Quote:Obama’ presidential center and library opened in June, a little more than three months ago, and the employees who work there are already complaining about poor working conditions, cuts in pay, hours, and benefits, and saying that their concerns are being ignored by the people in charge.

After just three months? Really?

They claim that the situation is so bad that they’re trying to form their own union. Well, at least Obama supports unions. Right?

From the Daily Mail:

Barack Obama is facing a fresh humiliation at his ‘eyesore’ presidential center with workers slamming the project’s bosses and moving to unionize just months after it opened.

In a letter to colleagues this week, staff at the Chicago library said they were organizing a union due to the institute’s ‘increasing workloads’ and benefit rollbacks.

Workers have grown frustrated with leadership at Obama’s foundation after their concerns were met with ‘vague responses,’ according to the letter, first shared by the Chicago Sun-Times.

Issues with workloads and benefits have led to a ‘high turnover rate’ among employees, with many more ‘continuing to leave (and) taking with them their institutional knowledge and expertise,’ the letter claimed.

Workers say they were recently told that their healthcare costs would increase, promotions were suspended, and paid time off was reduced, despite also learning they would get no pay increases this winter.

The New York Post has more:

Some of the complaints suggested the $900 million presidential center — often maligned for resembling the Star Wars Death Star or a huge trash bin — could already be facing financial trouble.

They included the center’s recent halting of raises and promotions, an increase in their healthcare costs and a reduction of paid time off — all of which the letter said have led to a “high turnover rate” and exiting employees “taking with them their institutional knowledge and expertise.”

Just how vital those four months of “institutional knowledge” was remains unclear, but the workers included an ace-in-the-hole in their pitch: President Obama’s own glowing words endorsing unions in 2016.

“If I were looking for a good job that lets me build some security for my family, I’d join a union. If I saw a problem in my workplace, I’d organize my coworkers to do something about it,” the letter quoted Obama.

Do you think these workers will get any attention from CNN or MSNOW?

Not likely.

Link

I’d trade 10 years off the end of my life in exchange for making ALL of the “presidential libraries” permanently disappear in a puff of smoke.

But this shrine to Obama’s awesomeness really does set a new architectural standard for harsh, cold and ugly.

bwahahahahahaha employees are threatening to unionize.

It just goes to show that libturds cant run anything. Sub contractors have gone unpaid. Employees are treated like slaves.

(10-10-2026 09:15 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  bwahahahahahaha employees are threatening to unionize.

It just goes to show that libturds cant run anything. Sub contractors have gone unpaid. Employees are treated like slaves.

Democrats screw up everything they touch. 100% fact.

(10-10-2026 09:18 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 09:15 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  bwahahahahahaha employees are threatening to unionize.

It just goes to show that libturds cant run anything. Sub contractors have gone unpaid. Employees are treated like slaves.

Democrats screw up everything they touch. 100% fact.

Exactly.

They are the dregs of society.

Overeducated morons with no purpose in life.

Imagine the pink haired nose ringed losers they hired. These are exactly the types you can see all over social media with the unrealistic expectations and who are never happy about anything.

They probably consider working as some sort of docent at a library a “corporate” job.

It could be the few people that actually show up everyday to run the place are pissed off that everyone else calls out every day for their FMLA protected anxiety/mental health issues.

It could also be the stress of dealing with the type of people they have to deal with there. It’s probably a bunch of crack addicts trashing the bathroom, ghetto people letting their kids scream and run wild, school field trips full of Southside brats who don’t want to be there, and a steady stream of people asking if that’s where they can get the Obama phone. Or expecting to customer service for their existing Obama phones.

No President should be allowed to have a library, regardless if they are a Democrat or a Republican.

It is a waste of taxpayer money.

(10-10-2026 10:21 AM)BirdHawkEagle Wrote:  No President should be allowed to have a library, regardless if they are a Democrat or a Republican.

It is a waste of taxpayer money.

Well, this one is officially actually a “libary” so it’s allowed I think.

(10-10-2026 10:21 AM)BirdHawkEagle Wrote:  No President should be allowed to have a library, regardless if they are a Democrat or a Republican.

It is a waste of taxpayer money.

Trump's will be different.

Presidential libraries are required to be funded by private donations during the building phase, and then they must have a fund set up that covers at least 60% of the on going operating costs when it is handed over to the government. (NARA then runs it ) Any other costs are handled by the taxpayers.

Trump's library will be completely privately funded, and he will not hand it over to NARA. (womp womp) So it will remain a privately owned library.

This should be the norm for all presidential libraries going forward. ALso, its going to look spectacular.

(10-10-2026 10:44 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Trump's library will be completely privately funded, and he will not hand it over to NARA. (womp womp) So it will remain a privately owned library.

I hadn’t heard that, but that is very smart play by Trump’s people. 100% guaranteed that if NARA (or any other federal agency) ever got their hands on it, it would be converted to an anti-Trump venue. That is exactly what happened to the Nixon library in California: privately owned for a while, then entrusted to NARA, and now promoting (mostly) anti-Nixon viewpoints.