Are Americans Willing to Settle For Less, as Politicians Think They Should?

From Politico:

"We have a new privileged class in America," said Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who rescinded state workers' collective bargaining power on his first day in office in 2006. "We used to think of government workers as underpaid public servants. Now they are better paid than the people who pay their salaries."

Yes, really, why can't we go back to the glorious days when public employees were underpaid? (Not like now, right, with all these furloughs and unpaid leave?) Those halcyon days when Wall Street tycoons occupied their proper place as gods, and government workers were underpaid and overworked just like the rest of us except those CEOs we work for and the golden parachutes they fly in and out on. When regulations melted away and left politicians and money men standing smiling before the bell in the morning at the Stock Exchange, in mutual satisfaction and dreaming of the piles of cash they'd all be swimming in soon. Let's go back to that time, shall we?

When will people get it through their heads that union workers aren't "privileged?" That they fought for and mobilized for the benefits they have now? And why should those benefits be eroded just because others weren't able to do the same? Once again, it's the race to the bottom for all American workers. And too many Americans, unfortunately, buy into this line. Instead of thinking, "Yeah, I should unionize so I can get the good benefits and salary that unionized workers enjoy," too many Americans are led instead, by CEOs and greedy politicians bent on destroying unions, to think, "I don't have that stuff, so nobody should."

It's the kind of mindset that's going to send all of us--that's going to send America--to the bottom of the hill if we don't act fast and act now. It's the kind of mindset that makes us doubt, frankly, whether the can-do spirit of America is still with us.

Instead of the race to the bottom, can't we join together in our workplaces to make all jobs better? Before the only Americans who can afford to take care of their families and retire with dignity are the ones at the top--the CEOs and Wall Street execs? It's time politicians stopped blaming unions and started blaming the ones who caused this mess of a recession in the first place. And it wasn't teachers, or firefighters, or cops. That we do know. But will politicians and too many Americans continue to use them as whipping boys anyway? Or will we stand up--at least all union members, public and private employees together--and say once and for all that American workers deserve more?

UFCW Local 481 President Luisa Acevedo Beaten by Police: Tell the Governor of Puerto Rico that Anti-Worker Actions and Police Brutality Must Stop NOW!

Puerto Rico Governor Luis Fortuno’s anti-worker actions have just taken a turn for the nightmarish.

As if it wasn’t bad enough that the governor has signed off on legislation outsourcing tens of thousands of public sector jobs and negating collective bargaining rights—now the police force has brutally beaten, and pepper sprayed UFCW Local 481 President Luisa Acevedo and her son, Frank Pizarro as they were peacefully protesting at a fundraising event for the governor. Both were beaten so badly they required hospitalization, though both have been released and are doing okay now.

You can watch the video of this unbelievable, terrifying scene here. The conflict starts at 1:36 of the footage. (WARNING: the video is disturbing, and does contain violence and some profanity.)

Please help us fight back, for Luisa and Frank and for all the working people of Puerto Rico. Send an email to Governor Fortuno and tell him his brutal anti-worker tactics are unacceptable and must stop NOW.

Things could not be worse for workers in Puerto Rico right now. The current economic situation is terrible, and the anti-worker legislation passed last year is killing more jobs. Governor Fortuno is placing the burden of the financial situation on the backs of workers and their families, and is preventing unions from doing anything to protect workers. And now this—the brutal beating of a union president and her son.

Enough is enough! Tell Governor Fortuno his anti-worker actions and brutality must end today.

Trick or Treats--Union Made

Jason Lefkowitz from CTW has a great post up today over at Today'sWorkplace.org. In it, he lets people know where they can go to buy union made Halloween candy this year. After all,

why give your money to a company that treats its workers like Oompa-Loompas? They were slaves who got paid in beans, remember! (Don’t be fooled by their catchy songs; that’s just a show they put on for the boss. You should hear the things they say about him in the break room.)

Instead, head over to Union Plus and check out the list of candy made by UFCW, UFW, and BCTGM members. Go ahead--it's okay to indulge your sweet tooth at this time of year. Just make sure it's satiated with union made goodies. Even through your sugar high, you'll feel good knowing you're supporting American workers and good jobs.

House Members Push Back on Health CareTax for Working Families

Finally, Congress shows a little backbone. Apparently, 156 House members (a majority, if you're keeping track) have written a letter asking Speaker Pelosi to drop any notion of taxing so-called "Cadillac plans," or higher-cost health insurance. The letter rightfully points out that:

Such a tax would impact regions with high health care costs in the short-term, and, in the long-term, inevitably extend to more and more middle-income Americans across the country.

It also points out the biggest problem for union members with this tax--how grossly unfair it would be. UFCW members and other union members across the country have spent countless hours at the bargaining table trying to secure affordable, quality health care for themselves and their families. And as the costs of health care have skyrocketed, union members have been forced to sacrifice things like wage raises, or pension benefits, in order to keep health care affordable for all--not just for union members, but often for non-union workers in the industry as well.

Or as the Washington Post puts it:

Over the past decade or so, unions in contract negotiations typically chose to forgo large wage increases in exchange for more generous medical benefits, mainly because costs were rising faster than inflation. Now, as the Senate Finance Committee works on health-care legislation, union members say they feel unfairly targeted.

"It's the old Washington, D.C., law of unintended consequences," said Robert Laszewski, president of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, a consulting firm. "They went after the Goldman Sachs partner and they ended up with the fireman in Brooklyn."

Taxing union members' good health care plans would be punishing union members for fighting for affordable health care in the first place. It would be the ultimate betrayal of what union members stand for, and have always stood for: raising standards of living throughout our industries. It would be complete submission to the slippery-slope mentality--to the idea that we all fall down together rather than use unity to climb up.

And it's not just union members--it's all kinds of hard-working Americans who would be affected and taxed. As Bob Laszewski points out:

It is pretty clear to me that millions of middle class Americans would get caught in this AMT-like tax trap.

If we want to discourage excessive and inflationary health care benefits, a laudable goal, let's be direct about that. But let's not pretend to be going after some rich guy on Wall Street all the while knowing we have set a tax trap for a retired teacher in Miami.

None of us should be complicit in that pretense. So good for you, the 145 members of Congress who are making that clear today. Thank you from UFCW members nationwide for doing the right thing, for union members and all working families.

H/T to Jane Hamsher at Firedoglake

Another Meme Debunked: Immigrants Not Actually Taking Our Jobs

"They're taking our jobs!" It's the most common refrain heard in the the narrow dialogue and screaming matches that pass for debate on immigration, on cable news shows and faux-populist rallies alike. It's the one supposedly irrefutable argument, the one that immigration opponents use to try to stoke the fears and anger of the under or unemployed--especially in this troubled economy.

It's not a new refrain. It's been heard throughout our history during periods of immigration of various groups, like the Chinese, to the United States. It's a dangerous phrase that implies a delicate balance between "us" and the "other," the immigrant, which "they" are tipping by coming into our country and taking all the jobs. It's a phrase that cuts off all debate and has even some reasonable, otherwise compassionate people nodding in agreement.

And now we find out it's not even true. From the Des Moines Register today:

With the Obama administration and Congress expected to push ahead with immigration reform, it's important that lawmakers and the public shape policy changes based on fact rather than fears.

It has perhaps seemed logical to assume that the willingness of many foreigners - particularly those here illegally - to work for low pay takes jobs away from Americans. But it turns out that having a large number of recent immigrants in a location doesn't necessarily correlate with a lot of native-born workers being unemployed, based on an analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data.

That analysis, done by the Immigration Policy Center, shows that "there is little apparent relationship between recent immigration and unemployment rates at the regional, state, or county level."

The report shows, for example, that:

Recent immigrants make up 8.4 percent of the population in the Pacific region (California, Oregon, Washington, Alaska and Hawaii), but just 2.8 percent of the population in the East North Central region (Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin). Yet, the regions had similar unemployment rates of 10.8 percent in the Pacific region and 10 percent in the East North Central region as of March 2009.

Another example: In New Jersey, recent immigrants account for 7.3 percent of the population, but in Maine they are just 0.8 percent. Nonetheless, the states' March unemployment rates respectively were 8.3 and 8.l percent.

The report found the highest unemployment rates are in counties in manufacturing centers and rural areas, which generally draw fewer recent immigrants.

The tradition of blaming job loss on immigrants is one we ought to lose in a hurry. Unemployment is very real problem, but it's not the fault of immigrants. We need problem-solving, not scapegoating, to fix our economy and implement meaningful immigration reform in this country.

Not Such Bright Bulbs at Morning Joe

A funny thing happened this morning. During a rather lopsided discussion about unions, the folks at Morning Joe pretended to try really, really hard to think of ANY successful unionized companies. But they couldn't name a single one. They hemmed and hawed and got these strained looks on their faces--but nope. Couldn't come up with one. Not even the company that owns NBC--GE.

What a bunch of dim bulbs.

After all, almost anyone could probably name at least a few successful unionized companies--companies that not only survive, but thrive with a terrific union workforce. Folks have been suggesting many of these companies to add to Talking Points Memo's post on the subject.

You can find the growing list here.

UPDATE: Sorkin apologizes. Good on him--but what about Joe, Mika, and Mike?

Rep. Don Young: Defender of Employee Free Choice?

Well, well. Representative Don Young (R-Alaska) has come out in defense of the Employee Free Choice Act. And no, you didn't just read that wrong. As Greg Sargent notes:

GOP Rep Don Young isn’t exactly known for his reluctance to toe the Republican line on key issues. So it’s kind of a big deal that he has openly broken with his colleagues when it comes to their leading talking point against the Employee Free Choice Act: The claim that it would eliminate the “secret ballot” option for joining unions.

The Anchorage Daily News reports that Young made the comments at a gathering of "Alaskans for Liberty" last Thursday. Apparently, after the outspoken Republican was asked about "card check legislation," Young said this:

I believe in unions. I believe in working people. They say the secret ballot is eliminated. That's not true. A secret ballot can be requested.

So there you have it, folks. Even Rep. Don Young says the "no secret ballot" argument is bunk.

New Study Shows Employers' Anti-UnionTactics Have Increased

A new study illustrates what workers have known for years--it's become harder to get a union than ever, thanks to an increase in opposition to unionization by employers.

The study, by Kate Bronfenbrenner, director of labor education research at the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations, is titled “No Holds Barred: The Intensification of Employer Opposition to Organizing." The study was

based on a random sample of 1,004 unionization elections from early 1999 to late 2003 and relied on a review of National Labor Relations Board cases and documents, as well as surveys of 562 lead union organizers.

A similar study done 12 years ago found that employers used 10 or more types of anti-union tactics in 26 percent of unionization drives. Bronfenbrenner's study shows that 10 or more antiunion tactics were used by employers in 49%, or almost half of all organizing efforts. In 12 years, companies have doubled their efforts to oppose unionization among their workers.

The report includes confirmation that there has been an increase in more coercive and retaliatory tactics, such as:

plant closing threats and actual plant closings, discharges, harassment and other discipline, surveillance, and alteration of benefits and conditions.

And it shows that even workers who have the determination and strength to fight through may not be guaranteed a contract, since:

Even for those who do win the election, 52% are still without a contract a year later, and 37% are still without a contract two years after an election.

For most workers who've tried to get a union at their workplace, the report simply confirms the bitter truth they've been aware of for a long time--and demonstrates the increased importance of passing the Employee Free Choice Act.

When Joanne Fowler, a Certified Nursing Assistant at Lake Village Health Care in Wilmot, Ark.,and her co-workers tried to organize their workplace, management threatened workers with layoffs and tried to bribe workers with raises if they would vote against the union. She said that:

under the Employee Free Choice Act, it will be the workers’ free choice to organize. You won’t have to worry about the company threatening you.

At a briefing today on Capitol Hill to unveil the study, California Rite Aid worker Angel Warner, who is trying to form a union and get a contract with the International Longshore and Warehouse Union spoke out about anti-union tactics and intimidation:

We wanted to form a union so we would be treated with dignity and could speak up without fear of losing our jobs. Now we finally got through the harassment to form a union and we still don't have a contract. It shouldn't be like this. If my coworkers and I want a union, we should have one.

Chamber of Horrors...eeeeek!!!!!! (w/Video)

Say two workers met on the street and just happened to discuss the Chamber of Commerce's totally intimidating new efforts to oppose the Employee Free Choice Act. We think that conversation might go a little like this...

Artists Support Employee Free Choice (w/video)

Broadway talent, TV stars, movie stars and other artists--forty seven of them--have just released a new video in support of the Employee Free Choice Act. People don't always realize that most artists are also union members, and that unions are the reason those working in showbiz can support a family and pay the bills.

Check out the great video and be sure to spread the word.

NEW VIDEO: Walmart Workers for Change

Walmart Workers for Change, a new campaign of thousands of Walmart’s 1.3 million associates across the country who are standing up and demanding a voice in the workplace, released a new video today that show the kind of anti-worker tactics they are facing from the world’s largest retailer. "The associates are afraid," said Cynthia Murray, a Walmart associate in Laurel, Maryland:

They’re intimidated, and they are afraid. My family and other families have paid the price for freedom. And when you tell me I can’t talk about a union, you’re taking my freedom from me.

Workers in more than 100 stores in 15 states across the country have joined together and signed union representation cards, citing a lack of respect from the company, as well as poverty-level wages and sub-par benefits as reasons they need a union voice on the job. Even though Walmart’s got a long and well-documented history of anti-worker activities, workers say they Obama's election has inspired them to take action, as has the introduction of the Employee Free Choice Act in Congress. The campaign comes at a time when workers find their wages have stagnated, even as Walmart and the Walton family continue to make record profits. Walmart’s recently released 2009 10K shows the company made $13.4 billion in profits last year. In the new video, which can be viewed at http://www.walmartworkersforchange.org/index.php/pages/articles/walmarts_war_on_workers, 10 workers from coast to coast detail the company’s response to their organizing efforts, including:

Dominique Sloane and Mark Moore, of Dallas, Texas, were told that their store would be closed if workers voted to organize. In Miami, Florida, Cheryl Guzman was interrogated by a manager about who among her colleagues supported a union. Linda Haluska, of Glendale, Illinois, was called into four mandatory meetings in one week, where she and her colleagues were shown anti-union, anti-Employee Free Choice videos.

Walmart Workers for Change is a new campaign made up of thousands of Walmart workers joining together to form a union and negotiate better benefits, higher wages, and more opportunity for a better future.

Wall Street vs. Detroit

When our parents were learning to drive in the 1960s & 70s, American car companies were roaring industries raking in incredible sales and profits. Auto workers demanded a fair share of the profits, fought for the benefits they deserved, and the middle class in America grew strong. Blinded by their successes, the American car companies continued with their trend of building big gas-guzzling cars, and in the 1990s, this business model culminated with the SUV. Over the last few years, with the downswing in the economy, auto workers sacrificed many of their previous benefits in order to keep the car companies afloat, but they couldn’t save the auto industry on their own. Then things really got tough, with the mortgage crisis and the credit crunch.

You may remember that Wall Street was bailed out not too long ago. Some people groaned about the bailout, but it was seen as necessary to keep the financial institutions going.

So why are the same people who suppoted the Wall Street bailot against the auto bailout? Why so much talk about letting people "learn their lesson the hard way”? The difference is Wall Street represents the interests of the rich, and Detroit represents the interest of hard-working middle-class America.

In these times of real economic hardship, the people with all the power in these companies still don’t quite seem to understand what it means to suffer. When they went to Congress last week to ask for a $25 billion bailout, the CEOs of these giant companies each flew to DC in a private jet! In case you missed it on the Daily Show, here are the chiefs of America’s floundering auto industries, unwilling to part with their private jets:




The good news is that GM is now giving up two of its five corporate checks. Apparently “G.M. says the timing is coincidental since it was already in the process of returning the two jets.”

Stronger Unions Can Strengthen Economy

New York Times op-ed contributor, Robert B. Reich, is calling out Washington politicians for taking "normal remedies" to address the continuing economic slide.

Reich says it's time to address the real problem - American workers are earning 12% less than their counterparts 30 years ago when wages are adjusted for inflation.

Among Reich's solutions: Organize and Unionize.

"We also need stronger unions, especially in the local service sector that’s sheltered from global competition. Employees should be able to form a union without the current protracted certification process that gives employers too much opportunity to intimidate or coerce them. Workers should be able to decide whether to form a union with a simple majority vote."

Read the rest of the editorial here.

The R-word

Recession is a scary word.

It's on the front page of most news sources. Say it aloud and most people cringe. But how it affects one person to the next can be very different.

This nation's last two recessions -- the collapse of the dotcom bubble and in 1991 -- are largely outside the memories of most young workers.

But, studies examining job losses during a recession say it is young workers who are the hardest hit. Using data gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and population surveys the Monthly Labor Review found employment among workers 16-19 years old declined by 5.7 percent. In addition to the large decline, employment for this group slumped for two years -- nearly twice as long as it did for older workers.

But relax young union member, don't cringe just quite yet when you hear the 'r-word' whispered.

Economists examing industries performing well during recessions list regional and national supermarket chains, convenience stores and discount stores among the top ten performers.

No job is recession proof, but young workers in service-based industries are less likely to suffer the consequences of their early-90s counterparts.

Slaughterhouse Workers Win Right to Organize

After a 3-year struggle, Brooklyn slaughterhouse workers have won the right to organize. The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled workers have the right to join the United Food and Commercial Workers Union.

AgriProcessors argued its workers had no right to vote or belong to a union because of undetermined immigration status even though the National Labor Relations Board previously ruled that every employee -- regardless of immigration status -- has a vote in collective bargaining.

One of the nation's largest kosher meat producers, AgriProcessors refused to bargain after a majority of its distribution center employees voted to unionize in September 2005.

Read more at ufcw.org.