Employees at the United Auto Workers, the sixth-largest union in America, have gone on strike against the union this week in Manhattan, but you wouldn’t know it from the legacy media’s silence. UAW Staff United, which represents hundreds of employees across 34 locals, announced its strike Monday, and Thursday marks the fourth day of picketing in New York City. According to UAW Staff United (USU), the strike comes “in response to the bad-faith bargaining committed by the UAW throughout our negotiation process and the retaliatory termination of a union leader.” UAW hires temporary organizers, who work on three-month contracts renewable for up to three years. USU is demanding “job security through stable staffing and just cause protections for these workers—which together would constitute an end to an exploitive, tiered system of employment for USU staff.” Specific demands include severance payments, two months’ notice of layoffs, and sick days. “We want to make sure that this job is not only sustainable, but also sets up staff to better support our campaigns,” Rita Akincillar, a spokeswoman for the USU, said in a statement Monday. “Management’s insistence on being able to lay us off on a whim shows gross disregard for our needs and the needs of the UAW rank and file.” BREAKING: UAW Staff United (USU), the union representing many United Auto Workers (UAW) International and local staff organizers in the Northeast United States, is on strike! pic.twitter.com/1rfzQSjmM6— UAW Staff United is on strike! (@UAWStaffUnited) December 2, 2024 The USU also claims that UAW leadership “has decided to cut off all striking workers’ pay.” At the same time, we received indirect word that UAW leadership has decided to cut off all striking workers pay (not even 1 day into our strike.) Two support needs: hardship fund donations and bodies on the line ??We are back at 350 W 31st today 10am-4pm!2/end pic.twitter.com/kQ90axRord— UAW Staff United is on strike! (@UAWStaffUnited) December 3, 2024 The USU posted photos of the striking workers. Today is day 4! Join us back at 350 W 31st 10am-4pm (weather permitting)Day 3 picketing @EDL_Law was so full of energy and high spirits! Thank you to all the members and supporters that pulled up to our picket line ???: Jonathan Bloom pic.twitter.com/zDShwccp9b— UAW Staff United is on strike! (@UAWStaffUnited) December 5, 2024 UAW staffer (and USU member) Molly Ragan wrote on X that “UAW pulled a classic corporate boss move and cut all striking workers’ pay yesterday.” “It’s strike day 2, and we are angry and determined to make this place better for staff organizers and the members we organize alongside,” she added. “Cut our pay, cut our health care, we are not going away.” . @UAW pulled a classic corporate boss move and cut all striking workers’ pay yesterday. It’s strike day 2 and we are angry and determined to make this place better for staff organizers and the members we organize alongside. Cut our pay, cut our healthcare, we are not going away.— Molly Ragan ON STRIKE (@molly_ragan) December 3, 2024 The USU targeted the offices of labor lawyers who represent the UAW. It’s strike day 3 and we’re picketing Eisner Dictor & Lamadrid (@BenjaminDictor @ThomasLamadrid) in downtown Manhattan. These are the “lawyers in service of the working people” that the @UAW is using to bust our union ? pic.twitter.com/pVlS3V6Qp1— UAW Staff United is on strike! (@UAWStaffUnited) December 4, 2024 The legacy media appear not to have covered the strike in downtown Manhattan. The pro-union outlet Payday Report covered the strike and condemned “so many labor journalists” for ignoring the story. As The Washington Times reported in September, UAW Staff United accused the UAW of stalling contract negotiations and illegally terminating the contract of a labor organizer. UAW Staff United launched in March after the election of UAW President Shawn Fain, who ran as a reform candidate following a series of corruption scandals. An independent UAW monitor is investigating Fain on accusations that he participated in retaliation against other labor leaders this year. Fain welcomed the investigation and claimed that he is “committed to serving the membership and running a democratic union.” The “retaliatory termination of a union leader” refers to temporary organizer Alex Chan, who was terminated at the end of September. According to the USU, the firing marks the first time a temporary organizer has been terminated before the end of a three-year term. USU claims the UAW terminated Chan in retaliation for her part in forming the union last year. “Terminating me doesn’t just hurt me as an individual; it hurts the union drives and thousands of union members that I’m supporting & organizing with,” Chan wrote on X. “UAW needs to afford its staff the same basic rights, just cause, and job security as the UAW workers that we fight for.” As the Left has consciously embraced unions, many left-leaning nonprofits have unionized, notably including groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center. Staff at the SPLC unionized after a racial discrimination and sexual harassment scandal at the nonprofit in 2019. When the SPLC reorganized earlier this year, the union accused the organization of union-busting. Neither the USU nor the UAW responded to The Daily Signal’s request for comment by publication time. The post IRONIC: Union Employees Strike Against the UAW, Accuse it of Union-Busting appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. When the EU doesn’t like the outcome of an election or a government in a member country, it alarmingly tends to look for explanations in almost every place, except the one that makes sense – the free, democratic will of the voters. It’s Romania’s turn. Namely, ahead of the second round of presidential elections in that country, the European Parliament (EP) appears to be going the roundabout way in an attempt to delegitimize the first-round victory of independent candidate Calin Georgescu. And the roundabout way is what looks like a frontal rhetorical assault on TikTok, which some EP members (MEPs) are accusing of failing to live up to the Digital Services Act (DSA) – EU’s censorship law. Specifically now, where it now concerns the Romanian vote and spread of “disinformation” on an alleged scale capable of influencing the result. A hearing was organized on Tuesday to put pressure on the social platform’s executives, with corporate media describing the MEP’s behavior as “hostile” and “furious” – while Georgescu is casually referred to as an “ultranationalist.” The Internal Market Committee hearing came after TikTok was blamed by the European Commission for running algorithms that supposedly “disproportionally” promoted content favorable to Georgescu. TikTok’s representatives told the panel that they are in fact working hard to censor, aka, moderate content in Romania in particular, a market which is said to have the largest number of moderators. And, in the run-up to elections, a number of “influence campaigns” had been removed from the platform, they told the MEPs. But that’s not what the MEPs wanted to hear. Those from Georgescu’s opponents at home, the ruling Social Democrats, were particularly vocal in their outrage, accusing TikTok of not respecting DSA-mandated censorship (“moderation”), and providing the committee with “no answers” while showing “utter contempt.” Only a politician knows how it’s possible to interpret an attempt by TikTok to prove and document its eagerness to “moderate” to the current authorities’ satisfaction as, “utter contempt” – but, unsurprisingly, Greens from a number of countries used similar rhetoric. Meanwhile, “work” is being done in Romania itself to derail Georgescu’s presidential bid, including accusations of alleged “outside interference.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post EU Pushes for TikTok Clampdown After Romanian Election Upset appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Outrageous: 94% of Feds Work From Home

POTATUS Pardon-Palooza: Rubin Doesn't Want to Be 'Jenny From the CELL Block'

Some union leaders are self-destructive idiots. America’s ports have fallen behind. Not a single one ranks in the top 50 worldwide. A big reason is that dock unions stop innovation. This fall, the International Longshoremen’s Association shut down East and Gulf coast ports, striking for a raise and a ban on automation. They got the raise. Now union president Harold Daggett says longshoremen will strike again in January if they don’t get that ban on automation. His statement in my new video makes it clear that he knows how badly his strike would damage other Americans. “Guys who sell cars can’t sell cars, because the cars ain’t coming in off the ships. They get laid off,” says Daggett. “Construction workers get laid off because materials aren’t coming in. The steel’s not coming in. The lumber’s not coming in. They lose their job.” Obviously, labor leaders aren’t necessarily “pro worker,” says Mercatus Center economist Liya Palagashvili. “They’re saying, ‘We don’t care if these other jobs are destroyed as long as we get what we want.’” Daggett is unusually clueless. He doesn’t understand that a ban on automation will also hurt his members. As Palagashvili puts it, “They’ll save some jobs today, but they’ll destroy a lot more jobs in the future.” That’s because today’s shippers have options. Daggett’s union only controls East and Gulf coast ports. Shippers can deliver their products to ports that accept automation. “We’re going to see less activity in ‘Stone Age’ ports,” says Palagashvili. “Stone Age?” “They want to ban automated opening and closing of port doors,” she points out, requiring workers to pull heavy doors themselves. Weirdly, the union boss makes his demands while also pointing out that dockworker jobs are dangerous. “Very dangerous ... We’ve had 17 people killed in the last three years!” That’s terrible, but it’s an argument for automation! Using machines instead of vulnerable humans protects human workers. Daggett’s arguing against himself! I see why he wouldn’t agree to an interview. “It’s backwards,” notes Palagashvili. “(If) you care about the safety of these workers, you should enhance their jobs and make them safer and better. And the only way you can do that is with technological advancements in automation.” Other countries have used automated cranes for years. They’re 80% faster than the human-operated cranes in many American ports. “The best ports,” says Palagashvili, “are Asian and Middle Eastern ports. They allow for innovation and technological advancements. If you look at Chinese ports, they’re actually sitting behind a computer and directing port activity through the screen. That’s a better job.” “I bet there are fewer of them,” I push back. “Some port jobs will definitely be lost,” she says, “but that’s not a bad thing. Look at it historically; we had hundreds of thousands of blacksmiths and candlemakers and watchmakers.” Obviously, those and other jobs were destroyed by new technology. But unemployment didn’t surge. New jobs emerged -- jobs people at the time didn’t imagine: programmers, mechanics, electricians, medical technicians ... That’s capitalism’s “creative destruction.” It constantly creates new jobs. That makes most everyone richer. The media rarely cover that, because it’s a slow, non-exciting, good news story, and the new jobs appear in many different places. By contrast, when a factory closes, the union assembles the media, and we report the tragic story about workers losing their jobs. “That reporter doesn’t follow up with the worker two years later,” says Palagashvili, “but research does, and research shows that that worker gets a new job.” “On average, (a) better job,” I note. “Better jobs,” agrees Palagashvili, “and higher wages.” Higher wages because innovation allows workers to accomplish more. “Bulldozers and crane trucks made construction industry workers better off,” says Palagashvili, “and the real wages of those construction workers increase.” Daggett and his union just don’t get it. They fight to keep American ports dangerous and inefficient. That will hurt their own workers and, eventually, themselves.

Moms for America is a nonprofit, grassroots organization with over 500,000 members spread across all 50 states that aims to “activate, empower, and mobilize moms to promote and advance freedom in our homes, communities and through our vote.” The organization recently awarded Missy Robertson with a Mothers of Influence Award for using her platforms to promote morality and virtue. During her powerful acceptance speech at the 4th annual Mothers of Influence and Champion of Freedom Awards, which was hosted at Mar-a-Lago on November 22, Missy and Jase were surprised to see none other than Donald Trump in the crowd. Jase recounts the incredible experience. “I was the most underdressed person there,” Jase admits, adding that he was surprised to see that what was just a start-up organization seven years ago has since evolved into a “who’s who.” “This place was packed. It was all these people you see on TV,” he tells Al. As for Trump’s unexpected appearance, Jase says that he just happened to come in from playing golf at the exact moment Missy was scheduled to give her speech. Jase explains that the people coordinating the event initially weren’t sure what to do when they got the call that Trump was on his way in. But before they could make a decision about potentially moving Missy’s speech, the announcer introduced her and she was ushered on stage, knowing the president would be in the crowd. “Missy told me, she said, ‘When that happened, I just felt a peace come over me,”’ says Jase, who knows that the mysterious timing “wasn’t an accident.” “So she starts giving this speech that was focused on Jesus, and she got to Acts chapter 17” — which Jase explains is a powerful passage in which Paul preaches the gospel message of salvation through Jesus Christ — and “right as she got to that point ... I looked up and saw the president looking at my wife,” Jase recounts. When Missy’s speech concluded, “Every person in that room (and there were hundreds) who loves Jesus descended on me and my wife, and there were songs, prayers, tears,” he says. “This is not an accident. This needed to happen.” “I’ve never been as proud of my wife as I was in that moment.” To hear the rest of the incredible story, watch the episode above. Want more from the Robertsons?To enjoy more on God, guns, ducks, and inspiring stories of faith and family, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

President Joe Biden's administration has reportedly made a last-minute push for Ukraine aid in the upcoming government spending bill Congress will need to pass by December 20. The Office of Management and Budget sent a request in late November urging Congress to approve another $24 billion of emergency funding toward weapons and equipment for Ukraine in the upcoming funding package. Speaker Mike Johnson, however, has expressed disinterest in approving additional aid. 'It is not the place of Joe Biden to make that decision now.'"I'm not planning to do that," Johnson said during a press conference Wednesday when asked about Biden's request. "There are developments by the hour in Ukraine," Johnson continued. "I think, as we predicted and as I said to all of you weeks before the election, if Donald Trump is elected, it will change the dynamic of the Russian war on Ukraine. And we're seeing that happen." Johnson noted that he would prioritize the suggestions of incoming President-elect Donald Trump over the current Biden administration. "It is not the place of Joe Biden to make that decision now," Johnson said during the press conference. "We have a newly elected president, and we're going to wait and take the new commander in chief's direction on all of that." Congress will have to pass another funding bill by December 20 in order to avoid a government shutdown before the holidays. Johnson noted earlier this week that he is expecting the funding to go into March while others within the conference have advocated for a funding bill that would go into January. The reality is the longer the funding bill is extended, the less wiggle room for the incoming administration to set its legislative agenda.Republicans are also expecting at least three vacancies in the upcoming Congress due to Trump's nominations, tightening the already slim House majority. As a result, Republicans will likely have to rely on Democrats to approve a spending bill, weakening their bargaining power. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

After Mike Tyson lost to Jake Paul by a decision in November, a government executive from Saudi Arabia reportedly offered Tyson $700 million to take have a rematch.As reported by several outlets including MMA Weekly, Saudi Arabian adviser and minister Turki Alalshikh offered Tyson the money if he is willing to participate in a "real" fight with Paul.Alalshikh is the current chairman of the board of directors of the General Entertainment Authority in Saudi Arabia and is widely considered to have transformed the boxing landscape, typically with large injections of cash.'Jake Paul is a joke.'The $700 million offer was seemingly first reported by an Instagram page called FTTV, which cited Alalshikh as saying "Jake Paul is a joke."Alalshikh then offered the caveat that Tyson would have to knock Paul out within the first three minutes of the fight to earn the money."I am giving Mike Tyson $700 million if he agrees to fight Jake Paul, this time in a real fight, and wins by KO in a maximum of three minutes," Alalshikh reportedly said.It's difficult to know whether the offer is real, given that Alalshikh hasn't made any other public comments about Tyson since he was promoting the fight online in November.The Saudi wasn't the only person seemingly unhappy with the outcome of the Netflix bout, with many notable celebrities saying they felt duped by the result.NFL Hall of Famer Michael Irvin — who sat in the second row at the event — called the event a "lie" and even theorized that there were contract stipulations preventing Tyson from throwing his preferred punches."That fight was a lie," Irvin claimed. "Everybody's lying. ... They had no intentions to really strap it on. If you look through that, I didn't see one patented uppercut by Mike Tyson. What did Mike Tyson win on? Uppercut.""He couldn't body and then uppercut. Like, how can you put that in a fight contract?" Irvin said.At the same time, the enormous offer to Tyson showcases exactly what UFC President Dana White said is wrong with the current state of boxing.Despite Alalshikh's previous claim that he was going to "fix" a broken sport, White said in October that the current boxing model "doesn't f***ing work. ... It takes a f***ing Saudi trillionaire to make boxing work."White's words were in response to claims that he doesn't pay fighters enough and that there is more money for athletes, particularly UFC fighters, when they transition to boxing."Even Saudi trillionaires get tired of f***ing bulls***. It's all a myth," White said about the pay scales."All the people that are trying the boxing thing, they all end up losing s***loads of money."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

REEE! Libs of TikTok Calls Taylor Lorenz OUT for Being a Hateful Unhinged LUNATIC and She Just Can't DEAL

RUH-ROH! Adam Schiff Believes People Getting PREEMPTIVE Pardons Must Be GUILTY (At Least He DID - Watch)