to recap Fletcher’s career
thusly:
“IN 1973, Governor Tom McCall became the first of seven chief ex-
ecutives to appoint Fletcher to serve on state government committees. As
a lobbyist in the Oregon Legislature, Fletcher played a role in gaining
legislative approval for the Labor Education and Research Center, which
was established at University of Oregon in 1977.
“Fletcher taught as a junior high teacher for 12 years in Klamath Falls,
worked for the Department of Corrections, the Apprenticeship Informa-
tion Center, and then served as president of the Oregon AFL-CIO from
1981 to 1999. Following his retirement, Fletcher renewed his teaching
credentials and also has been very involved in the local Woodburn food
bank delivering food to seniors. Irv and his wife Eva reside in Woodburn.”
A MAINE NATIVE, Fletcher moved to Eugene from Klamath Falls
and held the secretary-treasurer post in the Lane County Labor Council
and was on the state labor federation board before becoming its presi-
dent.
★★★
PENSION HISTORY — A booklet entitled “Labor Firsts in Amer-
ica” contains a short history of pensions in the United States, some of
which follow:
The first pension was established by the Ply-
mouth colony for its disabled soldiers in 1636.
The first federal government pension was estab-
lished in 1776 to assist wounded and disabled
Revolutionary War soldiers. The first private pen-
sion plan offered by a labor organization was set
up in 1860 by the Amalgamated Society of En-
gineers, a union of American and Canadian
workers. The first private pension plan offered by
a company was established in 1875 by the Amer-
ican Express Company. The first private pension
plan set up entirely by American workers was
RAY MARSHALL
created in 1880 by the International Molders
Union.
THE FIRST investigation of old age associations was done in 1903 by
the Massachusetts Bureau of Labor Statistics. The first proposal for fed-
eral legislation to provide old age pensions was made by Congressman
William B. Wilson, a Pennsylvania Democrat, in 1907. He became the
first Secretary of Labor in 1913. The first state to pass a pension law was
Arizona in 1914, but the law was ruled unconstitutional. In 1916, Territory
of Alaska passed the first pension law to be declared constitutional. In
1923, Montana became the first state to pass a pension law that was de-
clared constitutional.
The “Labor Firsts in America” booklet was published in 1977 by the
U.S. Department of Labor when Ray Marshall was secretary of labor in
the administration of President Jimmy Carter.
JANUARY 6, 2006
Bush first president not to
attend Council on Aging
To The Editor:
I was honored to be Congressman
Earl Blumenauer’s delegate to the
White House Council on Aging that
took place Dec. 11-14 in Washington,
D.C. Often called “the President’s WH-
CoA,” it is an event that takes place
every 10 years and has delegates sent
from all of the states appointed by their
senators, representatives and governors.
In the past, resolutions from these
conferences have influenced Congress’
lawmaking efforts on issues concerning
the aging citizens of this country. It was
disheartening to learn that this decade’s
gathering purposely omitted the oppor-
tunity for delegates to discuss resolu-
tions not on the “pre-approved” agenda.
The resolutions presented to us
lacked substance and did not clearly
state the issues. “Principles to
Strengthen Social Security” was one of
the resolutions written in a way to to-
tally avoid the anti-privatization senti-
ments of the majority of the delegation.
The conference’s Medicare resolution
also lacked substance.
When Mark McClellan, the Medic-
aid and Medicare administrator, made a
statement to the delegates about
Medicare’s Part D drug benefit — sug-
gesting that the implementation of the
plan was working well — he elicited
snickers and laughter from his audi-
ence. Fortunately, when we broke into
work sessions, we the delegates were
able to gain attention for our priorities
— like strengthening Social Security
Open
Forum
and providing affordable and accessible
drug benefits under Medicare despite
the president’s highly-scripted agenda
promoting his goals.
It was interesting to all of us that this
was the first time in history that the
president of this country did not attend
this conference. Perhaps he really does-
n’t want to know what we, the dele-
gates, are thinking about the gravely im-
portant issues facing the aging
population of this country.
Verna Porter
President
Oregon Alliance for
Retired Americans
Portland
AFL-CIO, Change to Win will oppose
Alito nomination to Supreme Court
WASHINGTON, D.C. (PAI) —
The nation’s two labor federations have
formally joined a broad coalition of foes
of President George W. Bush’s nomina-
tion of federal appellate judge Samuel
Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The AFL-CIO and Change to Win
labor federations weighed their decision
on a wide range of anti-worker rulings
on union representation, wage and hour,
and job safety and health issues.
Alito’s rulings and dissents as an ap-
pellate judge in the Philadelphia-based
Third Circuit Court of Appeals “reveal a
disturbing tendency to take an ex-
tremely narrow and restrictive view of
laws that protect workers’rights, result-
ing in workers being deprived of many
vital protections,” said AFL-CIO Presi-
dent John Sweeney in a letter to U.S.
senators.
After reviewing cases Alito decided
or wrote on, “It’s clear that his judicial
philosophy is at odds with the interests
of working families,” Sweeney added.
Change to Win Chairwoman Anna
Burger said “Alito’s workplace would
be one where worker rights would be
severely curtailed. Alito’s record indi-
cates he would side with those who
would deny workers a real voice on the
job. Change to Win stands for worker
rights Alito would oppose and we will
work with our allies to stop him from
ascending to the Supreme Court.”
Alito was nominated by Bush to re-
place retiring Associate Justice Sandra
Day O’Connor. Senate Judiciary Com-
mittee hearings on Alito open Jan. 9.
The AFL-CIO documented 25 Alito
case opinions — most of them anti-
worker — and sent them, with
Sweeney’s letter, to the Senate. They in-
cluded:
• A 1994 case where two Reagan-ap-
pointed appellate judges ruled that re-
NORTHWEST LABOR PRESS
porters for a chain of suburban Pitts-
burgh newspapers were entitled to
overtime under the Fair Labor Stan-
dards Act, despite its exemption for
workers at “small” newspapers. Alito
argued “neither the statute nor the leg-
islative history supported the majority’s
opinion” that the reporters should get
overtime pay, the AFL-CIO said.
• A 1991 dissent where Alito, dis-
agreeing with two other GOP-named
judges, argued the Fair Labor Standards
Act covered seamen sailing on re-
flagged tankers. The tankers had been
transferred to a “flag of convenience”
—Kuwait — during the first Iraq-
Kuwait war and the court majority said
the labor law did not cover the seamen.
• A 1997 Pennsylvania case where
Alito’s majority opinion said corporate
officers of bankrupt firms could not be
held liable for unpaid wages of the
workers. “In Alito’s view, the corporate
officers should not be held liable for
wages because once a bankruptcy peti-
tion has been filed, they are no longer
empowered to choose to divert ... funds
to pay accrued wages and benefits,” the
AFL-CIO analysis commented.
• A 2002 case where Alito ruled a
company had not had enough prior no-
tice — despite 13 old job safety and
health violations — of 33 new Occupa-
tional Safety and Health Administration
charges that it “failed to abate” on-the-
job hazards. Alito threw out OSHA’s
new charges.
• A 1997 case where a Republican-
named majority said a coal processing
plant was a “mine” subject to federal
health and safety rules. Alito dissented,
saying it wasn’t.
• In a 1998 case involving the Hotel
Employees and Restaurant Employees
Union and a failing Atlantic City
casino, all three judges ruled it did not
have to give workers 60 days’ notice,
which the federal plant closing law re-
quires, because the New Jersey Casino
Control Commission ordered the clos-
ing. HERE argued for the advance no-
tice. “Alito wrote separately to empha-
size his view employers are not required
to give notice under the WARN Act
when the government, rather than the
employer, orders the plant closing,” the
federation noted.
• A 1991 Alito opinion overturning
a National Labor Relations Board rul-
ing that the employer involved “dis-
criminatorily failed to recall union sup-
porters from layoff.” Alito bounced the
board’s decision “because it failed to re-
solve a tension between the board’s
conclusion that the employer had not
proven its defense, and the administra-
tive law judge’s decision, which had
credited exonerating testimony by the
employer.” The impact was to leave the
union workers laid off.
• A 1993 ruling throwing out a union
election in Indiana (Pa.) Hospital. The
NLRB upheld the vote and threw out
the hospital’s objections, but Alito did
not. He sent it back to the board on tech-
nical grounds. “The issue was the hear-
ing officer’s decision to revoke subpoe-
nas for case intake logs of the region’s
information officer.” The hospital
claimed NLRB’s neutrality was “com-
promised by advice given by NLRB in-
formation officers to employee-voters,
and it wanted the logs to determine
which NLRB agents the employees had
spoken with.” Alito told the NLRB to
subpoena the logs.
Sweeney’s letter to senators also
pointed out criticism of Alito by fellow
appellate judges for his “excessively
narrow view of worker protection and
civil rights statutes.”
PAGE 11