Why are so many Americans fearful/resentful of unions?

[alp227]

It seems that many of the "LIMITED GOVERNMENT"/"INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY" people out there are fine with being bossed around and strangled as long as it's their own boss at work putting the worker's survival on the line. Which is why you see those "at will employment" and "right to work" laws in Republican-controlled states (especially the former Confederate states in the Southeast and sadly former industrial states in the Great Lakes Region).

That's my intro to my post about public reaction to the Bay Area transit strike. Some of the comments after this Los Angeles Times article about the strike http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-bart-strike-workers-20130701,0,1582152.story

I agree with everyone's post on here. All they do is complain, go on strikes, and make everyone else miserable. Not all employers give their employee raises nor do they need to provide excellent benefits. It's up to the individual to educate themselve and land a job that pays them well. If you're unhappy with the company you work for or you think you worth more than what you're paid, then find another job! That's what real hard working people do. They don't settle and they definitely don't pout. I HATE UNION WORKERS!!!

There are many people who can take over ur easy job easily, There are so many people who are unemployed and would kill for such job with a good pay.

For those of you who have observed the change in America after the Reagan years (Thom Hartmann has done so brilliantly), you probably aren't surprised that the general public lacks sympathy for union workers. I've seen online comments reacting to this strike actually say things like "unions are outdated" and "unions should be banned".

I wonder why people think that way.

Is it because they're conditioned to submit, submit, submit to what their bosses give 'em and just "be good workers" instead of standing up for their rights? Listen to this Hartmann caller and figure it out:

Yep that caller really said "be a good worker" is the way for workers to get their rights.

Or do people who trash union workers not understand that because of people who went on strike for the past century or so EVERY worker out there gets benefits like 8-hour workdays, sick leave, etc.?

Is there a sort of authoritarianism that upper class Americans have or something? Arrogance? All their talking points are, basically:
- Get another job instead of going on strike or complaining
- Be a good worker

[LWolf]

1. Because they are susceptible to propaganda. nt

[Sherman A1]

3. Precisely

You have hit the nail on the head.

[cantbeserious]

18. Yes - Was Exactly My First Thought

eom

[Squinch]

25. Especially any propaganda that portrays them as self-sufficient masters-of-their-own-domain.

(Not in the Seinfeld sense, of course.)

That kind of propaganda makes them think they have power precisely where they do not.

[liberal N proud]

27. The media telling them what they should think

[emulatorloo]

77. +1

[Jenoch]

2. There is a problem in some places

with the public unions. The retirement benefits are draining the resources of some communities.

[Notafraidtoo]

5. When you make promises you keep them.

"Those areas" made promises to their workers and now they want to bow out all the while cutting taxes for the wealthy that live there. You know whats draining the resources of said community's? Wealthy people avoiding taxes after they benefited from the fruits of those workers.

[Jenoch]

6. I'm referring to local

municipalities in Minnesota. I don't see where your points apply.

[Bradical79]

17. I don't see what the problem is

because you've provided no details :-P

[Sherman A1]

10. +1000

[Sherman A1]

9. I must disagree

This logic, I believe represent the mindset established by 30+ years of the discredited "trickle down" logic brought to us by Reaganomics. Give tax breaks to the top, ease regulation on business and everything will be better? I do not believe it has worked out very well as we have seen the benefits of ever increasing productivity funnel straight to the 1%, with a new Gilded Age established, with huge disparities in the distribution of wealth & income. Most of today's problems in my opinion hearken back to Ronald Reagan and his screwing over of the working class.

That said and more to your post. it is not the benefits that these workers are receiving that are draining the resources of communities. It is bad management. At the most basic level if the community leaders do not perform due diligence and agree to something they cannot afford, then how is it the fault of a Union or any service provider (be that a vendor or other contractor) to not accept the compensation package they have negotiated? The next question is of course why must communities budgets be balanced on the backs of their workers? How often do we see communities somehow find money for a new football stadium, TIF's for Walmart or other big box stores, but not for safe roads, bridges, libraries, parks or teacher salaries?

Increased pay & benefits to the working class create more available income that will be spent in the local community, creating jobs and a rising tide that lifts all boats.

It is the system of priorities that is amiss, not the wages & benefits of workers.

[Doctor_J]

13. Tough shit. These workers took concessions along the way in exchange for those pensions

so now they are owed that money, under contract.

[Dash87]

30. I agree.

[MichiganVote]

33. The FAILURE of our Government to COLLECT taxes from Corporations/business/1%

are draining the resources--not Unions. You have bought into the media PR bought and paid for by the US of Corporations.

[ellie]

38. Thank you

This exactly.

[GoCubsGo]

40. Yes, and...

...the failure of corporations to give their own employees the same fair shake. People resent it when they get stuck with shitty 401(k)s, instead of the reliable pensions that union workers have. Not to mention the retiree health benefits, the better pay, the better working conditions... And, their dirtbag employers have them cowed by threatening job loss, etc. So, naturally, they resent those who have it a little bit better than them, rather than the ones actually causing their misery. Divide and conquer. Same shit, different day.

[Starry Messenger]

62. Thank you.

The anti-union crap on DU today is killing me.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

51. Bull. Fucking. Shit.

That's not a problem with the unions, it's a problem with mismanagement. Those bennies get negotiated in good faith and it's not the unions' fault if management chooses to put the cost on the town credit card instead of making some tough decisions.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. You know, I will talk to my locals

Average pension in San diego city is 24k dollars a year.

Those workers do not, I repeat, do not...pay into social security.

The city raised the fund to pay for projects that they could not, nor wanted to, ask citizens to ay taxes for, a four letter word.

I am betting a dime on the dollar a similar situation where you live.

We have had a services provided with no taxes levied for 30 years or so nation wide.

[Enthusiast]

71. Once the retirement benefits are agreed on

those resources should have been secured. Often they are not protected then the unions are blamed. And this is the height of hypocrisy. If a community's government decides to gamble on mortgage backed securities they are responsible, not the retiree. See, you have bought into the propaganda.

[WinkyDink]

74. Gov. Corbett, is that you? Because you must've forgotten that WE PAID FOR THEM.

[Doctor_J]

78. That's something the Limbeciles seem to forget

The money belongs to the members, under contract. Those who decide not to pay, like Corbett and Walker, should go to prison just like madoff did.

[Apophis]

75. What a bunch of bs.

[Doremus]

89. Bullcrap. A talking point straight from the RMS.

aka Repuke Mouthpiece Script.

How did you come by such a thing?

[HiPointDem]

4. two reasons. years of repetitious propaganda & the fact that some unions are corrupt in

small or large ways.

[Pelican]

7. Horror stories about incompetence being rewarded...

... along with a general perception that it will raise their personal costs.

Many of the folks you are referring to believe that they are smart enough and capable enough to earn individually as opposed to collectively.

[Notafraidtoo]

8. I wish people would take a few minutes to think..

Here is a exercise think about all the other country's you would want to live in based on standard of living, now how many of those country's have lower union membership then the US, for me its 0.

Exercise two, how did America look before unions, Answer- almost no middle class and third world misery for more then 70% of US residents.

The only way we will have a progressive economy again is with strong labor it is unavoidable. until at least half of Americans learn that simple fact we will continue this 30 year decline in wages. investors do everything in their power to force lower wages on workers and increase the amount of work they do. unless people organize there is no defense to this process.

[Laelth]

37. +1 n/t

-Laelth

[Taft_Bathtub]

11. Cold War Propaganda plus media brainwashing

Since the 1940s the public has been indoctrinated that unions are havens for communists and agitators who just want to take money from workers. In addition, the media always frames unions in a negative light, and also describes strikes as being between "unions and the company" and not management versus labor.

Mix all that in with some Horatio Algerism (If I just work hard enough I can be the CEO one day!) and you have a climate very hostile to unions.

[Populist_Prole]

12. +1

Plus the "white collar-ization" of America, which makes for an innate bias against anybody who isn't an MBA or paper-pusher.

Certainly, as others have said so far, their are those in the working class who've been brainwashed by the authoritarian "the boss is holy" mindset, particularly in the southeast. I live here and see it.

[Doctor_J]

14. Like most of the devolution of the US, it can be traced to Big Media

as others have said in this thread. The propaganda is relentless, and effective. I would add that I am sometimes flabbergasted by how many DUers let it slip that they are Hate Radio and Fox "News" addicts.

[bluedeathray]

15. Their talking points are more extensive than

- Get another job instead of going on strike or complaining
- Be a good worker

There is an image of an organized system to fight management decision (Hostess bakeries).

There is also an image of "protected" laziness and minimal output (UAW).

Believe me, I'm pro union, and realize that one of our best tools to fight the Plutocracy is strong unions.

But ignoring many people's perceptions isn't the way to argue for the institution.

[dmosh42]

16. Two reasons--It takes some balls to strike for decent wages and benefits, and....

basically most people would rather kiss-ass and defer to their bosses than challenge them.

[Nanjing to Seoul]

19. Right wing/anti-Communist-Socialist/class warfare propaganda

[Eddie Haskell]

39. And a low IQ

[East Coast Pirate]

20. You can't trust reader comments.

Freepers like to post links to articles and then manipulate the reader comments to make it seem like most people are conservative kooks.

[Ilsa]

21. They know nothing about the history of labor.

They know nothing about "company stores" in "company towns", why M-F, 40 hours, is the typical legal work week, or that people have died to get safer and better conditions.

I suspect some schools have intentionally ignored this part of our history.

[Dantheman65]

35. You got it exactly

But I don't think the schools have intentionally ignored it. Modern American history simply isn't taught very much. They get some world history and early american at most.

Also capricious and arbitrary hiring and firing practices are now considered "normal". If Walmart can do it then why should painters, truck drivers, or school teachers be any different? They think it's not fair if some workers have better benefits or protections than others.

[TransitJohn]

22. PsyOps and disinfo

has really changed the country since the Depression, the Cold War and Red Scare exacerbated the problem.

[mntleo2]

23. Raised WOBBLY here, and disappointed ...

...IMO unions sold their souls to management, beginning with Reagan. I watched as union bosses went on fishing trips with CEO bosses and this would have been fine ~ but all too often they came back and their "packages" was about giving away benefits and wages and refusing to sanction a strike. Always they argued this would "keep jobs" but it did not. The jobs went away anyway. I have been in both private company unions and with the public sector. I will never forgive the rights those people took from my generation and now my children's generation that my grandfather saw people DIE to get. Whenever I spoke about the history I was taught, these union bosses laughed that off as if it were nothing.

In the mid-1990s and as an active union member in a state union job, I was shocked to discover that my union president had gone behind the worker's backs and gave away our Civil Service rights. This was simply so she could receive more money herself ~ to hell with the 30,000 + workers and their rights, whom she was SUPPOSED to represent.

The story is long and sordid but it actually preluded the problems people like me tried to warn would happen in places like Wisconsin with their anger at the loss of so-called "bargaining rights". Let me explain ...

Civil Service was important for ALL workers, whether they were in private industry or in government work. The reason this was so is that Civil Service rights are heueueuege. This was why it used to take next to an act of God to fire a government worker, because management had *better* cross all their t's and dot their i's before taking any action in that direction. When unions took their workers out from under Civil Service protection they in essence took away rights that take up an entire law library wall and the rights that remained, fit in one of their pamphlets.

My grandfather told me that the reason Civil Service was so important was because "if the government was not a decent employer, they would not up-hold labor laws for the private sector..." What he meant was that the laws passed under Civil Service was "an example" as to the work conditions elsewhere. I have watched my grandfather's words come to be true as I watched these rights erode from a time when a government employee could make a decent living down to the place where they are begging for food stamps after losing those rights ~ and then it "trickles down" to the private sector.

It has been all I could do to hold my tongue while watching the mayhem in WI when workers saw a governor essentially take away their wages and their jobs at the flick of his pen. He would never have been able to do that if their unions had stayed under Civil Service, but many of their unions followed like sheep to the slaughter when my union boss (925 ~ yes the same union that the movie was named after) began the process of taking away these rights in the early 1990s. As a matter of fact she helped to write the law in my state that began the process for this erosion ~ one of the first in the nation written in order to take down Civil Service. The man she wrote this bill with is Gary Loch and he became governor and is now ambassador to China under Obama so this was not a "Republican" movement. This was a bunch of "progressives" selling thousands (now millions) down the river and turning back the clock to where my grandfather's generation began. 20 years later my worst nightmares have some true, thanks to actions like this union president imposed on the rest of us. She had an obligation to her workers, but instead she led the way to the demise of the very reason unions themselves are struggling because, thanks to her and the rest who followed, they shot themselves in the foot.

On the surface it appeared that the "reasons" for taking away Civil Service SOUNDED good. Government unions are usually subsidized by the government along with the dues they get from workers. The problem with this is that because of these subsidies, if the specific union shop has not voted to become "closed" then the union HAS to represent a worker whether or not they pay dues. Unions wanted to force their workers to pay these dues without having to go through the process of urging shops to become closed. So taking down Civil Service seemed the "easiest" to do, since management was eager to do that and the unions stood to gain $millions more in union dues from their workers who did not pay.

As a good unions member (who voluntarily paid my dues), I and a few others tried to fight this erosion. We had to bring a lawsuit (not a small thing to do) against the state and the union. The reason we did this was because the boss had not only gone behind her worker's backs and negotiated Civil Service rights away, she was not even going to let her paid members vote on it in her so-called "democratic" union! It was one of the most painful times I have ever gone through as i was called a "union hater" by other union members. I eventually lost my job over it because this union boss had told her minions not to represent me when I began to get harassed after enduring an on-the-job injury (later admitted by my supervisor she was ordered to do by management AND the shop steward confessed he was also ordered to not properly represent me by the union).

But before I joined the lawsuit, I underwent a great deal of soul searching because of my own union roots. My grandfather used to say, "Stand with unions, right or wrong!" I really believed that. But I realized as I watched the shenanigans of this union that what he meant was worker's rights *not* union rights. Because unions themselves have become "corporations" and if they have to choose between their own survival rather than represent their workers as they are in existence to do, then they will choose themselves over their workers. As a matter of fact, the most ironical to me is that because of their own desire to survive, this union's workers had to belong to a union themselves!

I usually do not DARE to speak about this here as so many people do not understand how unions participated in taking away their rights and hurt themselves in the process ~ all in the name of $$$$$. They should have known they are Charlie Brown and the rest of the world is Lucy with the football, as this is WHY unsions are in existence. So while I can see plainly that the only thing left for the workers are these corrupt and self serving organizations, as long as people have to pay them in order for them to NOT represent them in exchange for a union's own existence, they will be angry at the reality they are not that well represented if at all. I will always be for worker's rights, however for good reasons, I will view unions with a jaundiced eye. Because I know they WILL sell you down the river if they have to choose between actually doing their jobs as a representative of you or to survive themselves.

If anyone reading this is thinking this was an "isolated" case, forget it. Believe me, I have watched the dominoes fall all across the nation. This was the beginning that I speak about here, but it has continued until now workers like the ones in WI are screaming for their "bargaining rights' because their REAL rights are gathering dust in some law library where few have them anymore. The few of us who tried to stand up to unions for worker's rights were mowed down like grass. I still believe it is possible to change that, but now thanks to the Powers That Be, this work is made harder. Because the terrible price my grandparents paid to pave the way has been destroyed for future generations for whom these brave workers hoped would never have to suffer as they did. I just wish people (and unions) would LEARN FROM THEIR MISTAKES instead of trying to justify them.

Some solutions? Here are a couple:

* First of all, RESTORE CIVIL SERVICE (yeah right, while we know it can be done because it was, just TRY to get your union to support it, much less any legislator who stands to get money from those unions).

* Unions need money, this is true. But the conflict here is that if you pay them to be your representative, they will not do so if your rights threaten theirs. I am not sure what to do except that figure out a way where unions should never have to make that choice. They should be able to freely and vigorously represent their workers without having to hurt themselves.

So yeah, I am skeptical of unions, but it is not without good reason. I am not skeptical of worker's rights. It has to start with worker's rights IMO and unions need to somehow get back to that work instead of being run like a corporation where their own workers have to have a union.

My 2 cents ...

Cat in Seattle

PeeEss: About 5 years down the road after losing their rights, union members that called me and other's "union haters" later came to us hat in hand with apologies as they watched their rights (and union) go to seed. Oh the president did fine, she made out like a bandit (literally) and bought a fine home in an upper class old neighborhood. To this day because of the ignorance of so many about unions, she is still going around giving speeches about how wonderful she is. But her die-hard supporters realized they had been duped, however it was too late. They wanted to decertify the union for all the damage they had done. I had the grace to not say, "I told you so ..." but all I could say was "Go get 'em!" since I was no longer a worker there. However I knew, one of the poison pills that this ~ and other ~ unions gave themselves in exchange for selling their souls, had already stacked the deck even more than it was stacked against those of us trying to stop what we saw coming and these workers did not have a prayer ~ Cat

[Pholus]

26. Your grandfather had good worker wisdom there..

Well paid civil servants drive pay for everyone. Why do we resent teachers so much right now. Is it that they're overpaid, or is it that their program wasn't gutted like everyone elses.

Raised on stories like that from my dad. I loved one story about overhearing his boss getting chided by other business owners in the town for "overpaying his employees."

My Dad's boss replied: "A man has to feed his family and I'd rather help him than force him to steal it from me."

Dad would have died for that guy.

My other two bits of wisdom from him?

1) Threatened with termination over a silly matter, my dad countered: "Well, I was looking for a job the day I walked in here too."

2) When his boss complained about a requested raise: "You sell your product for the best price you think you can get. I sell my hands, it's what I've got."

[mntleo2]

36. Yes, this is why some resent teachers all right ...

...but unions refuse to so much as address much less acknowledge their mistake and keep telling themselves and others that their bid to undermine Civil Service was somehow good. They think if these rights were restored, they would "lose" power and money, and maybe even become obsolete, I think this is their fear.

I remember one 925 (paid) union organizer sarcastically telling me during our lawsuit that the reason any unions that wanted to keep civil service rights was, "because they did not know how to bargain..." Well obviously neither did hers who is now considered a joke who took away so many rights that now, a boss can casually comment something to a worker while passing them in the hall and then the worker is fired the next day. Not that these unions weren't considered jokes before, but this was because Civil Service did most of the work for them. They thought they would have more power and also gain money if they did not have that "silly little bother" to stand in their way. Now they are weak AND a joke ~ literally prostituting themselves for a buck just like the union leader I speak about did when she went behind closed doors and sold herself to the highest bidders.

Teacher's unions have maintained their slim hold on reality because governors know they do not have the leverage they have with non-Civil Service unions. Unfortunately the media nor will anyone ~ certainly not the unions ~ explain what happened and begin the movement to restore those laws I speak about. They are still there and gathering dust on law library shelves. Yes we all had "issues" with tenured government workers who basically held places and carried the attitude it did not matter whether they did a good job or not. Those one or two workers were in a minority and IMO were sick ~ and most of their coworkers had no respect for them. The majority I ever worked with and observed, took pride in their work and gave their all because they wanted to be craftsman at their tasks. Still it was important to hold that one "useless" worker since it meant that those who did good work, had security, just treatment, and that their jobs would be there the next day, nobody could fire them after giving their all just because some boss did not like their race, their gender, their religion, etc.

Unions should not fear their demise should they support Civil Service. The truth is whenever you gain rights, you need an organized entity to stand vigil in order to help you keep them. I wish they would see that!

Love, Cat

[jollyreaper2112]

28. that is heartbreaking

I can understand exactly how it happened, the rationalizations, the excuses, but goddamn is it a shame. What will it take to win these rights back?

How could she negotiate without the consent of the union? You had no recourse against her? If this happened in your grandfather's time, she would have been shot.

[mntleo2]

43. Not only did this happen, they got rewarded and promoted!

...Believe me this is the thing that was so agonizing for someone like me who believed a union should be democratic that pretended it was, but was not democratic at all. We had to bring a freaking LAWSUIT against her to force them to allow a vote by all workers as to whether or not to go out from under Civil Service. I wish I were making this up, but it happened and it was beyond absurd.

Then when we won the lawsuit, the union cheated (long story short, they used colored ballots for certain bargaining units and the gave the "wrong" colors to the ones they knew would vote for their nefarious deeds, thus ensuring they would "win&quot .

All I can tell you is that it taught me a great deal about the workings of unions since I saw it from the inside out and it was beyond ugly, it was heartbreaking. I agonized as to whether or not I was part of "undermining" the strength of unions or trying to make sure it stayed strong, but over 20 years down the road I know this was the right thing to do. Because unions are now much weaker and frankly I think if they had stayed the course, ALL workers would not be in the terrible place they are now.

My DIL used to work for Walmart. Fortunately for her this happened after she left, but during the holidays last year, some of her coworkers were forced to work up to 48 hours STRAIGHT, no breaks, no over time. Can you imagine undergoing being on your feet working your ass off continuously for 2 solid days and nights without stopping for a breath and then getting paid a wage careful enough to ensure you got no benefits or overtime? It was beyond disgusting! this was in the Covington store in WA State ~ and i am sure happening regularly around the nation.

While what Walmart did is blatantly against labor laws, did any authority do anything about it? Hell no! Because now Walmart has elected officials in their pockets and God forbid should those officials (or even the weakened NRLB) uphold laws that already exist on the books. 20 years ago the company would have been taken to the cleaners by the government even though they are non-union, but now there is nobody there even upholding existing law.

Hey a few of us tried to warn about this coming should they begin the corruption of those laws. We were vilified and told to shut up by management who were backed up by our own "allies". And yes I am sure no union would say THEY were responsible for the treatment workers are getting today, but IMO they definitely played a huge part and planted some major seed that are now weeds choking the labor movement.

Again I just wish unions would learn from it instead of justifying it.

Is there any discussion about this here in this thread? I doubt it because shhhhhhh! (whisper) We shouldn't talk about any mistakes the unions have made and we shouldn't try to fix them, just don those purple shirts and rah rah for the rights that were given away.

My (admittedly bitter) 2 cents

Cat

[lumberjack_jeff]

53. For the same reason that the pots in which you boil crabs don't need lids.

Americans can become content with a remarkably pathetic standard of living, provided none of their neighbors are getting something for nothing.

[mntleo2]

61. LOL! Something for nothing ...

...yeah the sad thing about this is that workers themselves do not understand they EARN those benefits along with the other pay they receive. It is not something that the company "generously" gives, it is part of their pay for the work they do.

The amusing part about the whole "hate the union and their workers" thing is that they are all mad at the benefits the union got for their workers that haters don't have BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE A UNION...

One wonders how these people can ever find their way out of a paper bag with the irony. Soooo lemme get this straight...they are all mad because they believe someone "got something for nothing" when in fact getting those benefits such as retirement, health care, decent wages and worker's rights to decent treatment is part of the wages just like if the person got paid the equivalent in cash for those benefits. Instead they believe the CEO of United Healthcare "earned" his pay while reaping over $1Billion who can afford to pay for any "benefits" he needs ~ and believe me that CEO has PLENTY of "unearned benefits" that he did not raise a finger to receive, you know the corporate jet, the fancy dinners, the limo rides, the easy access to legislators whenever they have a whim, the top-notch hotels, etc. Oh no, those people bneing paid over 270 X what their workers got paid somehow "earned" that while their workers who work their asses off making sure HIS company gives him all his own "benefits" are "getting something for nothing" because they might get a healthcare package and a pension (which the CEO can take away legally after taking it out of their checks if he ever feels he might suffer a company loss).

Often these idiots do not realize that they could have those things too if they organized and got enough people to stand with them in order to get them. Instead they are all mad that the people who have organized, are somehow "getting something for nothing" while their cheap boss leaves them begging for the pittance they receive and then call that pittance their worker's "wages".

Cat

[treestar]

24. self centered, in that the inconvenience of the strike impacts them

and then unfortunate involvement of unions with the mob, a la Jimmy Hoffa.

[maddezmom]

29. I am confused because you seemed to be against the BART strike in you LBN thread

[Starry Messenger]

63. Yeah, I'd like some more explanation about that too.

[handmade34]

31. jealousy

[GoCubsGo]

41. Exactly right.

They resent the people who have better pay, benefits, and working conditions, rather than blaming the ones causing their misery.

[rurallib]

32. I am 64 years old. All my life radio and TV have aired about

99% 'news' and 'views' against organized labor. The anti-labor message has been out there long and strong.
All "Joe" in that clip was doing was regurgitating the message that decades of propaganda has filled him and his father with.

The propaganda has worked and worked well.

[think]

34. IMO: Unions need to evolve & improve their messaging. Also the propaganda

being waged against unions is a sinister effort to demonize them.

I would encourage those in union leadership to work hard on messaging. Including social media networking.

If the American people understand that union leaders in Columbia and other third world countries are murdered with known collusion of multi national corporations they will better understand how evil some corporations can be and why America needs to protect it's workers from overreach and abuse.

If the American people see the charts where CEO pay is skyrocketing while worker wages remain stagnant this will have an impact.

Also union might want to help American people live economically more efficient. Fiscal inefficiency is a drag on the American worker and a drag on the economy.

Sorry for the rant....

[Chan790]

47. It needed to be said. I'd highlight a further problem.

There is a seeming active antipathy on the part of organized labor to unionize or support unionization of white-collar private-sector workers even where there is already an active worker-driven effort to do so and they're reaching out to organized labor for assistance/advice. Unionizing us is the future of labor as the we (along with service sector) are the growing employment base while manufacturing recedes rapidly, fail to do it and organized labor in America will continue to recede.

I was central to one such effort when I was in banking...the bank treated us like crap. They made promises they broke to workers with no repercussions. They fired people without cause, when pushed for cause or proof...they'd say "internal security suspected theft. No, we can't give you evidence. No, we can't reveal how we know. It would cripple our ability to deter theft if we had to prove these accusations." They screwed us on raises. They created an atmosphere were if they accused you of something, you were guilty until proven innocent and seeking legal counsel was terminable. They were Goliath and we were defenseless alone.

It started as a whisper in one branch, that whisper spread from one person to two (I was #2. #1 got fired and they thought that it died with #1 until they realized there were legion.) to two branches to four to two corporate-areas within DC to about half the city. (by area. We had the majority of the branches and staff as we had downtown and the wealthy part of NW DC.) The bank was suspicious but lacked proof or any idea where the leadership was for a very long time, we were safe and we had the votes to make it happen if a vote were to occur; I literally had verbal commitments to unionize from 60% of the branch banking representatives of the major urban territory of one of the 10 largest banks in America. So we started reaching out for assistance and advice to every labor group and union we could think of realizing that nobody was quite aligned with us as a labor-base but someone might want us and others would be happy to at least give us advice. SEIU, AFL-CIO, UAW, Teamsters, IWW, UFCW (Half my family is UFCW.)...we reached out to everybody. I reached out to people on DU I knew were labor-organizers. We never got so much as a "We can't help you but 'Solidarity' and we support your efforts." letter from any of them. I felt hung out to dry.

There is nobody organizing private-sector white-collar labor and nobody wants to be the first.

I'd think this would be a coup, who wouldn't want us as it'd be a foothold being handed to them into unionization of white-collar workers, a growth segment; it'd break the dam and that union would benefit immensely. No.

Eventually, they figured out what was what and over the next several months, they sent in some wide-body tough from bank security to threaten me in trumped-up allegations, they eventually fired me without cause (and I took them "to the bank" on it in court), harassed the other key people involved until they made them miserable enough to quit or found grounds to fire them and the rest melted away as they saw the opportunity had been crushed and waited possibly for another opportunity/another day.

I've talked to labor organizers about it since I left the bank. The general response is "We'd never do that. You don't fit under what we aim to do. You're not really the kind of people we organize or want to organize." Well, you're you're unwilling and nobody else is...maybe you might want to look to that as possibly why organized-labor is shrinking.

[think]

50. Thank you for the input.

I wasn't aware of the void in leadership in the white collar sector for unionization. Looking back it does make sense.

As much as I have my opinion I do admit not keeping up on union and labor issues as much as I should.

Maybe things will change as people might start waking up to the need for Americans to earn a living and just wage.

[Locrian]

48. work on the message - exactly

It's easy to wage a propaganda war. Most workers have direct experience that can be exploited: everybody can point a finger at the occasional lazy lout, knows stories of unions in the 70's / 80's. So it's easy to broad brush and people buy it.

What they DON'T have experience with is what you're talking about: union busting in the old days where they killed people, child labor, abuses etc. Well, that is they don't direct experience until it's too late....

It's all about power: why people don't realize that you have an advantage to not just be a 'lone cowboy' is the reason they can keep us separate and a low (power) threat.

[Doctor_J]

79. Just how are they going to "improve their message" when Big Business own ALL of the media

your post sounds reasonable (at least the first bit) but is in fact nonsense.

[think]

83. I did mention social media. And yes it's very tough when the M$M controls the knobs

minds, hearts, and dollars. One might say even impossible.

And one might say never say never.

Improving the message through social media like Twitter & FB is possible and the tools are out there. It's not easy to do but it does costs less and if well thought out can have amazing results.

Omaha Steve posted an excellent example of this type of thinking. It is not focused on Twitter or FB but it is utilizing tools for people to support America and unions via those platforms:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3139571

Part of the Democrats and Obama's success are thanks in part to great messaging and interaction with net savvy voters.

And I am just an arm chair quarterback so my apologies if there was any offense. I only put it out there as encouragement.

But I realize it takes a network of people to make social media marketing work so I will try to do my part and promote unions through social media from time to time.

[Sgent]

42. I can't speak for everywhere

but most people in my area have the following perceptions about unions. Often they are incorrect, but not always, and especially in the past. This is based on an area with relatively few unions and their work with other unions.

1) Union wages are based on showing up, not effort or competence.
2) Related to 1 -- workers are paid based on length of service rather than value
3) Its impossible to fire a union worker
4) Union workers don't communicate with management, and aren't flexible in duties or otherwise -- thus costing the company money and therefore jobs.
5) Layoffs are based on length of service instead of quality of current service
6) Union involvement with organized labor and corrupt officials

I don't agree with any of these in the current work environment -- but much of this was happening in the 70's and early 80's. It soured a lot of people on unions going forward, especially in the south. As to number 4, you may disagree, but many people blame the baker's union solely for the Hostess bankruptcy -- which reinforces their preconceived notions.

[Niceguy1]

52. where

I work 1-5 is true and included it our contract...as to #3, I have never seen a person fired due to incompetence. It would be Nice, though..

[MillennialDem]

44. Propaganda, jealousy, and/or lack of information

Propaganda: The right wing / corporate noise machine is non stop with union workers are lazy, they cost you money, unions aren't needed any more ("there are laws to protect workers now&quot , and so on. It sickens me when I hear ordinary people repeat this garbage.

Jealousy: This usually comes from people complaining about teacher pay. They will often let it slip that they work 12 months a year and earn less than a teacher who doesn't work in summer. Well then you should have been a teacher huh? Guess you couldn't hack it.

Lack of information: Union workers so disengaged they think the union does nothing for them and then complain about their dues being wasted. My mother worked in a hospital for over 40 years and I asked her if she was part of the union there and she said "yeah but I didn't want to be" (must have been a fair share agreement). I'm sure she would have figured out in a hurry those union dues would have been better than a huge pay or benefit cut...

[markiv]

45. same reason people fear the bogyman

because they are told to fear something that for all practical purposes, doesnt exist

[markiv]

46. Reagan was Screen Actor's Guild president (a Union), and a Democrat

but general electric showed him the other side of the bread could be buttered better for him

anyone who thinks he's the last democrat they got to to sell out is kidding themselves

maybe you didnt notice all those free trade deals, and h-1b visas clinton signed into law, or the hundred million dollars the clintons have now

it wouldnt be fair to say the clintons copied reagan, they perfected it

[markiv]

49. 'be a good worker' -> that's what tech workers did

- bring heavy self paid training to the table

- make a fortune for the company

- make relatively modest salary (when factoring the heavy unpaid overtime, the pay per hour not that high)

- no unions

- super flexible

- heavy unpaid overtime

and the reward?

training their H-1b indentured servent replacement before being fired

[Chan790]

54. Same thing the VFX people in Hollywood are going through now.

It's really a shame and a problem. Thankfully the VFX people after the Life of Pi debacle started to get together and discuss organizing and it seems to have made a difference. (I'm not one. I just support them and am on their mailing-lists and Facebook sites.)

[abelenkpe]

55. In my industry

people are resentful of the union because they have done nothing to counter subsidies offered by foreign countries that have lead to massive offshoring of jobs. Also our benefits have been steadily reduced in negotiations over the past 15 years. Younger workers don't want to join because they think they will lose their job, older workers are bitter because they have lost their job. We really need to form a new union, but there is too much fear and everyone is scattered across the world chasing their job to whatever location is offering the most subsidies.

That said I think we need more unions, stronger unions, global unions.

[frazzled]

56. I think mostly because so few people belong to one today ...

and because they themselves have so few protections in their jobs: no job security, no defined-benefit pensions (except what they manage to contribute to their own IRAs, which could evaporate in a bad economic climate when they retire), no hour limits or overtime (my daughter-in-law was putting in 70 and 80 hour weeks at her job, in the office, for a flat salary, no overtime), etc. And this includes not just low-wage workers at fast food restaurants but often professionals, non-profit workers, salespeople, etc.

So people (a) don't understand these hard-won benefits and (b) are jealous of them.

I think unions (both the few private ones left and the public ones) need to understand this aspect of the condition of the majority of American workers in order to better communicate. They need to advocate as much for the wider public's lack of job protections as for their own if they want to gain the public acceptance. They need to be communicating that they are setting the example and working for the betterment of all labor, not just their own interests. Sometimes today it feels no longer like a "movement" but like self-protection. And that's not going to win as many hearts and minds.

A pension, for instance, is something that the vast majority of Americans can only dream of ... a relic of the past that evaporated for most workers decades and decades ago. Unions have to do more to educate the public.

[leftstreet]

64. People hate unions - until they join one

They need to advocate as much for the wider public's lack of job protections as for their own if they want to gain the public acceptance. They need to be communicating that they are setting the example and working for the betterment of all labor, not just their own interests.

Nicely stated

[Cirque du So-What]

67. Personally, I drive a couple Chevys

although I take exception to your 'purity' criteria that the vehicle is 'made' with union or non-union labor. What about the myriad of components going into each of those vehicles? In a world where Hondas are assembled in Ohio and Buicks are assembled in Germany, it's a sucker's bet that 100% of the components in any 'union-made' vehicle come from union vendors.

Also, I'd be interested in seeing some stats on how many liberals, progressives & Democrats go out of their way to purchase 'non-union-made' vehicles, as that's an act I would more likely attribute to union-hating conservatroids. Besides, non-union automakers on American shores have provided an impetus for the Big Three to make improvements in quality, reliability, and gas mileage that simply didn't exist back in the day when imports represented a small slice of the pie. When it became apparent that these automakers were producing vehicles that kicked ass in terms of quality, reliability, and gas mileage, it forced the Big Three to take notice. I freely admit to having owned Toyotas in the past, but after Detroit automakers got their act together and began producing vehicles that approached the quality of foreign manufacturers, I switched back to domestic. I'll be damned if I'm going to purchase a vehicle that's lower-quality and reward bad management - and that's where I squarely place the blame for their loss of market share when people got tired of their sub-par products.

[uppityperson]

68. Uh huh. Bye. Thanks MIRT

[dionysus]

58. the right has done a good job at falsely portraying union workers as lazy.

you could also find a rare corrupt union official out there somewhere who makes it look bad for everyone, who knows?

there's also a jealousy factor involved I think as well

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

59. They are bombarded with anti-union propagada from the M$M n/t

[Starry Messenger]

65. You posted anti-strike editorial on your BART story in LBN.

Now imagine a million of you.

That's why unionism in the US is not supported.

In 2009, it was revealed that BART management was regularly racking up high ticket meal and travel expenses. Do we hear a peep about that now that the "grreeedddy workerssss" are asking for higher wages? Why do people get disgruntled about paid health benefits and not $100 steaks?

Why don't more people complain about the owners getting a cush ride?

[telclaven]

66. From personal experience

When I was one step away from living on the street, I got a job in a vehicle parts distribution center. I was working as a temp worker, filling in for surge (for what I never found out). It was a closed union shop, with Teamsters as the union. Was told I could work 30 days, then had to join the union and union dues were going to be $760 the first month (initiation dues plus monthly dues). NO WAY I could pay that. Very unpleasant experience, all around bad taste in my mouth. Was fired after 30 days. Back to panic about how to feed and shelter myself and dog.

Working doing airframe riveting work. Wasn't forced to join union, just 'encouraged'. Work hard, try to get job done. Pulled aside by the union shift lead and told I had to slow down as I was making other union men look bad. Working slow ment carrying over the job into overtime. Or, as they put it, "stop taking food out of union babies mouths." Wow. Um, okay. Don't feel safe working here any more.

So those were my two union stories. Anecdotal data is anecdotal, I know. But these are the things that made me question the utility of unions and what they actually did for ME, the guy trying to get by.

[Enthusiast]

76. Example of contrived anti-labor propaganda.

[Doctor_J]

82. Yeah I think he pulled that off of FoxNation or Glenn Beck

sounds a lot like Reagan's El Dorado-driving welfare queen. The stories are pretty rote.

[telclaven]

86. Contrived?

Is that the same as I'm lying?

[Enthusiast]

87. Here's the deal, one that you don't seem to recognize.

After 30 years of constant universal media assaults on organized labor the rest of us understand that "they" don't need any assistance. This fundamental fact appears to have escaped your notice............somehow.

Labor is never shown in a positive light. It is always the lazy union worker. It is an unmistakable coordinated propaganda effort. Most of us recognize this. Why a "Democrat" would feel the need to carry GOP/Limbaugh water escapes me.

"You should be thankful you have a job."

"Unions have outlived their usefulness."

Where this nation is at right now is a result of a billion dollar effort to spread this meme that you are assisting whether you are aware of it or not.

[telclaven]

91. Don't believe I said either of those quotes

Pretty sure, but let me check anyway.

Nope.

Here's the deal. The question was why Americans are distrustful of unions. I replied with my own, personal, experiences. Not the be all end all of data.

Since moving into the professional world (big data analysis), I've been very mindful of the need for white-collar unionization. The shit pulled on us, because we're 'exempted' employees, is maddening. I said before, I wish my wife was part of a union when she was a nurse. She decided to become a full-time caregiver to our subadult units of affection instead.

As to all the rest, I'm thinking we should try the German model of labor/management relations. That seems to me the gold standard for what unions should be. Effective as hell too, from what it looks like in Europe from here.

[Enthusiast]

94. And I knew you would say that about the quotes.

But those are just the most frequently repeated ones.

[NoGOPZone]

92. It's a word

my union teacher taught it to me in middle school.

[librechik]

81. you sound like someone whose worst expectations were fulfilled

IOW, you are a victim and a spreader of propaganda, through your "personal anecdotes."

[telclaven]

85. M'kay, whatever

Like I said, personal experience. Of null value when examining a larger data set.

On the flip side, I encouraged my wife to start a union effort at the hospital she worked at. The work environment there was horrid and, in my humble opinion, dangerous. Some nurses tried to start a union and were promptly fired. My wife just said F-this and quit. I still think they need a nursing union though.

[Initech]

69. Man if these morons think the workers are striking because they have a "good job with good pay"...

They are sadly deluded. Forty years of right wing hate radio and Heritage Foundation talking points have warped many a mind.

[Enthusiast]

70. They have been subjected to the most massive propaganda campaign in all of history.

I started to notice it mostly among younger workers in the 1990s. They would spew the most absurd anti-labor diatribes. The words were similar to those of Limbaugh.

[Recursion]

72. Two reasons: corruption/nepotism, and the sense that "Unions got theirs and aren't helping me"

Both are unfair to an extent, but both are strong and unions need to do more to counter them.

[WinkyDink]

73. Greed and stupidity would be my first thoughts.

[librechik]

80. Highly successful propaganda programs, if not psyops. n/t

[DrewFlorida]

84. Unions have done a great job of raising working standards and wages for Americans, however...

They have also engendered excessive power at times making it almost impossible to fire the worst of the worst employees. Also they have created a caste system when it comes to getting a union job, union jobs are not given out equally, nor on the basis of merit, but in too many cases they are given out based on who you know or are related to. There are many problems with unions and the way they operate which have caused a lot of negative perceptions. Much of the general public does not understand the history of how unions came about or the capitalist system's systematic use of leverage to keep workers under paid and over worked, nor do they understand how unions have raised safety standards, rather they think of the short term and how they may have been denied that good paying union job because they didn't know the right people.

[roody]

88. Colonized minds

[justanaverageguy]

90. I can't speak for the rest of the country but.....

I can tell you why I don't particularly care for them. I owned a construction related business that became signatory to the union. It was the worst business experience of my life. They could have absolutely cared less about the success of my company and my financial well being, but at the same time expected me to make the happiness and well being of their guys my top priority. The relationship was a total one way street. Suddenly my days went from being spent to growing my business and doing a good job for my customers to having constant battles with the union over the most mundane details of the contract because the local BA and his immediate superiors didn't understand or ever read their own agreement. Furthermore, the labor they sent to me was the bottom of the proverbial barrel and wasn't worth half of what it was costing me. I wouldn't hire these guys to wash my car. However, when you sign up with this particular union you get what they send you. I wasn't even allowed to interview the guys before they came to work for me. If they could look at the work they did for me and be proud, then they are truly pathetic. They were god awful and did the crappiest work ever.

I have since sold my interest in that company (the company recently went out of business) and have opened another in the same industry. I will NEVER EVER sign with a union again. If somehow forced to do so I'll close the doors first.

[HeroInAHalfShell]

93. because they have had bad experiences with unions??

[Marrah_G]

95. Propaganda

The same type of propaganda that gets them to vote against their owns interests time and again.