Open question: how can American labor unions be revitalized?

[0rganism]

Organized labor has been on the decline for decades, as the number of Americans living at or below poverty level has increased. How can we, or anyone, reverse this trend? What must be done?

[OffWithTheirHeads]

1. The first thing that NEEDS to be done

Teach labor history in apprenticeship schools. I have been fighting for this for years! I am a proud member of Sheet Metal Workers local 104 and I can't tell you how many union members are Republican. They have no idea how we got the 8 hour day, the weekend, anything. They don't know how many people fought and died for things they take for granted. They have NO idea how bad things were or will be if we don't continue to fight for workers rights. They get paid well and have good benifits and are clueless as to how this came about. They really think the owners gave us this stuff because they are good guys.

If we don't start teaching the history of the labor movement, especially in apprenticeship school, can we really expect them to learn it on Fux news?

[oscar111]

6. AFLCIO - put more than 5 replies to this Q per page, ur site

AFL has this same question at it s site, a page called Voices.

but the software is horrid.

Only five replies per page. Trudgeing thru that on dialup is so slow, i gave up looking for my own answer aftr seven pages of trudging.

AFL needs to learn that sites like DU put "headlines-only" on the surface pages, so one can look quickly at what may be interesting posts, at a speed of about forty per page.

IIRC, AFL's posts didnt even have headlines allowed.

Such turkeydom at the highest level of AFL is inexcusable.

Are there not tekkies in the vast membership of AFL?

ANSWER TO THE QUESTION POSED:
AFL must subsidize AAR, or its own clone of it {in noncompeting areas only}

A movement with no voice has no future.

AFL has been cut in half during the last fifty years, because of no media of its own. The voters do not understand AFL at all, ... pretty obviously. They understand Limbaugh, at the rate of 18 hours every week.

[cloudythescribbler]

17. now u did it Oscar -- what is AAR?

[annabanana]

19. (Air America Radio). . . . . . . . n/t

[oscar111]

21. AIR AMERICA RADIO AAR: ho ho, cloudy you got me

good retort, cloudy

[0rganism]

8. I wonder how many know about the 1st Columbine massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_Mine_Massacre

Labor has got to be one of the most neglected topics in high-school American history curricula. I got lucky, had a few teachers who were really adamant about covering it, and they still only scratched the surface. People just don't seem to understand how child labor laws, 40-hour work weeks, safety standards, and minimum wage laws were not simply given to us on a silver platter from the Powers That Be; they were paid for in an ocean of blood, sweat, and tears.

[oscar111]

25. Same as Ludlow? both in CO.

?

[0rganism]

27. Well, Ludlow was bigger and messier

but I find it strange that the Denver area has had two "Columbine Massacres" and we'll only ever hear about the 2nd one in corporate media.

[driver8]

50. I'm in a union -- IATSE local 700. A lot of Rethugs in my union, too

I couldn't believe how many people were supporting Bush. I told them, "Do you realize that Bush doesn't give a shit about unions? He would bust them all if he could..."

No convincing them, though. Bush was "tough on terra" and Kerry was "a pussy." (Hmmm...awol chickenhawk is tough...war veteran is a pussy. Something wrong with that line of thinking.)

[Career Prole]

2. We need to elect a labor-friendly government.

Right now the deck is stacked against us.

[Zhade]

47. That would require getting corporate cash out of politics.

Not even the Democratic Party will do that, thanks to corporatists like the DLC and Blue Dogs.

[TomClash]

3. Make Andy Stern head of the AFL

whether he likes it or not! :-)

[oscar111]

11. Stern -- what are the differences between him and Sweeney?

new to the labor movement -- pls tell newbie what issues define the diff between these two contenders?

[TomClash]

41. Andy Stern

is the head of SEIU. He would spend much more time and money on organizing - he's one reason SEIU has been so successful in that regard. He's also much more confrontational - though in a nonviolent way. He'd be good at increasing union membership.

[Toots]

4. If labor doesn't stand up now when it really matters, then it's a lost cau

With what this Administration is doing and attempting to do to Labor I am totally amazed that we hear nothing from them. Are they all turning into Jimmy Hoffas (turncoat traitors) or just too busy to notice they are getting the shaft "Big Time" If the Union wanted they could put a major hurt on America until it woke up and realized what was happening. But just like the Democrats in Congress, not much to mention.

[napi21]

5. I think WM is probably the best start.

It's a very difficult thing to do now. When they first organized, there were giant companies all under one roof. If you could convince most of the employees to join the union, you had power. Now, few if any companies have only one site, and people are so afraid of losing their job, it's hard to get them to agree to join a union.

That's the big problem with WM right now. They seem to have 2 kind of employees. 1. Desperately need that paycheck and are scared to death to cross the Co. for any reason. 2. Those who really don't care at all. The job, pay and benefits are so low, they know they can get something else tomorrow thats just as bad, so they just don't care enough to join a union.

However, WM workers are the biggest number of misused or abused workers in the US today. It would take someone with a lot more expertiese than me to tell you how to do it, but it seems like the best place to start.

[oscar111]

7. WM? what is that?

?????

[napi21]

9. Sorry, Wallmart. I've been abreviating it so long, I thought everyone

recognized it.

[oscar111]

13. If I didnt recognize WM, no one else will.. i have over 1OOO posts

probably 2OOO by now.
i read these boards daily. Never saw WM before.

assume no one will recognize it, amigo.

[cloudythescribbler]

16. Western Maritime Union?

I think you are right tho, obscure insider references are ALWAYS to be avoided, especially to cultivate the right mind set to organize UNIONS!!!!!!

You have to speak to people where they are, not where you think they should be, if they can be reached at all

[0rganism]

10. Wal-Mart, I figger

Unionizing Wal-Mart would be a serious shock to their system, that's for fucking sure.

[dogman]

36. A different evil in these parts-Waste Management

But that's a dirty job nobody wants.

[ariellyn]

12. Unions can be bad for business.

I've worked in a highly unionized environment. The people weren't very productive and they tied up valuable company time filing petty grievances. All of this leads to inferior products at higher prices.

I had an employee who had just been hired who asked to leave early when we were very short staffed. She had a valid problem but I explained that I would not be able to let her leave because we were short and I told her I'd look for an alternative if at all possible. Within ten minutes she called the union office who called me inquiring about it. In a nonunionized environment I'd have fired her immediately. Not that they could intervene, but the fact that she did that wasting my time and hers was ridiculous.

I'm not saying all unionized environments are this way. And I do believe unions are beneficial in some ways. But unions can get out of control which is why business owners don't like them.

[oscar111]

15. "Owners dont like them" -- well, so what else is new?

perhaps i should not say anything more.

[0rganism]

22. and business can be bad for humans

I've worked in highly unionized environments, too.

The people there were friendly and got the job done when it mattered. They made damned sure the younger workers were well-trained and ready to take on the job in question. They weren't just wage-slaves, there was a certain esprit de corps, a sense that everyone was working together for a common goal, and watching out for one-another.

I've also worked in highly non-unionized environments. The bosses have total control, they can demand anything from the workers no matter how ridiculous or stupid, the workers have no recourse whatsoever and live in fear from paycheck to paycheck, and actively strive to undercut each-other behind the scenes.

"In a nonunionized environment I'd have fired her immediately"

This says it all, as far as I'm concerned. Yeah, you would have fired her, and spent some time and money interviewing, hiring, and training the next worker to do the same job. Not that it mattered, because your wages would be much lower, and you could call on the other staff to fill in for as long as needed, whether or not they had "valid problems" of their own.

Cry me a river.

[Michael_Bush]

24. Unions suck!

For the exact same reason you stated.

Rather than fight for more productivity they protect the slackers and push production costs up not by getting individual workers more pay but by bringing in more workers to do less work.

Don't use their pension funds to influence corporate management.

They fight to keep jobs here through protectionism rather than by harnessing smarter better workers to be more efficient and thus cheaper.

GM is going to flush its pension down the drain. The unions should have fought the excessive pay for CEOs, the excessive payouts to stockholders but that chance is gone. The only bill due is the pensions and their members are going to foot the bill.

I believe in the concept of unions, and I thank them for the good work they did long ago. Until they change their ways they are a burdern not a help to their members.

[Career Prole]

33. Sure...whatever you say Mr. Bush. n/t

[ariellyn]

55. I agree...

The protectionism issue is a problem. I've seen the worst employees go for review to be fired and end up keeping their jobs. The only example that sets for everyone else is they can do whatever the worst employees do and get away with it.

Many new employees come into a unionized environment willing to work and end up slacking because the protected employees teach them that they don't have to do as much as they would ordinarily.

Maybe there are some companies where unions work well. My experience has been negative.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

78. When I was in a union, I walked a picket line and I now manage union

employees as a salaried supervisor.

Our union has very clear guidelines to follow in order to discipline or fire an employee.

A huge factor in this is the union steward; if the steward has a clue, that steward will recognize when an employee's behavior/performance is a detriment to their colleagues and the company.

I've fired two employees and utilizing the union guidelines, as well as having the steward present at all meetings, protects me and my employer from retro active litigious targeting by those employees.

A few stewards still act like defense attorneys, fighting for the employee no matter how egregious their performance. That's where my frustration comes in.

We are also very picky about who we hire. We have 90 days to evaluate an employee before their union "protection" kicks in, and we will closely monitor the new employees so if there are any issues, we'll terminate their employment before that time period has lapsed.

It's all about the stewards. MKJ

on edit: it's also about those in management working in partnership with labor for the company to be successful.

[ariellyn]

94. I agree. I don't think the people here have the same experience.

Most of what I'm seeing is theory. I studied unions in grad school--I learned that they were a savior to an abused workforce during the industrial revolution. But having seen unions on steroids in action is a reality check to the theory. The reality is, unions can be abusive too.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

95. I'm living unions as someone whose been on strike and as a manager

They have pros and cons...I try not to focus on the cons, because my time as a union employee was very beneficial and because I feel I have a great working relationship with my stewards.

How well do you work with your stewards? i really believe that, since all employees, managers, et. al. are focused on making sure the company we work for succeeds; one can, and must, find common ground. MKJ

[blondeatlast]

67. "I believe in unions" Then answer the question instead of attacking. nt

[Blue_Tires]

115. Bob Lutz

is that you?

Thanks for parroting all the upper-management talking points

[Career Prole]

32. "She had a valid problem but...we were short"

Was she on guard duty or something? Giving someone CPR at that moment?
You were short...so what?

Do you know why this problem comes up so often nowadays?
Do you know why the production numbers keep going up and up even though more and more people are out of work?

Because businesses make themselves short-handed intentionally out of their own greed, and then pull whiny complaints like this one.

If she had a valid problem, she had a valid problem.

[dogman]

37. She didn't know she is company property.

She should realize who owns her body and submit to some power crazed boss who feels the need to crack the whip.

[ariellyn]

54. You think I'm "power crazed" because I need an employee to work?

Should a business shut it's doors because people need to go at any time they wish? Give me a break.

[dogman]

62. If her presence was so vital that the business could not run without her

maybe she should be paid more and would have been able to afford a different solution to her problem. Maybe you as the management should have just kicked it up a notch and covered for her. One monkey don't stop no show, give me a break.

[ariellyn]

64. I don't know where you work but where I work, people are needed at their

assignments.

[dogman]

70. And managers over see the workers.

When a situation develops they step in and deal with it. What if the worker gets sick or is indisposed for some reason, do you shut down? You will find most work related problems are either resolved or exacerbated at the middle management level. Unions serve to protect workers from being made the scapegoat by failed management decisions.

[cap]

76. but you are supposed to staff appropriately

so that you are covered! People are being forced to work more than one job! That's the root of the problem.

Since you are a manager you must understand basic management concepts such as slack and variance! You failed to account for this and you got caught up short! It's your fault and not the worker.

I hate seeing workers blamed for manager's inability to schedule.

[Michael_Bush]

90. She DID staff appropriately

But one of her employees decided it was inconvenient to work.

Should she have a full extra crew ready just in case this one walks out?

How about a spare crew for the spare crew?


Sorry but logic doesn't seem to be your strong suite.

[cap]

96. where was her "Plan B"?

As a manager you are supposed to plan for fluctuations in workload and personnel. Sorry, I am a manager and I've seen too many managers blame their lack of planning and lack of managerial skills on their workers. You align the "Holy Trinity": Time, Resources, and Scope. A change in one dictates a change in the others.

(Actually logic is one of my strongest suits! )

[blondeatlast]

98. How do you know this? She's been remarkably unforthcoming about

the nature of the business and the employee's job, despite at least one, if not more requests.

[ariellyn]

116. I staffed to cover assignments

the request was made within hours of closing after people who might have covered for her had been let go for the day. I was working 12+ hour days and needed her badly that day.

Some of the responses here are based on extreme assumptions about low pay, tyranny...etc. I simply needed this individual to work. I tried my best to convey that to her and it was not done in a mean or spiteful way.

She didn't give a damn that I didn't have anyone to cover for her. And it made me angry that despite my attempts to explain how much of a crunch we were in, she called to "tell" on me to the union.

I don't think it's asking too much to ask people to work when you need them. And if you are unable to understand my position, so be it.

[blondeatlast]

68. If it can't be flexible enough to handle such a situation--YES.

Poor management is poor management--and it leads to poor performance from employees.

Oops--off to the whipping post for me, I guess.

[blondeatlast]

82. I'd be very interested to know what sort of business you are running.

There aren't many businesses I know of that are so reliant upon their employees that the management can't hold down the fort once in a while.

The way you've described the sitch, your employee knws her job inside and out, so without her, the business can't run.

Sounds like a clear case for a MAJOR raise to me.

[Hubert Flottz]

65. That's some of that ownership bullshit Bush was blathering about

If you walk in the door the company owns you!

[ariellyn]

53. She had a car problem. And I had a business to run.

I believe people have a responsibility to their jobs. If she wants to keep a job, as a new employee especially, she should be showing some flexibility. You have to prove yourself first. She had been there about two months, and, if I could have let her go early that day, I would have. I tried to explain that at the time.

[BiggJawn]

57. What are you doing here?

Seriously. I've read your postings in this thread, and I have formed an opinion that you must be one of those "Entrepreneurs" who thought it'd be "FUN" to be your own boss.
But now, you haven't had a vacation in 45 years, a day off in 6 months, and if it wasn't for the chef at the country club,you'd starve, and you're going insane from all those assholes who supposedly work for you that steal you blind every time you blink. And my experience has been that those kind of people are either ReTHUGs or their dope-smoking kin, the Libertarians.

I was luckier than your "Inflexible" new-hire because I knew how to wrench, so when my car would go lame (hey, it HAPPENS when you drive stuff that's been out of warranty for 10 years, but what would YOU know about that, since you turn 'em in on the lease when the windshield washer runs dry) I only had to deal with transport problems for a day, then spend that evening working into the night to get the damn thing running so I could go to work for my most fair and appreciative boss the next day.

Bosses like YOU were the reason Unions were formed in the first place.

[ariellyn]

58. Are you suggesting that I don't belong here because I don't like unions?

Newsflash: there are MANY issues besides unions that fall under the democratic umbrella.

You have no right question my allegiance because my opinion on an issue differs from yours. "Dope smoking libertarian" or "reTHUG" are the only two narrow minded choices you could come up with since I don't agree? Sounds like the simplistic, black and white, "with-us-or-against-us" thinking from the other side.

Somebody needs to look in the mirror.

[Occulus]

59. Let me repeat what was so succinctly spoken in the previous post:

Bosses like you are the reason we have unions in the first place.

May your workers go on strike.

[ariellyn]

60. Please share your experience working in a unionized environment. n/t

[Generic Other]

79. Picket lines are evidence of crappy management in companies

Unions provide quality control.

[Michael_Bush]

84. Whiney Liberals at their worst

Ariellyn,

I have no idea if you were right or wrong in your situation but I do appologize for the hostility some here are showing you. Dems love to feed on their own kind, sort of like chickens pecking each others eyes out.

Most have never tried to create an actual business and have little idea the sacrifice involved nor do they have experience working in a large unionized environment. I certainly do and have seen far too many slackers protected who should have been shoved out the door.

Keep your chin up!

[blondeatlast]

99. Most of us diagree with Ariellyn on this issue. So we aren't supposed

to take her to task?

Locksteps are for OTHER boards, fella.

Poor Ariellyn--exploited to the break of business failure by an employee with a car problem.

Give me a break.

[ariellyn]

120. Who is "most of us"??? n/t

[Hubert Flottz]

66. AMEN!

"Bosses like you are the reason we have unions in the first place."

[blondeatlast]

72. It's pretty clear the majority is against you on this issue.

That puts you on the defense--but it doesn't mean the majority here is wrong.

You simply seem to have a crappy attitude to employees.

What have you done FOR them lately?

[ariellyn]

119. About three people have opposed my post--that's a "majority"? n/t

[BiggJawn]

77. No I'm suggesting you don't belong here because you're a petty tyrant.

" If she wants to keep a job, as a new employee especially, she should be showing some flexibility. You have to prove yourself first."

What an asshole you are. She's a HUMAN, not a fucking MACHINE. People have problems that can't be fixed between the hours of 5PM and 8AM. Especially if you pay them shit wages so they can't afford to have there car towed and arange for a rental.

Maybe if you'd adopt an attitude of all of you being a TEAM, and became a co-operative group instead of thinking it's you against "them"..No wonder you have trouble finding people that want to give you 110%, if you consider them problematic liabilities instead of valuable assets.

I'll say it again, bosses like YOU are why Unions rose in the first place.

And I STILL think your attitude is closer to Libertarian than it is Democratic, I don't care how much you try to defuse it by accusing me of being "narrow-minded", which is a fucking HOOT, coming from the likes of "She should decide if she wants a job or to get her car fixed" you....

[ariellyn]

91. Your attack goes beyond my post.

Perhaps you have some personal issues that are feeding into your over the top responses. Your post is full of assumptions about finding employees, "shit" wages, yada yada, that you know nothing about.

I again urge you to look into the mirror. And avoid responding to me again--since you can't maintain any level of civility.

[blondeatlast]

100. You studied unions in grad school. Well, I guess that makes you God

on the issue.

[ariellyn]

114. No it makes me both educated and experienced on the issue. What

does that have to do with God?

[Ms. Clio]

117. And yet you refuse to identify the nature of your business

I find that just utterly baffling, and a big red flag as to your credibility here.

[blondeatlast]

69. Flexibility comes from both sides. If that situation couldn't be managed

the business is poorly run, and will die on its own--and should.

For pity's sake--she should be fired for having a car problem?

I hope that you never have to be the employee--karma's a tremendous bitch.

[Itsthetruth]

86. So ......

did she home early that day or not?

[AP]

56. MIT did a study in late 90s that showed unionized workplaces more product-

ive than non-union workplaces.

They said the biggest reason is because the people on the floor feel like they can make suggestions to improve productivity -- especially when the solution is an implicit criticism of management -- when they belong to a union because they know they probably won't be fired.

In workplaces without unions, people don't bother to rock the boat. They'll watch the company bang its head agains the wall because it's better to have a job that's stupid than tell people how to make it better and then get fired for the effort.

Net result: union companies had higer profit margins.

[cap]

75. business can be bad for people and bad for quality

I remember when companies had grievance processes so that bosses could not arbitrarily fire workers. I remember strong personnel departments that took managers to task. I remember apprenticeship programs that trained skilled workers that made quality products (remember when clothes really lasted a long time. There were 5 grades of clothing each corresponding to a union pay scale that increased with the skill needed to produce that item) instead of hiring any warm body off the street to produce shlock. Six Sigma is an excuse to strip the infrastructure needed to produce high quality goods. If the spec isnt customer facing, you delete it from the process. Most consumers dont research the processes needed for long lasting quality goods -- who has the time to do this? So they get snookered by lower prices.

When companies had strong personnel departments and more security in the workplace there was less back biting amongst the workers. As a manager, it was easier to work with people. Resident sociopaths didnt get as far by back stabbing a coworker in order to get ahead.



AFL CIO has just opened its ranks to all working people. A change needed.

I remember when we had pensions, health insurance, and could work until we were 65... Now the real end age is between 45-55 years old. The companies just dont want you after that. You will work here and there on 6 month contracts... maybe if you are lucky you will get a job for a few years. This is happening even at the executive level --there was an article in Fortune magazine about C level executives with no job security, sucking wind.

You may find that you will actually want to have a union in your future! So dont dis the unions. You, yourself, may be in their ranks.

[ariellyn]

93. I agree business can be bad for people--employees AND customers.

Employers don't fulfill their reponsibilities to people as they should. Yet, I don't think unions are the be-all-end-all solution. Look at American Airlines. Aren't they unionized? Did the union stop them from reneging on their contracts to provide retirement?

[blondeatlast]

83. But good business can be enhanced by unions. Read up on Southwest Airlines

The only airline to continually show a strong profit since 9/11, and heavily unionized.

Can you say "good management?"

[ariellyn]

92. This is one time when theory and reality don't jibe.

I have studied unions--and I have lived with them. Have you?

[blondeatlast]

97. Read up on Southwest. Big profits, union labor. REALITY.

I live with unions everyday.

You aren't going to change my mind.

[ariellyn]

118. I HAVE read up on Southwest. They are ONE company-they don't

represent the reality of all unionized companies in America. If they did, there wouldn't be just 11% unionized today, nor would UAL be reneging.

Their company culture is exemplary and a rarity. It would be nice if more companies were like Southwest but unfortunately, they aren't.

[Jensen]

107. You are absolutly right....

SouthWest has a very strong Union (IAM)but their management THINK of their employees as family, unlike United Airlines that took advantage of their front line employees (customer service, reservations)who did NOT have a Union until 6 years ago or so and took advantage of them until they took up the IAM.

A lot of those employees are thankfull to have a Union now or the present management would of outsource them like American airlines did a few years back.

My daughther is a United Airlines employee and she is in a fight right now for the pension she so worked for and that is with a Union, we can only guess how much worst it could get without a Union!

As you all know this is becoming a epedemic for the American workers...This administration will continue to steal from us as they did w/Enron.

I do not know if is against the rules, I'm new at this, and not to change the subject but I would like to make you aware of this petition that any one of us can sign and I hope you all do! Thank you!

http://www.unitedafa.org

[blondeatlast]

109. Very interesting--the online hearing deserves it's own thread!

I'd been following the UA/AFA but had slowing down in the past few days.

Welcome to DU--I'm a big supporter of the UAL employees in what for them is a delicate, but very vital, struggle.

[Jensen]

110. No thank you for your reply

I'm new at this but I find DU a great place to exchange ideas that are so needed in this country and with this administration!

Thanks for any help you can provide on a new thread is appreciated!

[blondeatlast]

111. I posted a new thread in GD--this is the wave of the future! nt

[Jensen]

112. Thank you, Blondeatlast...I won't forget this!

[cloudythescribbler]

14. This is a topic that requires a LOT of discussion!

There are lots of things that are needed to revive the labor movement. Here are a few:

* It was once claimed that 'pension fund socialism' has come to the US because the power of these pension funds in the hands of unions is potentially so great. Well, in practice, that's another story.

But first the unions need to get together and invest a tiny fraction of the money in the leading unions to buy out one potentially national paper, like the NY Post, whenever they hit a financial crisis. Then that paper should be distributed like USA today, so there will be a press outlet. There should also be labor owned radio and cable TV channels, not just propaganda but that can hold their own financially, and provide an alternative media view at the same time.

*Labor needs a nonlabor citizens organization to support efforts. I have already suggested immediately that a group like Greenpeace or PIRG but that organizes like ACORN should be formed to oppose the Iraq War and militarism (PeaceAmerica). Over time, a similar group, which would take a little more to spark up interest, perhaps starting in MI, should be developed for union members AND supporters of unions.
There could be a newsletter in the meantime before a national newspaper gets bought, and member chapters to support both legislation and boycotts and oppose union busting

*Labor organizing needs to expand where it is strong and enter new spheres. Many doctors, lawyers, and paralegals, as well as graduate students (I was a founding member of AGSE -- Associated Graduate Student Employees -- at UC Berkeley 20 years ago, whoopee!), and workers in organizations like Volunteers of America should be organized. Health unions and farmers & c should be expanded, as well as other organizations that cannot move away as easily as manufacturing or even white collar outsourcing, in addition to the focus already.

*organizing should be pursued internationally where it is permissible, and pressure vis a vis those govenrment, including China, where effective unionization is impossible.

*A greater visibility not only in the press but as community institutions, with a self conscious aim, in part, not only to promote community organizations but to help improve the popular image of unions is essential. Most Americans have a queasy view of unions inculcated throught the MSM, and only by getting into the MSM and using alternative channels that really reach the mainstream, like community groups (according to BOWLING ALONE, there is a huge hole there anyway) to reach mainstreet America, including with the message that -- you want COMMUNITY, well unions are the best kind of secular community organization that there is, just about.

*Linking up, among these institutions, with the formation of economic cooperatives, including banks, and supermarkets, like the excellent co-op they used to have in Berkeley, and other businesses, to both meet people's needs and improve COMMUNITY standing and visibility.
America needs community organization and unions need to do it.

THESE IDEAS ARE NOT UNPRECEDENTED BUT WHERE PURSUED ARE DONE ONLY INSUFFICIENTLY.

these are a few suggestions for starters LOL

[oscar111]

18. To "cloudy"'s re - : Media needed even if cant "hold its own financially"

Radio pays for itsself on election day.

AFL should have its own media even it it loses money.

That media will pay for itsself on election days.

Rush was a money loser for years. But his backers kept him on air anyhow. Their spine is the kind of spine we need.

[cloudythescribbler]

61. well yes, of course a labor owned newspaper shouldn't fold

but hey -- one thing is clear on the left in my decades of experience. Those institutions that don't manage to make ends meet don't last. I am not looking for an institution that won't cost money, but an institution that is strong and viable. I am sure that with good management and using all the connexions that labor has, if they DID buy up the Daily News or the NY Post or something, they'd do just fine. And I think it could sell internationally too.

[Coexist]

20. Well...

with the consolidation of power in the corporate world, the "untouchable" status that corporations are receiving from our political leaders, the multi-million dollar bonuses that CEO and CFOs are receiving while shipping most "average Joe" jobs overseas...

sounnds ripe for a backlash to me. Time and misery move people to organize. Just wait.

[RebelAgainstEmpire]

23. As long as capital is free

to go where it wants, it'll be very difficult.

[0rganism]

26. So perhaps international solidarity is the best bet?

If only the maquiladoras and Indochina sweatshops could be unionized, we'd start to see some changes.

[RebelAgainstEmpire]

31. As close to

impossible as you can get though. That's a lot of people. Different borders, colors, spiritual beliefs, political beliefs, genders, ages, education levels, etc. That's a lot of potential division to be exploited. 6 billion+ people on the planet. Almost an unlimited supply of that "next guy" willing to work for less than you, because they have to get something in their kid's stomach.

That's why corporations have the upper hand. They have one color. They don't have kids to feed. They don't see arbitrary lines drawn on maps a long time ago. They themselves don't have to eat, sleep, or breathe. They have human rights, without any human weakness(such as the need to eat, sleep, and breathe).

As long as corporations write legislation, I'm not sure how you fight back. Boycott's could work, but it's very difficult with global corporations(especially if they own everything anyway). Can't really strike, as that is the main point of this entire thread.

When we humans actually stick together on something, it's fun to see what we can do. Few and far between though.

[Zhade]

48. This is why we need to charter corporations again.

NT!

[cloudythescribbler]

88. Yes, it's one of the best ideas Ralph Nader has been pushing

First of all, there should at least be the OPTION of federally
chartered corporations.  These should have certain advantages.
 Soon, all NEW corporations (or at least those larger than a
certain size, when they get to that size) would HAVE to be
federally chartered. That would allow for uniform AND
RESTRUCTURED nature of chartering. Rechartering must also
include some concern for Constitutional rightw vis a vis
employers within the workplace, a topic of a whole literature.

   I wonder if someone has a model out there somewhere, or a
citation for such a model somewhere on the web, of what these
new charters should look like.

   I am now going to repeat this with every post at this site
-- a little like the Roman Senator who ended every speech with
"Carthage must be destroyed" (until it was) -- 

THIS TOPIC SHOULD BE KEPT UP FOR MORE THAN JUST 24 HOURS!!!!

[Zhade]

89. Agreed - we should be at least touching on it briefly every day.

Unions are vital to staving off fascism. We need to organize. I SHOULD be in a union, but my employer is a certain rightwing neoconservative media baron from a country that brought us koalas and vegemite, so we are not ever going to be allowed to organize.

[Career Prole]

34. If we had a labor-friendly government

the labor provisons of their trade agreements might be enforced.
If they're not enforced we can't compete.

As long as our government is on the corporate teat labor will continue to get the shaft.

[dogman]

39. The best solution because it helps the Unions and the Country.

Once again we see the divisiveness of the GOP strategy. Reduce everything to it's lowest common denominator and then you systematically crush it. This brings up the point others have raised here. Educate the workers who lack basic understanding of their position in life, and who is going to look out for their best interest. We have but one resource and that is our labor which ultimately is our life. Put a value on your self, develop pride in yourself.

[Career Prole]

40. The corporatocracy makes it sound

as if we, unlike them, have nothing to sell...but oh, we do.
We sell them our lives by the hour in packages of forty.

The bosses always demand the highest possible price for what they sell, but more and more of us accept the lowest price for what we're selling...the sand in our hourglasses.

We need to realize the value of what it is we're actually selling while we're still young, and that's a hurdle because when we're young we're convinced we have lots of weeks to sell dirt-cheap.

[dogman]

44. That's the ballgame.

The early innings are over and what will you have left when you need to make it to home in the ninth.

[oscar111]

28. 40% to 15%: 40% unionized fifty yrs ago, only 15% now: cut in half

forty in the nonagri. workers unions.
To be more precise.

a good fact to know in getting the big picture.

the decline has been sharp.

Sweden, last i heard, had 95 % unionization in heavy industry, 9O % overall unionization. It can be done.

BTW, some law firms specialize in destroying unions.

[oscar111]

29. "complacency" - is that an accurate reason for union decline?

i have heard that given a the main reason. Being a newbie, i ask you folks -- is that accurate?

[Career Prole]

35. "some law firms specialize in destroying unions"

You bet, Oscar...and some political parties share that specialty as well.

[hollowdweller]

43. The more workers legal and illegal move into the country the less chances

we will have strong unions.

[dweller]

30. Join

http://www.workingamerica.org/home.cfm

Nonunion workers and retirees are invited to join the people power of America's union movement and help make America work for all of us.

dues are voluntary.
dp

[Ksec]

38. I think its got to be a cause and effect situation

The dixie folks hate Unions. So do northern conjobbers. Maybe when these people are working in sweatshops , Unions may not be such a bad idea.

[hollowdweller]

42. We need to organize all the service employees esp Wal Mart

Also need to cut back on illegal immigration. As long as they can replace a striking worker with a steady stream of incoming that are willing to work for less workers will never have any power.

[blondeatlast]

73. We need to get the word out about Working America.

Non-union labor and union labor uniting in the fight to protect worker's rights.

http://www.workingamerica.org/wa_splash.cfm

[Jose Diablo]

45. A good place to start is support the airline strikers over the pension

issues.

The key to union strength, other than sticking together, is the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). I don't know who is on it now, but I can only imagine it's Bu$hbots.

The reason Walmart gets away with what they are doing is because the NLRB is not calling them to task over the illegal activities Walmart has pursued to keep the union out.

When Reagan back in the 80's packed the NLRB with pro-corporatist, that is what weakened the unions ability to protect the workers. The unions have been on a slide since that time.

Among some of the things NLRB does, is arbitrate disputes between unions and corporations. Also they are supposed to monitor compliance with labor law during periods of union organization. This is how Walmart gets away with what they are doing when a union attempts to organize a Walmart location, the company practices what most would call illegal methods to dissuade workers from joining. Any injection of fear into the workers insofar as job security used to be strictly forbidden. Even so much as a supervisor mentioning in a passing remark potential job loss could result in huge fines being assessed against the company.

The NLRB used to mean business when they talked because if the government was not receptive to the needs of the workers, the workers would strike on a heartbeat and cause a huge loss in profit to the biggest of companies, the USA. This is something workers learned from hard experience in dealings with companies over the previous century. To most today, those lessons have been forgotten and unions have been taking a beating by the news, so popularity now suffers.

Plus, when corporations get away with what they are doing, the NLRB is not blamed nor is the government, the union is blamed for being weak. But a union is only as strong as the workers willingness to support the union.

Even here we blame the leaders rather than own-up to the actual weakness of the party, which is the people themselves. We really need to start looking in mirrors to see the core problems. Sometimes, it takes more than just wanting something, it takes a long fight.

[B Calm]

46. Good place to start is to educate young workers by telling

them when labor sticks together, wages and benefits go up!

[B Calm]

63. The young workers today think 10 dollars an hour is good money

They know no better. I try to tell them they are making 1985 wages, but I think it goes through one ear and out the other..

[oxbow]

49. 35% of workers used to be in unions

just a few decades ago, now its something like 13%. NPR did a story on this just last week. So sad to realize what we've lost. Labor needs better advertising, I agree. Make commercials reminding average Joe and Jane who got them their pensions, 40 hour weeks, disability, etc.

[swag]

51. One word: demographics. IN 2008 THE LEADING EDGE OF THE BOOMERS

begin to retire. We all know this because Greenspan has been repeating it and it has become part of the wanky SocSec-destruction punditry's mantra lately - boomers begin retiring, OH GOD, OH GOD, OH GOD.

Leaving Social Security solvency aside (that will be fixed easily by an earnings cap solution, unless Social Security is stolen from Americans by Bush's idiotic cut-out privitization scheme ((make me take a margin loan of 3% plus inflation to buy a Bush-picked balanced account and hope to make back enough to pay off my fucking margin-loan from these fucking churners?)) in which case a few trillion in debt will shine among the polished jewels of the Cheney/Bush/Frist/Hastert deficit crown),

there is soon to be a huge worker shortage in the United States., and this is one reason for the current corporate and national outsourcing mania. This is a growing concern on Wall Street, indeed some analysts see the job market tightening up significantly as early as 2006, just as a result of economic cycles, "soft patch" or no soft patch.

But by 2008, an age-wave does indeed begin to hit the labor market in the United States, and analysts worry now that worker wages and benefits, once workers are again in high and increasing demand will skyrocket and erode corporate profits.

Ask yourself, worker: Got Power?

[swag]

52. Fight these fucking "Health Savings Accounts" (HSAs)

that Bush and the Insurance Co's are trying to jam down small business throats.

This is part of the "Own Your Shit" society scheme (along with the Bush Social Security Rip-Off) that is there to help companies fuck workers.

They've only gotten started.

FIGHT HSAs and don't accept these trashy "plans" for yourself or your family.

[jzodda]

71. Its woven into many subjects...

but there are some things that would help..

First off the trend in both gov and business is to totally discourage unionization. In the past 100 years it was not always this bad, but the past 30 years the trend has been trending away from unions. These days business just threatens to file for bankruptcy or layoff the workers in mass numbers. This tends to weaken the power of unions to be able to speak out.

Next jobs have to stop being exported away from the US. Companies these days just theaten to move or just go ahead and do it b/c there is no punishment for doing so. They go to countries with lax labor standards and large populations of low wage potential workers. Ross Perot called it the "Giant sucking sound" People called him crazy back then but he was right on about Nafta and trade treaties like it.

Then we have the illegal immigration problem. Those workers are the easiest to exploit and they are the least likely to ever complain. As long as there is this endless supply of cheap, exploitable workers coming here with no rights to speak of then business will continue to use them over our own workforce which can potentially unionize.

[blondeatlast]

74. Unite non-union labor with labor--Working America plans to do

just that.

Perfect place for the Wal-Mart employees to start.

Uniting to fight for health care benefits, pensions, job protection, Social Security, and worker health and safety issues.

Even middle management fits into the owrks. WA is the future, IMHO.

http://www.workingamerica.org/wa_splash.cfm

[Lydia Leftcoast]

80. First of all, make it illegal to hire permanent replacements

If your employer can basically fire you for striking, then there is no right to strike, and the unions lose their most potent weapon.

[Itsthetruth]

87. S-1

We had 53 votes in the Senate for Senate Bill S-1 which banned premanent replacements in 1992. It was not passed. Why. Because Republicans threatened a filibuster and the Democrats folded!

Labors alleged "friends" in the Senate could have "welcomed" the Republican filbuster and joined it with one Democrat Senator after another taking the floor in support of S-1!

That would have ended the filibuster quickly and S-1 would have been passed. Yet one more betrayal by labors "friends" in the Senate.

[lonestarnot]

81. For starters elect people that aren't corrupt and click oriented.

[realFedUp]

85. do unions themselves offer good health plans?

Pump up the perks.

[B Calm]

101. Some do! When labor sticks together, wages & benifits go up.

A union is strong as the membership!

[davsand]

102. I see the Anti-Union squad was out earlier. Now we can organize!

Pretty amazing to me that so many of the low post count folks with missing profiles are SO vehemently anti-union. It should come as no shock, but it still amazes hell out of me that anti-union disruptors are tolerated here when other types are not. Anyhow...

I agree completely with the statement that education about the history of the labor movement is important. I'm not sure I know of a local that REALLY does a good job of teaching the apprentices about the early days. Frankly, leaving it to the schools to teach it in American and European History is futile.

Our local CLC donated a few hundred copies of a biography of Mother Jones to the local school and public libraries as a start. I wish EVERY Central Labor Council could/would do that sort of thing. We have also started working with the local Girl Scout Council on a Labor Badge for Girl Scouts--teaching why collective bargaining is important.

It isn't much--but it is a start.

Something I have been wanting to do for a long time is to put on a Labor Film Festival in conjunction with Labor Day. I'd like to show some of the films about the early days of the labor movement and then tie it into lectures, discussions, and speeches about labor history.

I want to show "Matewan" and then have a discussion about it.

I want to show "Norma Ray" or "Silkwood" and I want to talk about the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire.

I want to discuss things like the Haymarket Riots and the Palmer Raids.

I want somebody to read a few of Eugene Debs' speeches where he talks about why the right to collective bargaining is fundamental to us all.

One thing we have GOT to do in this country immediately is to repeal NAFTA and GATT. We have GOT to do a better job educating our people about WHY it is important to keep plants in the US. WE have all got to do a better job working to oppose the politicians who do not support American workers.

This isn't a party thing--this is a matter of survival. If they are GOP and they have a solid labor track record then I'm ok with that. (Please note, a labor friendly Repub is about as rare as he black rhino, so don't think I'm completely nuts here. Frankly, an honestly labor friendly Dem is getting to be a thing of rarity too.)

On a national organizing front, I have seriously begun to wonder about the AFL-CIO and its ability to do the job. I dunno--I've not seen much coming out of there for a long time that really smacked of innovation or even much focused effort. I know some guys say that the Internationals and the AFL-CIO are all quietly controlled by the corporate interests, and some days I do wonder if maybe that isn't more true than I want to think. Maybe a change in leadership is in order--I honestly dunno.

Peace to you all and solidarity!


Laura

[B Calm]

104. davsand, great post!!

[Hidden Stillness]

103. A Union is not a Union if it has No Rights

I don't think unions will be revitalized in this country until there really are again good quality, skilled jobs. It seems to me, coming from a union family (pipefitters) back when unions really were the path to a secure, good, middle-class job, that the whole basis of union status was that this was a skilled job, I have been trained for it, you cannot just bring in somebody off the street who can do this job and so I individually am necessary to this firm and you cannot threaten me as you could with a low-skill job that any number of people could do immediately. As middle-class people used to know, if you lucky enough to be accepted into the union, you would then get apprenticeship training for your job that was so comprehensive that it was the equal of a college education--rich people go to college. Then, as updates were needed for new technology or new ways of doing the job, the person would be sent to new individual courses on the specific topic, sometimes at a local community college, paid for by the union. Now, years later, as they have killed one skilled manufacturing job after another, replacing it with machinery (that someone has to have the skills to repair) or outsourcing, most people are now left with the most dismal supermarket/fast food place kinds of jobs, here in the Midwest and elsewhere, and are trapped there. This then is my concern: on what basis would the union posit itself, since the "we trained union members are individually valuable and this is our strength" fact is gone?

The union cannot come back as a revived thing in a vaccuum, and many great posts on this thread have referred to the fact that there is no real NLRB or even Labor Dept. anymore, no regulations, nothing, only an atmosphere of total criminality as everything is being run by the "little" people-hating capitalists now. Nothing could succeed if tried unilaterally in this atmosphere--you need profound legal change first, to restore the rule of law to the corporatists. Just by way of contrast to the world of the real union based on skill, I worked for a while at a supermarket some years ago, and after trying to negotiate a very small, puny wage increase that would put us about 50 cents above the minimum wage (which Clinton didn't bother raising for the last 4 years of the term), the corporation cut off talks and we had to strike. This incident taught me the way the world is now. There was no "strike fund" and therefore, when you went on strike--instant desperation--you had no income. This strike went on and on, and they hired " 'replacement workers,' " which I thought was illegal--after all, if we are on strike, then business stops until the problem is solved, right? If they can hire new people, then what possible motivation would the slaveowners have to continue negotiations? If you strike and they replace you and they suffer no loss and go on, then you do not have the right to strike, you have the "right" to quit your job and be replaced!

They dug in and would not negotiate, so we were stuck here, on strike, with them continuing. The disgusting thing about this strike was that it was very well supported by customers. This chain's store, where we were, dropped to nothing. It got so bad for them that they started giving away free produce (which would've gone bad) to get people in the store, so people came in, got the free produce, and left! Inspiring; total support. This went on for months--the corporation actually called the police on the strikers, based on an old, obscure law that you cannot eat food in a parking lot (somebody had an ice cream cone)--the police just left, annoyed at the corporation. The problem was, we were middle-class individuals striking at an individual store as a union local at "low level" jobs easily replaced, and they were a huge, multi-billion dollar national+ chain, and this individual store kept getting bailed out by a budget set aside for this purpose by the entire chain, "socialism," we call it. No matter how much money the one store lost, it never really lost anything, because the entire chain funneled millions of dollars into its operations from the entire corporate fund, which we didn't have. They actually could have gone on that way forever, even though we had total community support and that one store was losing huge amounts of money. In the end, even though we should have won, we lost, and accepted a wage rate that was about the same as what we already had--unlivable. I was leaving that job at about that time anyway, but I never forgot the total, unholy oppression of the big-business corporate world. They always win, regardless; and that whole legal-corporate set-up has to be faced first. Trying to convince people to form unions again will have no impact on the problem until unions can be given the legal right to exist as equals in the workplace again. Good luck. As at least one poster remarked, as long as capital can be lawlessly moved from one part of the world to another, so the "employer" generally can cut off anyone who does anything they don't like, blithely, then every single worker is under complete threat, all the time.

[Lannes]

105. Be more agressive in policing itself

Union corruption isnt as big an issue as it used to be,maybe it isnt as big a problem.Whenever the subject does come up they usually take a "circle the wagons" approach instead of cleaning house.

The right loves to use union corruption as one of their beefs with unionizing.If unions were more agressive at weeding out the bad elements they wouldnt have that to use.

Another problem is the players unions of certain sports.Multi-millionaires complaining about not getting enough money.Some may have some valid complaints but its these unions that usually make the headlines above all others and give unions a bad name.

[B Calm]

106. The right loves to use union corruption, then why in the hell

doesn't the left use corporate corruption? There is a hell of a lot more corporate corruption than a couple instances of union corruption.

[Lannes]

108. Good point

I wish we would see more ad campaigns like "company X made 10 billion dollars last year and paid no taxes,do you think thats fair?"

Still,union corruption should be fought more vigourously.In the end the workers are the ones that suffer.

[heidler1]

113. Unions were obviously necessary when the labor movement started.

Now we mostly rely on state and federal laws to protect workers. Workers see this and opt out of the unions or vote against them to save paying dues. To fix this you will have to prove that what the worker gets by joining is worth the cost. Even if you are convinced it's worth it, that won't cut it.