In 2023, the Teamsters signed a massive deal with UPS to guarantee a fleet of air-conditioned trucks.
“Our members just ratified the most lucrative agreement the Teamsters have ever negotiated at UPS. This contract will improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of workers,” Teamsters General President Sean M. O’Brien <a href="https://teamster.org/2023/08/teamsters-ratify-historic-ups-contract/">boasted</a> at the time. “Teamsters have set a new standard and raised the bar for pay, benefits, and working conditions in the package delivery industry.&#8221;
He may have started celebrating too early.
As temperatures climbed last month, the Teamsters sent a furious letter to UPS demanding information on the whereabouts of the air-conditioned vehicles.
“How does UPS expect to actually deliver 20,000 or more air-conditioned package cars and vans over the next two years, when the delivery giant is already so far behind?&#8221; O&#8217;Brien <a href="https://teamster.org/2025/06/teamsters-request-ups-data-on-heat-protections-overtime-violations-staffing/">demanded</a>. “The summer heat beating down on our members is no joke. UPS is playing a dangerous game with the lives of thousands of essential American workers.&#8221;
UPS, meanwhile, seems to have different concerns.
For years, the company has been focused on <a href="https://about.ups.com/us/en/our-impact/ups-sustainability-and-social-impact-report/delivering-for-our-planet.html">replacing</a> its fleet with so-called green vehicles. A few years ago, UPS <a href="https://about.ups.com/us/en/our-impact/sustainability/sustainable-services/electric-vehicles---about-ups.html">pledged</a> to make 40% of its vehicles use &#8220;alternative fuel&#8221; by 2025. So far, UPS <a href="https://about.ups.com/us/en/our-impact/ups-sustainability-and-social-impact-report/delivering-for-our-planet.html">says</a> it uses more than 1,000 electric or hybrid vehicles.
Drivers blasting their air conditioning in the sweltering Texas heat probably doesn&#8217;t help the shipping giant&#8217;s goal of reaching &#8220;carbon neutrality by 2050.&#8221;
But that doesn&#8217;t matter to the Teamsters.
The 2023 deal pledges at least 28,000 package vans and cars with air conditioning, prioritizing workers in the country&#8217;s blisteringly hot areas. The Teamsters&#8217; contract covers nearly 340,000 of the union&#8217;s 1.3 million workers.
&#8220;With oppressive summer heat already affecting major parts of the country, exceeding 100 degrees as far north as New York, Zone 1 workers in the hottest southern states like Texas, Arizona, and Nevada are still waiting for UPS to honor its legal and contractual obligations on heat protections,&#8221; the union <a href="https://teamster.org/2025/06/teamsters-request-ups-data-on-heat-protections-overtime-violations-staffing/">said</a> in a press release last week.
This is not the first time unions have found themselves at odds with green energy policies. The United Auto Workers — another major labor union — <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/02/18/epa-electric-vehicles-car-rules/">opposed</a> President Joe Biden&#8217;s electric vehicle mandate, saying a rapid shift to electric vehicles would cost union jobs. At the time, UAW President Shawn Fain withheld the union&#8217;s endorsement from Biden until it could extract concessions from the administration.
Now, a major Democratic policy has once again alienated one of the party&#8217;s biggest constituent groups.
The Teamsters are demanding &#8220;all available data&#8221; on the status of the new air-conditioned vehicles. So far, UPS has only delivered 10%, the union claims.
The deal also promised 22,500 full-time jobs, another pain point for the Teamsters. Yet another issue is UPS&#8217;s slow response to grievances about overtime violations, according to the union.
“We are halfway into our union’s national contract and the Teamsters are gravely concerned that UPS is not living up to its end of the deal,” O’Brien said.
“In so many ways — from the painfully slow delivery of air-conditioned vehicles to overworking our rank-and-file and failing to provide up-to-date information on new job opportunities — UPS has a lot of catching up to do to honor this agreement,&#8221; the union boss said. &#8220;The weather is getting worse, but still our members show up every single day to ensure this company remains the best in the business. The Teamsters’ patience with UPS mismanagement is wearing thin.”
Quite a different tone than two years ago. Best of luck to the sweaty drivers stuck between their woke company and blustering union!

UPS Workers On Verge Of Strike

UPS Push For Electric Trucks Leaves Drivers Sweating — And Unions Furious

Climate Change

Labor Unions

Unions

President Donald Trump signaled on Thursday that &#8220;changes are coming&#8221; to his immigration policy, noting that farmers as well as hotel and leisure businesses have complained about his &#8220;very aggressive&#8221; crackdown on illegal immigrants.
In a <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114670684664650262">post</a> on Truth Social, the president said that he&#8217;s heard from farmers and people in the hotel industry who are concerned about the administration&#8217;s immigration crackdown &#8220;taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace.&#8221; Trump added that the United States must deport criminals while also protecting farmers.
&#8220;In many cases the Criminals allowed into our Country by the VERY Stupid Biden Open Borders Policy are applying for those jobs. This is not good. We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!&#8221; Trump added.
Later on Thursday, Trump <a href="https://x.com/Breaking911/status/1933211435032600896">told</a> reporters at the White House that a new order on certain immigration enforcement will be issued &#8220;pretty soon.&#8221;
&#8220;Farmers are being hurt badly. You know, they have very good workers who have worked for them for 20 years. They&#8217;re not citizens, but they&#8217;ve turned out to be great, and we&#8217;re going to have to do something about that,&#8221; he said. &#8220;We can&#8217;t take farmers and take all their people and send them back &#8230; and you know what&#8217;s going to happen, what is happening, they get rid of some of their people &#8230; and they end up hiring the criminals that have come in, the murderers from prisons and everything else.&#8221;
Trump&#8217;s shift comes as his administration has ramped up immigration enforcement operations in the Los Angeles area, including detaining suspected illegal immigrants on the street, at businesses, and on farms. ICE agents were spotted chasing down and detaining farm workers in Ventura County, California, earlier this week.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
ICE agents arrived at produce farms in Ventura County at 6am Tuesday and were seen chasing workers to detain them. Full story: <a href="https://t.co/7lofZTlbj8">https://t.co/7lofZTlbj8</a> <a href="https://t.co/Sh5WTud7lc">pic.twitter.com/Sh5WTud7lc</a>
— ABC7 Eyewitness News (@ABC7) <a href="https://twitter.com/ABC7/status/1932860010897264966?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 11, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The White House said on Wednesday that since last week, 330 suspected illegal immigrants in the Los Angeles area have been detained, 113 of whom had past criminal convictions.
As immigration agents carried out the president&#8217;s deportation agenda in California, anti-ICE protests and riots broke out in Los Angeles last weekend. Joining the demonstrations were members of Unite Here Local 11, a local labor union that represents workers in the hotel, food, and casino industries. The organization, which is part of a local leftist coalition that has pushed anti-police talking points and given tips for how to respond to ICE agents, condemned the law enforcement response to the riots.
Trump&#8217;s mass deportation operation has been celebrated by most Republicans and conservatives, but has concerned some farmers and business owners who work in industries that have relied on hiring illegal immigrant workers. In January, the Wisconsin Farm Bureau <a href="https://www.weau.com/2025/01/24/farmers-advocacy-groups-speak-concerns-over-workforce-president-trump-continues-with-plans-immigration-crackdowns/">urged</a> Trump to pursue a secure border without going after illegal immigrants who have worked on the state&#8217;s many dairy farms &#8220;for years.&#8221;
In April, Trump addressed some of these concerns during a Cabinet meeting, <a href="https://x.com/Acyn/status/1910382262610526486">saying</a>, “We are also going to work with farmers. If they have strong recommendations for their farms for certain people, we’re going to let them stay in for a while. &#8230; We have to take care of our farmers, our hotels and, you know, the various places where they need the people.”
The president added that employers could lobby the government for their illegal immigrant workers to be allowed to remain in the country.
“So a farmer will come in with a letter concerning certain people, saying they’re great, they’re working hard,” Trump said. “We’re going to slow it down a little bit for them, and then we’re going to ultimately bring them back. They’ll go out. They’re going to come back as legal workers.”
Trump&#8217;s post on Thursday was met with backlash among some conservatives who argued that it would be a step back from what the president initially promised to do on the campaign trail. Daily Wire host Matt Walsh <a href="https://x.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1933168224507662529">wrote</a> on X, &#8220;Hell no. We can’t tolerate this.&#8221;
&#8220;Employers who knowingly rely on illegal immigrant labor should be in prison,&#8221; he added. &#8220;Instead we’re going to back off of immigration enforcement for their sake?&#8221;
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for clarification on Trump&#8217;s post.

Donald Trump/Immigration

Trump Signals ‘Changes Are Coming’ To Immigration Enforcement As Farmers, Businesses Complain

Business

Donald Trump

Farmers

Illegal Immigation

Immigration

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Matt Walsh

The new acting director of The Kennedy Center has responded to reports that employees plan to unionize.
“These people who only now want to speak out and organize were silent while the Center was going into deficit spending,” Richard Grenell said in a statement on the situation, per <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2025/05/15/you_should_be_celebrating_trump_kennedy_center_rolls_eyes_at_union_push__152798.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">RealClearPolitics</a>. “They missed their moment but should be celebrating now.”
His remarks come after multiple legacy news outlets reported on the unionization push. The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/theater/2025/05/15/kennedy-center-union/">reported</a> that it spoke with Kennedy Center employees about their reasoning, who confirmed it was spurred by President Donald Trump taking control of the center and firing the entire board of trustees.
According to newly filed paperwork, the new union will be called the “Kennedy Center United Arts Workers,” and instead of having “at will” employment status, they will be “for cause.” This means instead of being able to be fired at any time for any reason, leadership will be required to prove a reason for any dismissals.
One union organizer told The Post, “Communication from leadership to staff has been reduced to emails that are few and far between,” and claimed they haven’t had any staff meetings.  
“This lack of transparency from leadership has really contributed to a culture of anxiety and uncertainty,” the unnamed person added.
During a visit to the center earlier this year, Trump commented on the state of the building, which first opened to the public in 1971. The president said it was in “tremendous disrepair, as is a lot of the rest of our country — most of it because of bad management,” per the <a href="https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2025-03-17/trump-visits-kennedy-center-slams-hamilton">Los Angeles Times</a>. Trump also said he was “disappointed” but promised to “do what has to be done” to make things right again.
Trump’s Kennedy Center takeover and shakeup have caused big reactions from leftists. There have been protests, cancellations, and a general aura of doom and gloom, but the venue has been attracting record crowds despite the drama. The Kennedy Center just broke its all-time attendance record for a public event on March 29, welcoming 11,000 attendees, of whom 76% were there for the first time.
This comes after Trump also promised to scrub leftist programs from the Center’s lineup. “NO MORE DRAG SHOWS, OR OTHER ANTI-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA — ONLY THE BEST,” the president wrote on Truth Social in February.

U.S. Ambassador Grenell At Berlin 4th Of July

Kennedy Center Director Ric Grenell Says Staff Planning To Unionize ‘Should Be Celebrating’ Instead

Kennedy Center Director Reacts To Employees Plan To Unionize: 'You Should Be Celebrating'

General

Politics

Ric Grenell

Richard Grenell

The Kennedy Center

Washington D.C.

The majority of Americans want federal workers to stop participating in union activities while on the job, new polling shared with The Daily Wire from a union watchdog shows.
The Public Labor Union Accountability Committee released polling on Monday showing that 91% of Americans want to know how much it costs them for government workers to do union activities during their working hours. The same poll found that 88% of Americans want more transparency around government unions and how much they cost taxpayers. 
&#8220;We asked voters what they think about public sector unions — and the results were clear,&#8221; the committee said in a memo on its polling. &#8220;Americans are fed up with the unions’ highly partisan political activity and voiced strong support for more transparency and accountability in how they operate.&#8221;
The polling was a nationwide survey of 600 registered voters through an online panel. 
Government unions are notoriously partisan, heavily backing Democrat candidates. In the 2024 election, the four largest public unions — American Federation of Teachers (AFT), National Education Association (NEA), Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) — gave $708 million to Democrat candidates. 
Those surveyed by the Public Labor Union Accountability Committee opposed the overwhelming slant of union spending toward Democrats. Sixty-five percent were opposed to the fact ​​that “last year, the nation’s largest union of federal employees gave over 95% of its political donations to one political party.&#8221;
Mary Katharine Ham, a new senior advisor for the watchdog, told The Daily Wire public unions were mainly a tool for Democrat politicians, not American workers. 
“These public sector unions pretend to stand up for workers, when they are really a money laundering outfit for the Democratic Party – ripping off the American taxpayer at every turn,” she said. “Big labor is the power center for Democrats – their organizing muscle and money. They stand in the way of common sense, of our federal government being more accountable and better run. And some of their demands are pure comedy.” 
Large majorities also demanded that “federal employees should not be allowed to influence a presidential election” (75%) and “public sector unions need to stay out of politics” (70%).
Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) has introduced new legislation called the “Protecting Taxpayers’ Wallet Act” which would mandate federal unions reimburse the government when employees use official working hours to do union work. 
“No surprise — new polling shows the American People want more transparency surrounding public sector unions,” Perry told The Daily Wire. “The bill is a commonsense fix against ever present waste, fraud, and abuse. We need more union watchdogs like PLUAC holding government unions accountable.”
President Donald Trump has already taken action to curb the activity of some government unions. Last month, he signed an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-signs-eo-ending-union-rights-at-federal-agencies-with-national-security-missions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">executive order</a> that ends collective bargaining for hundreds of thousands of federal employees whose work is related to national security.

US-POLITICS-TRUMP-MUSK

‘Ripping Off The American Taxpayer’: Most Americans ‘Fed Up’ With Partisan Union Activity

Poll

teachers union

President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order that will end collective bargaining for hundreds of thousands of federal employees whose work is related to national security, the White House said. 
The EO applies to public sector unions representing workers in federal agencies “with national security missions,” including the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the National Science Foundation, and the Coast Guard. A <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/03/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-exempts-agencies-with-national-security-missions-from-federal-collective-bargaining-requirements/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">memo</a> from the White House said that Trump was given the authority to limit union activity for national security purposes based on the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.
“President Trump is taking action to ensure that agencies vital to national security can execute their missions without delay and protect the American people,” the memo said. “The President needs a responsive and accountable civil service to protect our national security.”
Other agencies that would be impacted include immigration agencies like U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. International-focused departments and agencies like the Department of State, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and the International Trade Commission would also have collective bargaining rights ended.
The Energy Department, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, EPA,  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, Food and Drug Administration, and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the Treasury Department were also all named in the memo. 
The document added that Trump “supports constructive partnerships with unions who work with him; he will not tolerate mass obstruction that jeopardizes his ability to manage agencies with vital national security missions.”
The American Federation of Government Employees claimed that the announcement was an attack on free speech and would impact more than one million government workers. 
“President Trump&#8217;s latest executive order is a disgraceful and retaliatory attack on the rights of hundreds of thousands of patriotic American civil servants—nearly one-third of whom are veterans—simply because they are members of a union that stands up to his harmful policies,” the union said. &#8220;This administration’s bullying tactics represent a clear threat not just to federal employees and their unions, but to every American who values democracy and the freedoms of speech and association.&#8221;
A separate <a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/latest-memos/guidance-on-executive-order-exclusions-from-federal-labor-management-programs.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">memo</a> from the Office of Personnel Management after the executive order was issued directed federal agencies to consult with legal counsel to begin implementing the directive.

President Trump Announces New Automobile Tariffs

Trump Signs EO Ending Union Rights At Federal Agencies With ‘National Security Missions’

Executive

Executive Orders

Trump Administration

White House

A federal judge on Wednesday rejected an effort to block the Trump administration from buying out the contracts of tens of thousands of federal workers, saying that the public sector unions that sued lacked standing. 
U.S. District Judge George O’Toole Jr. <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.280398/gov.uscourts.mad.280398.66.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">declined</a> to block the Office of Personnel Management’s “Fork in the Road” program, which gave two million federal workers the opportunity to quit and be paid through September. Due to his ruling, the window to accept the offer closed Wednesday at 7:20 p.m. ET after at least 75,000 workers took the deal. 
The American Federation of Government Employees and several other unions challenged the program, arguing that the offer violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). 
“The plaintiffs are unable to succeed on the merits of their two APA claims because they lack Article III standing and because this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted,” O’Toole said. 
The judge added that the unions did not have direct enough interest to challenge the program. 
“The plaintiffs here are not directly impacted by the directive. Instead, they allege that the directive subjects them to upstream effects including a diversion of resources to answer members’ questions about the directive, a potential loss of membership, and possible reputational harm,” he wrote. “The unions do not have the required direct stake in the Fork Directive, but are challenging a policy that affects others, specifically executive branch employees. This is not sufficient.&#8221;
McLaurine Pinover, a spokeswoman for the Office of Personnel Management, celebrated the ruling, saying that OPM was “pleased the court has rejected a desperate effort to strike down the Deferred Resignation Program.”
“There is no longer any doubt: the Deferred Resignation Program was both legal and a valuable option for federal employees,” she <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/02/12/us-news/federal-judge-allows-trump-to-push-forward-with-buyouts-for-government-workers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told</a> the New York Post. “This program was carefully designed, thoroughly vetted, and provides generous benefits so federal workers can plan for their futures.”
AFGE President Everett Kelley said the decision was “a setback in the fight for dignity and fairness for public servants.”
“We continue to maintain it is illegal to force American citizens who have dedicated their careers to public service to make a decision, in a few short days, without adequate information, about whether to uproot their families and leave their careers for what amounts to an unfunded IOU from Elon Musk,” Kelly added. 
The “fork” program was introduced on January 28, saying that significant cuts to the size of government were on the horizon and that OPM could not guarantee that everyone’s position would still be in place with incoming reforms. The offer paralleled a similar offer that Elon Musk, who is leading Trump&#8217;s &#8220;Department of Government Efficiency&#8221; (DOGE) project, offered to employees of Twitter, now X, when he took over the social media platform. 
Musk <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1884601571347943773" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> government employees who took the offer from OPM would be able to do &#8220;whatever&#8221; they wanted for six months with full government pay and benefits.

Trump To Order Federal Job Cuts As Part Of Musk’s Downsizing

Judge Rejects Union Effort To Stop Trump’s Buyout Of Government Workers

Courts

Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

Elon Musk

Federal Government

Office of Personnel Management

As part of his plans to improve the efficiency and reduce the size of the federal government, President Trump offered federal employees <a href="https://www.opm.gov/fork" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a generous buyout</a>, effectively equal to about eight months of pay and benefits worth $122,000 on average.
Federal employees, who originally had until February 6 to accept the buyout offer, were scheduled to stop working at the end of this week. Despite federal employee unions urging them not to take the buyout, an estimated 20,000 to 40,000 federal workers have accepted the offer.
But a federal judge just delayed implementation of that buyout until at least February 10.
With federal employee unions at the helm of the lawsuits, it must be that the buyouts would harm federal employees — right?
Wrong.
The buyout offers a win-win for federal employees. Those who want the buyout can take it and enjoy eight months of pay and benefits without having to work. Those who don’t want the buyout nevertheless benefit from it as the more people who take it, the smaller are their chances of being laid off.
No one has to take the buyout; it’s entirely optional. Taking it is far better than being laid off with no severance through reorganizations or a reduction in force — both of which, the Trump administration noted, are coming.
The <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/unions-sue-trump-administration-arbitrary-capricious-employee-buyout-offers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">unions argue</a> that the buyout offer is arbitrary and capricious, and that the president lacks the authority to issue these payments. And they’ve instructed their members not to take the buyout.
But as head of the Executive Branch, the president has authority over the federal workforce, including significantly reducing its size. While Trump’s generous buyout offer is unprecedented, reducing the size of the federal workforce is not.
Within a month of taking office, President Clinton <a href="https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-order-12839-reduction-100000-federal-positions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">issued an executive order</a> instructing agencies to reduce their workforces by 4% over the following three years. He didn’t offer any buyout, and federal employment declined by more than 10% over the following three years.
It’s clear that the president has the authority to reduce the size of the federal workforce, which means that all federal employee unions are fighting for is to prevent their members who want the buyout from receiving it.
While the judge who delayed the buyout did not comment on its legality, the administration will presumably make the case that the buyout maintains spending on the federal workforce at the levels appropriated by Congress; and the offer is one of managerial directive, including allowing agencies to redirect work according to their needs.
The fact that federal employee unions are suing to prevent something that unilaterally benefits their members highlights one of the reasons Big Labor continues to decline in membership; union leaders often put their own desires for power and money above the best interests of workers.
If federal employees’ unions want to help their members, they will end their quest to deny them generous buyouts, and instead help their members make informed decisions that align with their own personal interests instead of the interests of union leaders.
***
Rachel Greszler is a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
<div class="css-j7qwjs">
<div id="post-body-text">
<div class="e1nzmkc90 css-pvudsd">
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
</div>
</div>
</div>

USAID Protest

Federal Employee Unions Seek To Strip Buyout Offer From Federal Workers

Opinion

A federal judge in Washington D.C. is hearing arguments on whether to block Elon Musk’s newly formed Department of Government Efficiency from accessing sensitive Treasury records.
According to ABC News, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-weigh-block-doge-accessing-treasury-department-records/story?id=118498817">weighing</a> whether to grant a temporary restraining order preventing the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing or using taxpayer data, including names, Social Security numbers, and bank account details.
The American Federation of Government Employees, the Service Employees International Union, and the Alliance for Retired Americans filed a lawsuit calling the alleged intrusion “massive and unprecedented,” claiming DOGE obtained the information “without providing any legal justification.” 
Per the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/03/us/politics/elon-musk-treasury-payment-data.html">New York Times</a>, &#8220;The American Federation of Government Employees, the largest union of federal employees, representing more than 800,000 workers, filed the suit alongside the Service Employees International Union and Alliance for Retired Americans, a group that represents the interests of retired union workers. All three groups are affiliated with the A.F.L.-C.I.O., an umbrella group of more than 50 unions representing more than 12.5 million workers.&#8221;
The unions requested the judge bar the Treasury Department from sharing further records and prohibit DOGE employees from using those already obtained, the filing says.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-05/treasury-musk-s-doge-targeted-by-union-request-to-block-data-access">said</a> that Musk, in his role leading DOGE, “has abided by all applicable federal laws,” per Bloomberg.
DOGE, formed to streamline federal agencies under President Donald Trump, now faces its first major court challenge, with the judge hearing arguments early Wednesday afternoon. 
In addition to claiming the department’s data collection violated privacy statutes, the lawsuit also asserts that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent consented to granting DOGE the ability to tap into the Treasury Department’s taxpayer records. 
According to the unions, DOGE has “full, continuous, and ongoing access” to millions of financial profiles, an arrangement they say could pose a serious threat to personal security nationwide.
The Treasury Department denies this, saying on a Tuesday regarding the privacy allegations that DOGE had been given “read-only” access to “coded data.”

Protesters Rally Against DOGE And Elon Musk Outside Department Of Labor

Unions File Lawsuit To Block DOGE Access To Treasury Data

Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/011325zor_5425.pdf">declined</a> to hear a challenge to New York’s “Taylor Law,” which gives unions monopoly bargaining privileges in the public sector. At best, the Court missed an opportunity to protect the First Amendment; at worst, the Court endorsed Marxism.
We are Jewish academics who have been forced to accept the “exclusive representation” of unions that we consider anti-Semitic. One of us, a professor at the City University of New York, <a href="https://www.nrtw.org/goldstein/">brought the eponymous challenge</a>, Goldstein v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY. The other, a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, similarly <a href="https://www.nrtw.org/news/jewish-mit-students-eeoc-03212024/">filed federal charges</a> against the MIT Graduate Student Union. Both unions engage in the anti-Israel “Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions” movement (BDS), which we vehemently oppose.
At CUNY, the faculty union in 2021 <a href="https://2022.psc-cuny.org/sites/default/files/Final_Resolution_in_Support_of_the_Palestinian_People.pdf">condemned Israel</a> “dating back to its establishment as a settler colonial state in 1948.” At MIT, the graduate student union in 2024 <a href="https://mitgsu.org/resolutions/ceasefire">called for</a> “an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza,” without mentioning Hamas or the hostages they still hold. The resolutions compare Israel to apartheid South Africa — ironic, given that the unions treat objectors like us as second-class citizens without voting privileges.
One need not share our opposition to BDS to see that these unions cannot represent us at the bargaining table. Yet that is exactly what is happening. Had the Supreme Court taken up Goldstein, the Justices could have struck down the Taylor Law on the grounds that it violates employees’ freedom of speech and association. Instead, the Court let stand the Second Circuit&#8217;s <a href="https://www.fairnesscenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Second-Circuit-Goldstein-v.-PSC-Decision.pdf">ruling</a> that “Designating PSC as Plaintiffs’ exclusive bargaining representative does not impermissibly burden Plaintiffs’ ability to speak with, associate with, or not associate with whom they please, including CUNY and PSC.” In other words, it is permissible to subordinate individual rights to collective interests — classic Marxism.
The Supreme Court knew this when it declined to take the case. An <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-71/323009/20240821101037349_240806a%20AC%20Brief%20for%20efiling.pdf">amicus brief</a> supporting the petitioners, filed by the Upper Midwest Law Center and the Manhattan Institute, cites the MIT Graduate Student Union as an example of the problem: “Jewish students are being compelled to associate with and implicitly endorse these views despite their most sincere religious beliefs, so they filed discrimination charges with the EEOC.”
The outcome of those charges was that religious students at private universities could divert their union dues to charity, but they would still be subject to exclusive representation. Public employees, including CUNY professors, already have the right to opt out of union dues under Janus v. AFSCME, but they too remain subject to exclusive representation by a union they abhor. While the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1466_2b3j.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recognized</a> in Janus that “Designating a union as the employees’ exclusive representative substantially restricts the rights of individual employees,” the validity of exclusive representation was not squarely before the Court — until Goldstein, which the Justices declined to hear.
The result has been predictable. Ten days after the Court denied the petition, the CUNY faculty union adopted a <a href="https://psc-cuny.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/PSC-and-NYCERS-Israeli-Investments-Divestment-Resolution-1-23-25.pdf">resolution</a> “expressing its support for complete disinvestment from Israel,” further resolving to “divest its own funds from any investment vehicle that includes in its portfolio stocks and bonds of Israeli companies and Israeli government bonds.” In response, a Jewish civil rights organization <a href="https://x.com/_SAFECAMPUS/status/1884323681675141318">filed a complaint</a> with the New York State Division of Human Rights, arguing that the union “has abandoned their sacrosanct Duty of Fair Representation.” Under Janus, “That duty is a necessary concomitant of the authority that a union seeks when it chooses to serve as the exclusive representative of all the employees in a unit.”
There is another way. New York and other states could amend their labor laws to give employees the right to opt out of union representation. Unions could thus continue to engage in BDS, but not on behalf of those who oppose it. Additionally, the states could adopt laws that give private employees the right to work without paying compulsory dues to unions that they oppose. Twenty-six states already have such a law, which Congress could extend to all fifty states by passing the National Right to Work Act.
The Soviet Union put up a physical wall to keep people in; New York’s labor law puts up a legal one. If unions are as good as they claim to be, they should not need to compel representation or financial support. To borrow a phrase: Governor Hochul, tear down this wall!
* * *
<a href="https://x.com/AvrahamGoldste3" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Avraham Goldstein</a> is an assistant professor of mathematics at the City University of New York.
<a href="https://x.com/WillSussmanPhD/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> Will Sussman</a> is a collegiate associate at the Manhattan Institute and a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

CUNY Students Hold Rally In Support Of Palestine

Did The Supreme Court Just Endorse Marxism?

Anti-Semitism

City University of New York (CUNY)

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

New York

SCOTUS

Supreme Court

Teachers Unions

Before President Joe Biden dropped his re-election bid, Vice President Kamala Harris demanded the International Brotherhood of Teamsters union “get on board,” which didn’t sit well with the union’s leadership.
Teamsters president Sean O’Brien says that just before Biden dropped out, Harris was meeting with local union leadership when she simply demanded the union endorse Biden.
“Around June or May, one of my vice presidents, a woman named Joan Corey out of my local, she sits on our general executive board, was at an event with Vice President Harris,” O’Brien said in the interview with Tucker Carlson. “And they’re going through the line to get the picture and Joan introduces herself to Vice President Harris, says, ‘I’m Joan Corey, I’m on the general executive board for the Teamsters.”
“[Harris] goes, ‘Teamsters? You better get on board. You better get on board. Better get on board soon,’” O’Brien said. “Says it to my vice president.”
Carlson asked if Harris said that to Corey’s face, and O’Brien said she did, and that Corey told him about the interaction the next day.
“So, she tells me this. So, I call up Marty Walsh – he wasn’t the secretary of labor – but he was pushing hard for us to make the endorsement. I’m like, ‘Let me ask you a question, Marty. Excuse my French. Who does this f***ing lady think she is?’” O’Brien said.
“Like, if I want support from any organization, I am not gonna point my finger in someone’s face and say, ‘You better get on board or else,’” O’Brien continued. “But that’s the attitude of this whole party.&#8221;
<a class="c-link" href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-13927">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
After Harris became the nominee, O’Brien said, she finally agreed to a roundtable meeting with the Teamsters, but only answered four out of their 16 questions. O’Brien said other candidates, including President-elect Donald Trump, answered all of the union’s questions.
“On the fourth question, one of her operatives or one of her staff slips a note in front of me — ‘This will be the last question.’ And it was 20 minutes earlier than the time it was going to end,” O’Brien said during his interview with Carlson.
O’Brien said that when Harris left, she told the Teamsters: “I’m going to win with you or without you.”
Just weeks before the election, Harris became the first Democrat in decades not to be endorsed by the Teamster’s union, with a majority of members backing Trump instead, The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kamala-first-democrat-in-decades-to-not-get-teamsters-endorsement-after-members-back-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> at the time.
“The union’s extensive member polling showed no majority support for Vice President Harris and no universal support among the membership for President Trump,” the Teamsters announced at the time.
Harris went on to lose the election, including losing every battleground state.

Kamala Harris

Kamala Harris Told Teamsters VP ‘To Get On Board,’ Souring Relationship

Kamala Harris Told Teamsters VP 'To Get On Board,' Souring Relationship

2024 Election

U.S.

For the <a href="https://californiaglobe.com/fr/voters-hand-gov-newsom-first-statewide-minimum-wage-ballot-failure-in-california-history/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">first time</a> in California history, a ballot measure seeking a statewide minimum wage increase has failed.
The ballot measure results were finally called by the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/california-proposition-32-minimum-wage-ballot-68e5320b2716d2a5844dc51b97a6e235" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Associated Press</a> on Tuesday, two weeks after Election Day. California Proposition 32, which would have increased the minimum wage to $18 an hour by 2026, failed by approximately <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_32,_$18_Minimum_Wage_Initiative_(2024)" target="_blank" rel="noopener">240,000 votes</a>, a less-than-2% difference.
The proposition was strongly opposed by the California Chamber of Commerce, which argued that the measure would increase taxes and force businesses to cut jobs, according to the AP. Earlier this year, Democrat-led California <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ca-fast-food-joints-warn-of-price-hikes-ahead-of-new-minimum-wage-definitely-going-to-pass-this-on" target="_blank" rel="noopener">instituted</a> a $20-an-hour minimum wage for fast-food workers, a move that caused many restaurants to hike prices and cut back on staff.
&#8220;Californians are sending Gavin Newsom and the SEIU a clear message: They&#8217;re sick of being lab rats for their pet projects,&#8221; said Rebekah Paxton, research director at the Employment Policies Institute (EPI), a conservative think tank. &#8220;Voters saw the devastating economic fallout of the $20 fast food minimum wage law, and for the first time in state history, voted against a statewide minimum wage hike.&#8221;
An EPI <a href="https://epionline.org/app/uploads/2024/07/2024-06-California-Limited-Service-Restaurant-Operator-Survey-Final-Booklet.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">survey</a> of 182 limited-service restaurant operators in California published in July found that 98% of fast-food restaurants in the Golden State increased prices after the minimum wage hike, 89% reduced employee hours, and 70% reduced the size of their staff.
In September, Newsom wrote an <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/gavin-newsom-critics-said-californias-minimum-wage-increase-would-job-killer-opposite-happened" target="_blank" rel="noopener">opinion piece</a> published by Fox News arguing that the &#8220;modest&#8221; fast-food minimum wage increase resulted in more fast-food jobs in the state along with &#8220;better working conditions, reduced financial stress and greater opportunities for upward mobility.&#8221;
&#8220;Our commitment to raising the minimum wage is a testament to California&#8217;s values,&#8221; Newsom wrote. &#8220;We believe in fairness, equity and the idea that everyone deserves a chance to succeed. And these results dispel the cynics who say we must choose between protecting workers and growing the economy.&#8221;
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a>
The broader minimum wage hike that went before voters earlier this month was pushed by unions such as the SEIU and UFCW 770. Kathy Finn, president of UFCW 770, which represents around 30,000 workers, said, &#8220;Proposition 32’s failure to pass is disappointing for all Californians who believe that everyone who works should earn enough to support their families.&#8221;
California&#8217;s minimum wage is already one of the <a href="https://pro.bloomberglaw.com/insights/labor-employment/these-states-have-the-highest-and-lowest-minimum-wages/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">highest</a> in the country at $16 an hour for most workers, and six cities and counties in the state already have an $18-an-hour minimum wage. West Hollywood has the highest minimum wage in the state at $ 19.08 an hour for non-hotel employees, set to increase to $19.65 on January 1.

California state flag

California Voters Reject Minimum Wage Hike

California

Economy

Gavin Newsom

Minimum Wage

Service Employees International Union (SEIU)

CUNY Gaza Solidarity Camp

‘A Hotbed Of Anti-Semitism’: Jewish Professors Take Their Case To The Supreme Court

'A Hotbed Of Anti-Semitism': Jewish Professors Take Their Case To The Supreme Court

Menu