The G.O.P. Plan to Destroy Labor Unions

[louis c]

It's called the "Right to Work Law"

Like so many of their plans, the title defies the meaning. Just as "The Clean Air Act", "The No Child Left Behind Act", "The Healthy Forest Act", "The Patriot Act", "Operation Iraqi Freedom", and on and on, this is another of their Orwellian descriptions, only it was among their first.

In states where the Republicans gained control of the state legislatures and the Governor's office, one by one they passed a "Right to Work Law". It sounds innocent enough, who shouldn't have the right to work? That's step one.

How this sinister law works is as follows. The law, when enacted in a state, such as it is in Florida, North and South Carolina, and many other Southern and Western states, outlaws a "Closed Union Shop"

I am a Union President and Business Agent, and I negotiate in a very pro-Union state (Massachusetts). Article II section 1. of our Collective Bargaining Agreement is standard in a Union contract."The Employer agrees that ...employees become and remain members of the Union as a condition of employment. The employer also agrees to terminate any Union employee who has failed to pay dues....Provided that such action is in accordance with applicable law."

That's a closed shop. Now, the anti-Union G.O.P says this is unfair, why should someone who is otherwise a good employee be fired because they refuse to join a Union? Sounds plausible. Until you see it in action.

In these right to work states, a law was passed outlawing that provision that I have just stated. Therefore folks can work without joining the Union at their facility.

Next, they strengthen the Labor laws that require all Unions to provide a "Duty of Fair Representation (DFR)". What this does is provide non-Union employees the same rights in the work place as Union employees.

They receive the same pay and benefits that a Union worker does, and only has to pay a token "negotiating fee" during the actual bargaining of the contract. In most cases, the non-Union Employee pays about $100 every three years, while the Union employee pays dues of $1000 for the same period.

Also, under DFR, the non-Union employees are provided with seniority rights, and representation rights, the same as Union employees. If a Union Representative fails to provide equal service to all employees under contract, he or she can be prosecuted under federal and state law.

The more services the Union is forced to provide non-dues paying employees, the more that the dues paying members must pay.

Pretty soon, human nature being what it is, the Union members feel like fools, "why should I pay for something that others get for nothing?" So starts the downward spiral.

Fewer members, greater expenses until finally the Union cannot be sustained, and collapses.

Then, no one is represented. Seniority is abolished. Hard fought rights in the work place no longer exist, and the G.O.P. and their Corporate allies win.

It is a story that has been repeated in many states. Someday, if they can get a stronger majority in congress, and a President who hates Unions (Bush), they can make this a Federal law, and we'll have no more Organized Labor in this country.

Please don't think it can't happen here, because it can.

[liberalmike27]

1. The truth is

I hate right to work laws too. But these laws are only a poke in the arm, to globalizations nuclear capabilities. Globalization is the true tool for the destruction of all labor rights in our country.

Simply put, no matter how good unions are, if they are willing to snatch up a company, and move it to micronesia, China, or some country in Africa, then they are pointless.

If we don't stem the flow, we are going to have a long century. It's bleeding America.

[louis c]

6. Outsourcing

is a way that they can destroy manufacturing jobs.

In my position, I also serve in an AFL-CIO coalition that fights this. It is the reason I supported Gephardt in the Primaries.

The right to work laws, if made at a national level, will destroy every Union.

I agree, this is a multi-front war, and our membership still doesn't get it.

To me, Union Employees are like Jews in Nazi Germany. We keep believing the worst can't happen, even though the powers to be show that they are out to destroy us.

Soon, it will be too late to act.

[ikojo]

38. Unions have helped to destroy themselves in several ways

First, in the 1950s and 60s they were pretty racist and avoided organizing blacks and they also avoided organizing the pink collar workforce. Had they focused on organizing blacks and women back then, unions would still be a force to be reckoned with. Instead they continued to focus primarily on the manufacturing sector which at the time was composed of white males.

Also, a hundred years or so ago there was a union (and it still exists but is VERY small in number) called the Industrial Workers of the World. They believed then and believe now that EVERY job should be a UNION job regardless of what is being done. They also believe in the concept of ONE BIG UNION AROUND THE WORLD. The AFL and the CIO worked with the government to suppress the IWW and many of its organizers were jailed and/or deported. Samuel Gompers made a deal with the government that he would seek only higher wages and not advocate against capitalism. Had the IWW become the dominant union, I think the world would be a different place today as far as worker's rights are concerned.

Another thing unions tend to do very poorly is to educate their members on WHY unions exist and the need for unions. Lord knows Americans don't receive ANY type of labor education in school! Oh but we learn about John D Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie!

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1132/is_6_51/ai_57815251

While claiming to speak for all workers, the AFL instead consciously chose to organize only the skilled, white, male minority of the working class. And its leaders chose to attack any person or organization that it saw as a threat to this minority and to engage in any tactics that might improve its material circumstances. The demands of black workers, women, and immigrants threatened Gompers' domain, so he opposed them, often with a racism that has to be read to be believed.

[wakfs]

2. Question

Why don't these other employees want to join the union?

[louis c]

5. Why pay for something you get for nothing

In addition, standard contract language gives the right to hire strictly to the employer.

Nothing prevents him from hiring people he knows don't want to join the Union.

[oneighty]

3. What if

unions are outlawed and a new and greater union (joining together) of working men and women calling for and participating in a new nation wide labor movement complete with guns and bullets.

It can happen. It will be called a revolution.

I expect it will happen one day.

180

[louis c]

25. I'd rather try to out-vote them

than out fight them.

They have some awesome fire power, you know. (sarcasm intended)

[givemebackmycountry]

4. You can thank that Republican Icon for this...

God Bless Ronald Reagan, who showed us the way.
A great President and a wonderful communicator.
Thank GOD for Ronald Reagan.

A Union man through and through.

Bastards - It's only a matter of time before we are all like the Joad family. Owing money to the company store for food and essentials.

Wages?

What's that?

[Pallas180]

7. they have moved on so many fronts at once, that the public

doesn't know what they are doing.

Yup, Ronald Reagan showed his appreciation of unions with mass firing
of thousands of air controllers..

That was the showboating start - signal to the companies.

And while unions used to advertise BUY American...you hardly see that,
as a matter of fact you just plain don't. And the "world order" has
been successful. Kill the unions, buy foreign, outsource jobs.

Didn't take them long did it?

[napi21]

8. May I please ask a question without getting "shot" through my monitor?

I've never worked in a union shop, but my husband, for quite a few years. Unions provide a very good service, but my husband and I have both seen some of the drawbacks too. On one job, the workers were told to "slow down", you're making the rest of us look bad, and the company is going to find out they don't need all of us to get the job done. Hubby worked the 3/11 shift. He went to work at 3, worked till 4:30, went to lunch for an hour, and then HID, SLEPT, or just disappeared for 2 hours or so before going back to work. Lest you think this was only one company, it wasn't. The same think occurred at 3 different companies over a period of 8 years. This was the steel Ind. in Pgh. When those companies closed and moved, he got a job in a different field alltogether. It was part of retail, but still a union shop. There you had a similar situation, but instead of sleeping, some workers would just slack off or disappear for hours at a time, to make sure everybody seemed to be needed.

I worked in 2 right to work states, and it's very wrong that an employer can fire somebody because they just don't like the color of your shirt today, or whatever reason suits them at the time, but there really has to be a meeting of the minds here.

It is unfair to businesses for employees to take unfair advantage of them, but it is also wrong for the employers to do the same.

Do you, as a union leader, have a solution?

[justjones]

9. Can someone explain to me how being unionized....

has anything to do with workers being told to "slow down"? I can see that happening in any job, unionized or not.

Is the idea that the "security" provided by the union makes it more likely that an employee will take advantage and dupe the system? If so, how is that different than the employer taking advantage of employees who are not unionized?

I think there is a meeting of the minds already in place, which is the constant tension between the unionized employee and the employer. The unionized employee has a means of recourse if an employer treats them unfairly and the employer has a means of recourse against a rogue employee...the employer can fire the employee, they just need good documentation to back it up.

[napi21]

10. As I understand it, the workers are told to slow down so that

it appears to take more employees to get the task done. More employees, thus more jobs.

At one point, at least with the steel workers union in Pgh" the unions became so powerful, the employer didn't have any means of recourse against a rogue employee. About the only thing someone could get fired for was stealing. I remember one day, my husband went to work at 3:00, and returned home at 6:00. In a plant that had 1500 workers per shift, ONE guy was an hour late getting to work because of snow. The entire plant walked out for three days because the guy who was late whould have been docked for the hour he wasn't there. It was called solidarity.

It looks like it's time for the unions to resurge. The corps. are abusing employees again, which is why unions started in the first place. There needs to be some rational thinking on both sides this time.

[sangh0]

27. That also happens at non-union shops

so I have no idea why you want to attribute to unions.

[louis c]

15. Your Management is at fault

The Union can only represent the worker up to a point.

There is a grievance procedure. If your hubby was gold bricking, it was up to his management supervisor to document and discipline.

if it was a violation of the contract, he would be suspended for a first offense and eventually fired if his actions didn't improve.

Unions just attempt to have fairness in the work place, not gold bricking.

I have found that in many cases, the manager wants to be a good guy, or is the one who just wants to get along. This can happen in every work environment,Union or not.

Where I work, there is strict supervision, but fair. No one can take extended breaks under normal circumstances, and they must be at their assignments or discipline takes place.

What the Union does is make sure the Boss' sin=in-law is treated in the same manner as a non-connected worker, but malingering is never tolerated by either side.

[jmowreader]

28. In a RTW state, here's how that works

I have eight people working for me. On a good day, we'll have three of them on shift at once. (Our duty day runs from 5am to midnight Monday-Saturday and 6am-9pm Sunday, and everyone gets two days a week off.)

If the customer flow is really low, I either have to make up something for two of them to do, and quick, or I have to send one or two of them home.

Eventually, this will cut into your ability to pay your bills and buy cat food.

[JanMichael]

32. It happens anyway with or without a Union.

A moot point in my very humble opinion.

[louis c]

34. Actually,

The hours will be guaranteed by seniority in a Union shop, up to 40.

If work flow is reduced, the bottom guy loses more than a couple of days, he could lose it all.

This is done to protect the employees from being cut back to part-time help, and lose more than just hours.

My philosophy at my place is this, "I don't want management taking six good jobs, and making ten shitty ones out of them."

Kind of opposite to Bush's overall economic policy.

[EDT]

11. Observation as a non-Union person in a Mass. Union filled company-

louis c- I will mention this here since I don't feel as comfortable asking this in my company.

In my own company, where there is a constant effort to improve process and fix problems, there is a HUGE wall between Union and non-Union employees.

When we have problems specifically related to a Union portion of a project (something as simple as moving crates from inside a building
to a loading dock) there is an atmosphere of pure fear, as if we are going against a huge, mafia like organization, if we complain. This reaches the point where
in a company wide meeting one non-Union employee dared mentioned a Union problem to a high up manager, and the whole auditorium fell silent. Other times non-Union managers just close their eyes, saying there's nothing they can do, and move to the next topic when we mention improvements needed on the Union side to get the job done.

I find this atmosphere of "inability to improve union and non-union cooperation" very frustrating, and wonder what your observations are on the subject, and if you think your company might have a similiar atmosphere in some cases.

Just curious, not looking to start a flame war, but feel uncomforable to ask a high up Union person at my workplace.

Well, back to work...

[SharonAnn]

14. Hmm, my first experience of being a professional in a union shop

was good, very good.

When the company consolidated some operations they moved many of us software types into a "union" building. There were horror stories from everyone and scurrilous rumors swept our operations like wildfire.

Since I was manager of the distribution facility, distributing software products, I knew that my department could be severely handicapped if we couldn't get things packaged and shipped (union jobs).

So, I just drove over to the building, asked to talk to the union representative, introduced myself and asked if he could take time to talk with me for a few minutes. I explained that we were scheduled to move our operations into the building, explained what our operations consisted of, and asked what he would recommend as far as setting up our new procedures for getting product packaged and shipped. He set up a meeting with a couple of his key people with our key people and we worked out a procedure that would get product shipped promptly and that would respect their roles in the process. We acknowledged their roles, asked how to work with them, and had no problems for the five years we were in that building.

Other departments, though, had all kinds of problems because they needlessly antagonized the building staff. Paybacks can be hell.

[louis c]

17. I don't know your specifics

but the closest I can come to an example in our work place is our Security Personal.

I an the Prez and B.A. at Suffolk Downs Race Track. Almost the entire work force is Union except out Security Personal, Management, and Sub-Contractors (Horse trainers, breeders, and the like).

I use the example of Security because they interact with us (mutuel clerks).

Since we sell mutuel tickets to patrons, any mistake that is made can cause a customer complaint which requires security intervention, and possibly management.

Security has been agreed to be independent, since I will never allow a Union worker to assist management is disciplining another member.

However, my predecessors and me have always treated the security folks like one of us. We invite them to our Union Christmas Parties, we treat them with respect, we send condolences if a family member passes on, or if a Security guy or gal becomes sick, we'll chip in to send them a little something.

As a result, every single problem in the work place involving Security and a Union member has been treated with the edge always going to us. Although they do their jobs, we always get the benefit of the doubt, and no one goes out of their way to cause a problem on either side.

I don't know if this helps in your specific circumstance, but that's the closest I can come to an example in our place.

[nancyharris]

12. Right to Work laws flourished

when Unions became politicized beyond the company door. Once Union dues were being spend on national political parties (both Democratic and Republican), workers began to question why their money was being spent outside of their community, especially since there was little to show in return. Instead of funneling the money back to the worker’s community in the form of pensions, child care, strike insurance and benefits, money is shifted to the National Union for political efforts. Some of the workers see this as in their best interest but many do not.

[louis c]

19. Brilliant members

now they pay no dues, and have no Union.

Look into how many jobs in the U.S. carry Health Ins., and check the percentage of those numbers between Union and non-Union.

Very few Union jobs carry no health care, and very few non-union, non-management jobs carry it.

But at least no dues go to political parties that support workers rights. Brilliant, just brilliant.

[gatorboy]

13. Some of you can chastise unions all you want.

But unions helped my parents with affordable health insurance for our family and job security that's rare to find in jobs these days.
Both members of the CWA and neither the lazy types some individuals here seem to enjoy stereotyping.

[Pallas180]

16. I wonder if the outsourced jobs had been unionized if the corps would

have been able to outsource the jobs or force people to train their
replacements?

Would unionized shops have stopped the outsourcing?

[louis c]

18. How these stereotypes ever got started is beyond me

Managers control the pace of work.

Those stereotypes of lazy union workers is a tool of the Repukes, and silly anecdotal evidence is just what the Union busters want.

Kind of like Reagan's welfare queen.

If you want empirical evidence of what happens in a non-union environment, just look at Wal-Mart's most recent class action suits against them. Discrimination, shaving peoples work hours to avoid overtime, reduction in hours, and on and on.

When we feed into the bullshit that some manager let some workers get away with something in a Union environment, and treat it like the rule instead of the exception, we play into the Repuke's hands.

[AmerDem]

20. "starving the beast" is the main idea behind ALL

Repuke ideas set out to help (*cough*) the average American. They want to take this country back literally to the early 1900's.

[louis c]

31. kick

[Misunderestimator]

21. Very well-stated. That is exactly where we are headed.

[louis c]

24. Thank You

I wish more people understood that the middle class in America was created by Labor Unions.

And if the Repukes and their allies can destroy Organized Labor, they will have succeeded in their endeavor to eliminate the middle class, and distribute the wealth in this country in the proportions reminiscent to that of the turn of the last century (1900).

[AnnInLa]

22. don't forget the "Rove Plan"

Unions are HUGE supporters of the Democratic Party. The less unionization you have, the less union members you have in this country over all, the less money is contributed to the Dem Party....one of the ways Rove wants to bring about the demise of the Dems, leaving America essentially a one-party country.

Louisiana is a right-to-work state, which has helped to contribute to a depressed economy here. However, the school employees of the parish in which I teach went out on strike in 1988. The citizens here supported us wholeheartedly, which allowed us to win the right of collectively bargaining our work contract each year. The citizens here are "against" unions, but they supported our local effort. I served on the bargaining team for a few years, and I can tell you, it was an interesting experience, and that collective bargaining saved the job-rights of educational personnel in this parish.

[gulfcoastliberal]

23. Also includes federal jobs...

Repugs want to outsource all functions that used to be handled by federal employees, since federal employees tend to vote dem. Again, empirical evidence can be sited showing that the goods/services being outsourced typically cost more and have lower quality than being gov't-originated. I wonder, when will child-labor laws come under debate?

[JHB]

29. When will child-labor laws come under debate? Too Late!

It's already started, following the same pattern as every other assault: highlight a few cases where the application of the law is open to debate (in this case, usually with family businesses), and argue for correcting this "injustice" (while any proposed legislation removed restrictions far more broadly than needed to "fix" the obstensible cause of the change), distract people with a debate over "teaching values" and/or "government interference", get your foot in the door, and from then on just keep pushing it open.

[doc03]

26. Read these posts and you can see why many union people

vote Republican today. The Democratic party used to support unions, many feel the Democratic party has betrayed the union worker. The Democratic party has taken the union vote for granted. Look at WV, it used to be a solid Democratic state now since the Democratic party has went the globalist route it will probably become part of the Republican south. Some here criticized the steelworkers for supporting * in Wheeling,WV. Learn the facts and you will see why. The unions created the middle class in this country. If you are anti-union there is plenty of room at the RNC.

[louis c]

30. Makes sense

rational reasoning. Go from bad to worse.

Pretty sound logic, no wonder we're in the spot we're in.

[Disturbed]

36. Multi--Corps

Many Corps no longer consider themselves American. They are Intl. Most don't pay taxes. They don't want American residents (citizens) as workers because non-residents will work for less money and no benefits. It's good for the upper echelon of the Corps and their stockholders. Outsourcing and re-location of mfg. is encouraged by both Repubs. and Dems. The US Middle Class will become the Working Poor sans Union Representation, Health Care and soon Social Security. It's all planned by the Neo Fascists and the Corps.

This is one of the top issues that is being sidetracked by the Neo Fascists with wedge issues, such Gay Marriage, Abortion, Gun Control and Swift Boat Garbage. The Neo Fascists are Hell bent on turning the USA into a 3rd World Neo Fascist Police State.

[Jose Diablo]

39. I wouldn't say the Democratic party has betrayed the Unions

Rather, I would say the DLC betrayed the Unions. They are the ones that influenced the Democratic party to accept republican values because, "we need the moderate vote" and of course the corporate money.

The DLC are the ones that sold out the Unions, and the Democratic party ideals of the "party of the people".

But something else is troubling. Why didn't the Democrats handle Reagan when it became known what was done to Carter. Why didn't the Unions and Democrats step-up and object when the Reagan busted the Air Controllers Union. Where were the Democrats when the Unions were forced to give-up benefits as the corporations shifted money from one to another then cried poor and said, "we need better co-operation from union people to help America become more competitive". Who's money was used to build the factories in China, India, Southeast Asia, Central and South America? Was it the shareholders or was it tax benefits supported with workers taxes or even money the corporations extracted from workers as they cried poor and the workers agreed to help the poor corporations.

For who's benefit are corporations allowed, yes allowed, to form. The shareholders only or did the founders also think the general benefit of all was the reason to allow the creation of artificial entities we call corporations. Corporations do Not have an inherit right to anything. They only have the rights granted by the people.

Want to stop Union busting? Bust the corporations and then make it stick as was done to FDR. FDR did not Give the people anything, he was forced to do so because if he hadn't, there would have been a full blown peoples revolt in America. Yes indeed, in 1930 the people were very very pissed-off. The enemies of the people can only do, what the people allow them to do.

If the people are pissed-off enough, you can be sure the people will get what they demand. Nothing is a gift, never was, never will be. If you think Democrat politicians will out of the goodness of their hearts give anything, guess again. It is the demands of the people the politicians respond. Not pretty please with sugar on it.

As for workers that scab or otherwise undermine the efforts of all other workers, the unions had/have ways of dealing with this also. But of course we are much 'nicer' people these days. The days of being 'nice' have ended. IMO.

Like to eat? Like to have a living thats not just above subsistence? Then better learn to support unions. There is no other way.

[louis c]

40. My sentiments exactly

[JanMichael]

33. Remember: Labor is a Special interest while Corporations aren't!

War is Good.

Healthcare for All is Bad.

Or that a man who is a child of Priviledge, a President, a Senator, and filthy Rich, is a "Average" guy.

All a part of the Rightwing mindwashing of the bulk of our population.

[louis c]

35. My reply is this

They (the Repugs and the corporations) have all the money. We (the Labor Unions and little guys) have all the votes.

Therefore, they have to spend all their money to convince us to vote against our own best interests.

Here's a simple rule of thumb. Wal-Mart is one of the biggest single contributors to political campaigns. They donate 85% of their money to Republicans.

The AFL-CIO is one of the biggest contributors to political campaigns, and they contribute 85% of their money to Democrats.

If the side that wins, repays their contributors with access and favorable legislation that leaves you with a simple choice.

Would you rather have a job like they have at Wal-Mart, or one that is sanctioned by a Union that is affiliated with the AFL-CIO?

[Disturbed]

37. 'Right to Work' States Are Really Restricted Rights States

'Right to Work' States Are Really Restricted Rights States

It's not a right to a job. Right to work” has nothing to do with a right to a job or employment. The deceptively named “right to work” laws ban workers-who by a majority vote decided to form a union in their workplace-and employers from negotiating union security clauses. By law, unions must represent all workers-members and nonmembers-in contract negotiations and other workplace issues. A union security clause does not force workers to join a union but simply means they must pay a fair share for the economic benefits they receive because of union representation-such as health insurance, pensions and wages that are on average better than those for nonunion workers.

A “right to work” law would allow nonmember workers to get all the benefits of union membership and pay nothing, while forcing unions and their members to foot the bill for those not willing to pay their share. The result is weaker unions with inadequate re­sources to represent members.

In the 28 non-“right to work" states, federal law protects those workers who do not want to join the union. Workers in those states are required to pay only a fair share to cover the costs of their union representation, but not the cost of a union's political, legislative, social or charitable activities. Conclusion
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why anti-worker business groups love "work for less" and that's because it means lower wages and ineffective or nonexistent state labor laws to protect working Americans. But keep in mind that when wages fall, state income and sales tax revenues fall. And that means that a state will have far less funding available to finance education, transportation, and other programs that are vital to attracting new industries and businesses.

[louis c]

41. Isn't that what I wrote in the original thread?

[Disturbed]

42. Yes.

I wanted to repeat it. ;)

Workers were never given a freakin' thing. They bled and died for every one of the benefits that the Capitalists were desperately trying to avoid that workers deserved. When organized crime got into the mix things deteriorated and they along with the Capitalists and the Repubs and Dems diluted much of the progress that was hard fought by workers.

The Repubs and Dems are not the friends of workers. They aid and abet the Capistalists in making workers serfs.

[louis c]

43. Amen