THE NEW York Times recently reported that the earnings gap is now the widest since 1928, with the richest 1 percent of Americans having captured most of the economy's 2005 growth, and the bottom 90 percent getting nothing. Between 1979 and 2005, according to MIT professor Thomas Kochan, productivity of American manufacturing rose by about 70 percent, but the real wages of production workers remained flat.
This economic pummeling of ordinary Americans has many causes, including deregulation of industries that once paid decent wages, the weakening of tacit social compacts in which bosses were ashamed to pay themselves hundreds of times the earnings of workers, the erosion of the minimum wage, and increased off shoring. But one of the big reasons is industry's relentless assault on unions, an attack abetted or tolerated by most US administrations for three decades. Unions not only raise wages for members; they work for a fairer wage structure generally, both in their spillover influence on wider patterns of pay and in their political work for a fairer brand of capitalism.
Supposedly, the "new economy" doesn't lend itself to unions, and most workers no longer want them. But according to the government's Bureau of Labor Statistics, surveys show that 53 percent of US workers would join a union if they could. And recent union growth is mostly in service-sector work -- the essence of the new economy.
In truth, academic studies going back to the work of Richard Freeman and James Medoff document the princip al reason unions have declined, from more than 30 percent after World War II to fewer than 8 percent of private sector workers today. It is mainly the result of business making clear that workers who support union drives risk losing their jobs.
Wal-Mart and other anti union companies take a more direct approach. In the rare case when local employees manage to organize a union, Wal-Mart simply closes the store. Fully 49 percent of employers threaten to move or close the worksite during the course of a union organizing campaign, according to a study by Chirag Mehta and Nik Theodore of the University of Illinois.
Punishing workers who opt for unions is illegal under the 1935 Wagner Act. But the federal government has stopped meaningfully enforcing the Wagner Act's guarantee that employees may form unions free from harassment or retaliation. Generally, fired workers who do win reinstatement orders have to wait for years, and punishments against offending companies are minor slaps on the wrist.
Now the labor movement and its allies in Congress are making an all-out push to put some teeth back in the Wagner Act, with legislation called the Employee Free Choice Act. The main provision would allow a union to be certified once a majority of workers at the factory or office or store signed union cards. The bill also increases penalties for harassing pro-union workers, and makes it harder for employers to stall union recognition or contract negotiations.
Under current rules, a two-stage process requires a majority first to sign cards, followed by a protracted period leading up to an election. It's during this interim phase that employers threaten rank and file workers, and fire their leaders -- sending a powerful signal to other workers not to get cozy with unions.
The bill passed the House March 1 with the support of 243 members, including 13 Republicans. The Senate took it up this week. Republicans have threatened a filibuster, President Bush would veto it if the measure passed, and the US business elite is treating the prospect of a resurgent labor movement as the end of civilization.
Interestingly, as the European Union was celebrating its 50th birthday this past week, the spotlight was on Germany, whose dynamic economy is enjoying an impressive recovery, with plummeting unemployment. The German Federal Republic incurred massive costs when it absorbed the former communist East Germany. Many blamed its slump on strong unions and high wages. But it turns out that this same social model produces the world's most productive workforce. Germany enjoys a large trade surplus despite an expensive currency, and much greater income equality.
Unions as partners can be good, not just for worker pay, but for the economy. In our country, unions have never been able to make that case by gentle persuasion. They make it in the old-fashioned way, organizing one worker and one legislator at a time.
Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect and a senior fellow at Demos. His column appears regularly in the Globe.
© 2007 The Boston Globe
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
10 Comments so far
Show AllIt will help someday (2008) to finally get rid of Bush et al and their grip on governmental agencies. The labor department,for instance, helps fight unions. The labor consultants used by corporations to help them defeat union organizers or to drive out existing unions also provide "education" to judges to help them become anti-union, even justices of the Supreme Court at (I once read) luxury resorts. The deck is at the moment stacked against labor and all those in the middle and lower classes.
YES!! I totally agree with Jim that where there is capitalism there will always be a need for the counter veiling force of organized labor.
One thing I would add is that operational "bosses" need to be included in that organized labor movement. They are being abused by management, just in another way than hourly worker. Middle management is expected to implement and enforce the abuses of the CEO's in every corporation I can think of. If they refuse or object to being a part of the tyranny of the workers, they are forced out one way or another. I have been one of those salaried "bosses" for over thirty years. I have quite more than one job because of upper management's unprincipled treatment of workers.
If you really want to give organized labor any clout, the "enforcers" (middle management) that believe in the inherent rights of workers need to be included in the fight. They need representation too.
testing 1 2 3
organize organize organize. kids, ditch the law school or grad school, and come join the labor movement. your country needs you.
Unions are a necessity for workers as we have no representation in this system. Our only power is our collectivity. The challenge is that in this bosses paradise, corporations make the laws and they have been increasingly stacked against our ability to organize. I'm gald to see labor fighting back with efforts like "employee free choice."
as long as there is organized capital (AKA- corporations) there will be a need for organized labor. Without a countervailing power, the power of corporations will inevitably run amok. (JK Galbraith 1983. The Anatomy of Power). That's why the coming revitalization of unions is viewed as the end of civilization by the Chambers of Commerce. They were saying exactly the same thing when the Wagner Act was passed in the first place. (YEa that's it. The only thing that conservatives conserve are their lame ass "arguments"!)
There are all sorts of interesting developments. The United Steel Workers are signing up non-steelworker members to multiply their political and organizational force. Stern at the SEIU is doing all sorts of innovative work. All sorts of reasons to be hopeful.
Blessthebeasts, I apologize. You had it right. It's pennerblu I should have addressed in my post. The name is highlighted in blue, and I didn't pay attention, I assmed it was just a link. The public was blaming the unions even before Reagan came in office, which made it easier to attack unions.
15 years ago? Excuse me, blessthebeasts, I don't know how old you are, but try 30 years ago. Even before Reagan became President (air controllers, anyone?), union popularity was declining, being blamed for economic woes. And some of it was their own fault. Too much money and corruption at the top. Well, that's history. Lean times for 3 decades have changed a lot of things. But we do need a balance, and it isn't balanced at all. Don't think I'm antiunion, I'm not. I've never crossed a picket line. But this country, with it's strongly capitalistic model, seems to live in extremes. We swing to excess in one direction, and then head in the opposite direction until we hit the other wall. Isn't there a more sane way to do things?
Corporate America is pushing employees around and with the loss of union strength and solidarity, most of management are getting away with proceedures they would not have gotten away with 15yrs ago. The loss of jobs and work in this country has given corporations control of the cards. We need labor unions to help us cut the deck.
The demise of unions since the Reagan administration coincides with the decline of the middle and working classes. Hopefully, people are starting to realize that we need a voice to represent our interests. The bosses certainly don't give a shit.