WORKERS OF THE WORLD, UNITE!

The title of our latest article comes from the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), an international union seeking to unite working people across the globe to ensure fair and just socio-economic conditions. Though brutally repressed in the first three decades of the 20th century, it was a driving force in the labor struggles in those seminal decades which helped provide us with the basic rights we take for granted now, 40 hour work-week, workmen's compensation, etc.. Rights, which now, more than ever, are in danger of erosion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Workers_of_the_World

The history of the labor movement in this country from 1850-1950, and it's importance in developing a more civilized society, is not taught in much depth in our grade schools. I encourage all who have not seen this book, People's History of the United States, written by one of the brightest voices in the progressive movement in the past 50 years, Howard Zinn, to read it and get a more informed picture of how this country has evolved.

http://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-United-States-Present/dp/0060838655/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1235613236&sr=1-1

The main global news story lately of course is that the economy in this country, and now, throughout much of the World, has entered a pronounced recession, or even a depression, approaching the severity of the great one in the 1930s. The monthly rate of job loss in the U.S. is now higher than ever in recorded history. The factors that created this mess are complex, but stem down to the deregulation of the financial industry beginning under the Reagan Administration in the 1980s, continued by the Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II administrations. Banks, insurance companies, and other large financial institutions were then free to engage in risky operations selling debt-based securities and packages to reap massive short-term profits. Inflation of real-estate values far beyond the ability of all but the most highly-paid workers created an unsustainable "housing bubble" after 2000, which burst in 2008, leaving many of the largest banks and financial institutions in the U.S. and in other countries essentially bankrupt.
Once again, one of A.P.R.'s favorite commentators, Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Treasury Secretary during the Reagan administration, sums things up here:

http://counterpunch.org/roberts02242009.html Give this a read, if you are able, we trust his viewpoints here, coming from his background and experience.

It is during times of economic stress that employers can use this as an excuse to slash employement, wages, and benefits, even if they are not imperiled. http://counterpunch.org/lindorff02202009.html. This is certainly occurring now, as the preceding link will show.

So it is more important than ever, that workers in all forms of industry and occupation unionize to stop assaults on the rights and benefits that belong in a civilized society. An extremely critical piece of legislation will be coming up for a vote in the U.S. Congress in the next few months, the Employee Free Choice Act. The following article sums it up nicely.

It Has Many Virtues
A Closer Look at the Employee Free Choice Act

By DAVID MACARAY

By now, most people have heard of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), the bold legislative initiative introduced by the Democrats (Rep. George Miller, D-CA), intended to amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by making it easier and fairer for employees to join a labor union.

Although the measure passed the House by a vote of 241 to 185, in June of 2007, and was approved by a 51-48 vote in the Senate, it failed to get the 60 votes necessary for cloture (which would have made it filibuster-proof), causing it to lie dormant for the remainder of the 110th Congress.

However, it should be noted that President Bush had already promised to veto the legislation, so even with those 60 crucial Senate votes the bill would have emerged stillborn. To have any chance whatever of becoming law, it was clear that the EFCA would require a Democrat in the White House.

During the primaries, both Obama and Clinton loudly sang the praises of the EFCA (as they raked in organized labor’s contributions) and promised, if elected, to fight for its passage. But because there have been signs that President Obama is hedging on that promise, it remains to be seen how hard he and his Congress-savvy chief of staff Rahm Emanuel will push for it. On one side, they have moderate Democrats terrified of provoking the Republicans; on the other, they have an aroused AFL-CIO applying pressure.

If enacted, EFCA would allow employees to circumvent the complex, time-consuming, and management-skewed NLRB certification process. Instead of a full-blown election, workers would have the choice of “card check,” where all they have to do is sign cards indicating they wish to become union members. If a majority of the workforce signs such cards they instantly belong to a union.

Naturally, most businesses hate the idea of the streamlining the process. They object to anything that makes joining a union easier. Indeed, if it were their call, many businesses would prefer seeing unions made illegal or “state-run,” as they are in the most repressive countries in the world. Accordingly, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has spent millions lobbying against passage of the EFCA.

While card check is the most celebrated feature of the EFCA, there are two other provisions in this bill that are equally—if not more—important. Card check is an enormous advantage to unions, but it’s not a “new” method. It’s already used voluntarily by companies who feel they can either defeat the measure through anti-union propaganda, or believe there’s benefit in being seen as “labor friendly.”

But the two other features of this bill could be seen as labor milestones.
First, the EFCA will give the union the right to demand that the company begin contract negotiations within 10 days of certification. Ask any union organizers how hard it is to get that first contract, and they’ll tell you that companies are notorious for dragging their feet—either by stalling interminably before sitting down with the union, or purposely prolonging the negotiations to the point where novice memberships get so antsy, they lose their nerve and ask for decertification. It happens.

However, under the EFCA, if the parties are unable to reach an agreement within 90 days, either side, union or management, can request that the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) be brought in to mediate the bargain. Mediators already assist in contract bargains, particularly when strikes have been called or appear to be imminent, so having one present isn’t innovative.

But here’s the astonishing part: If the parties can’t reach a mediated settlement within 30 days, the FMCS has the authority to finalize the contract. In effect, it would be binding arbitration. The notion of an outside party—a government agency, no less—setting the terms of a labor agreement would put the fear of God in management, causing them to do everything in their power to reach an equitable agreement. It’s a profound improvement to the process.

Second, the EFCA would require the NLRB to seek an immediate injunction when there is “reasonable cause” to believe an employer has fired, suspended or harassed an employee for engaging in a union organizing or first contract drive. Moreover, an employer who is found guilty of illegally firing or suspending a union activist would be required to pay that employee three times his back pay—the amount of his lost wages, plus two times that sum in punitive damages—plus as much as $20,000 in civil fines.

So there it is. The EFCA will not only make card check a way of life, it will prevent companies who hope to avoid having to agree to a fair contract from stalling or playing mind games at the bargaining table, and will stop (or seriously curtail) management from illegally thwarting union activism in the workplace.

It’s no wonder the Republican Party and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are going ape-shit over this. Arguably, the EFCA would be the first big-time pro-labor legislation to come down the pike since the 1935 Wagner Act. Now it’s up to Obama and the Democrats to step up to the plate and get it done.

David Macaray, a Los Angeles playwright (“Borneo Bob,” “Larva Boy”) and writer, was a former labor rep. He can be reached at dmacaray@earthlink.net

Only 8 percent of workers in the U.S. belong to unions currently, down from a high of 35 percent in the 1950s. Higher wages for all workers will do more to stimulate the economy, due to increased consumer spending for housing, etc.. than any other single thing.

While your lead editor lived in Missoula, Montana, in the 1990s, a time came when I found myself between jobs, and out of the federal government, for whom I had worked for ten years previously. The only short-term job I could find in the tough college-town environment there was as a "revenue accounting technician" for the Iowa-Missouri Rail Link (IMRL), a small midwestern railroad bought up Missoula's local billionaire, Dennis Washington. He also owned Montana Rail Link (MRL), a railroad connecting Montana with the adjacent states. Our section was in charge of billing all the concerns shipping materials in the railcars, each car had to have a separate "bill of lading", which was charged by weight, distance traveled, etc.. Since the IMRL was a new operation there, everyone working in that department was newly hired, including myself, and primarily composed of single mothers, widows, and divorcees.

The MRL employees, on the other side of the building, were all unionized, and made, as a minimum, 12.50 an hour (this was in 1997-98). The non-unionized IMRL people, were hired in at 7.50 an hour (try living on that in a place like Missoula!), which went up to 8.50 after one year. There was an evening shift, and some weekend work was required, yet there were no shift differentials for that. I got to talking with the unionized folks across the way, and they encouraged me to try and organize our side. I was all for that, as we all desperately needed the higher pay, and I was not happy that we were being exploited. As well, I knew I would get back into the federal govt. eventually, as a meteorologist, so was willing to take some chances.

The higher supervisors told us not to talk to the other section (which was illegal!). I talked with all my co-workers individually, and in small groups, and got favorable input for trying to organize our side into the union. Management found out, and called a hasty meeting, where they said that unionization would lead to fewer positions, the possibility of being "bumped" out by more experienced people from the other side, and less autonomy in our job duties. It was a classic scare-tactic, and quasi-illegal. Unfortunately, then, a vote was held, and our section decided not to unionize. That was a personal blow to me, as I had put alot of effort into organizing, for the betterment of all of us, especially the single mothers that had children. But, I then realized, that was why they were hired. Because these women were so vulnerable, with relatively few employable skills, they were easily threatened and manipulable, and so fell for the management threats. That was quite a lesson for me. Fortunately, I did get back on into the federal government. by taking a position in Juneau, Alaska, shortly thereafter. I didn't take what I initially felt as a betrayal personally, for very long, once I realized why my organizing efforts failed.

This is why the Employee Free Choice Act is so important, by more easily allowing workers to organize, higher percentages will join unions, helping them to a better standard of living, and helping the overall economy, as well. For those of you living in the western states, go to Costco, and then Sam's Club, and notice the difference. Costco's employees are unionized, make several dollars more per hour, and have better benefits, than those at Sam's Club (a subsidiary of WalMart). Costco has much lower employee turnover, more professional and highly trained staff, and as a result, a nicer environment to be in. The Wall Street Journal, a few years ago, panned Costco for treating their employees too well, at shareholder expense. Yet Costco has found it to their advantage to have a happier workforce with lower turnover, which all came about through the force of organized labor.

This will be a strong test of the Obama administration. If he/it ends up not supporting the EFCA and working for it's passage, that will be a stunning betrayal of organized labor, who helped get him elected. WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE!