The letter to the editor printed Wednesday, June 6 titled “Strong Unions mean strong middle class” is just plain wrong.
Strong unions do not mean a strong middle class. Unions were formed at a time when workers had very little voice in working conditions of their place of employment. Examples of that were the packing-house workers, railway workers and coal miners. Bargaining collectively, including withholding labor (strikes) and sit-ins such as the famous General Motors episode, improved working conditions immensely. Those common-sense changes have now become ingrained in both the legal code and our national experience.
But it was the actions of individuals acting together, not unions as such, which brought about the changes. In the early 1900s there were a half-dozen or more rail unions formed by differing groups of workers such as the section gangs, firemen, engineers, brakemen, telegraphers, etc. Together they established the first Federal pension system via the national railway act. Over the course of time, changes in technology outran the quickly irrelevant railway work rules, such as the 100 mile crew change limit, forced on the railroads by incompetent union leadership. Unions having become useless to the members were merged or abandoned.
Likewise, the United Packing House Workers, of which I became a member in 1957, were a tool for the workers to improve working conditions in what had been a vile workplace. When the interests of the union leaders overshadowed the members, this union also withered and was merged into an unrecognizable form today. The most notorious of the deterioration of union leadership was probably in the central states teamsters. The criminal corruption and looting of the workers pension fund was of a scale theretofore unimaginable.
So the fact of the matter is that unions are formed and work best when they provide a voice for the members, not just for the sake of having a union and not for the benefit of the “leaders”.
It is certainly worth noting that over half of all U.S. union members are government employees. The leaders of these employee unions are responsible in large measure for the tremendous taxpayer burden to support some truly outrageous benefits for those same leaders.
I am against the excessive power that these government employee union leaders represent and I am proud to know that I join a long line of others, including George Meany and Franklin Delano Roosevelt in so doing.
Meet and Confer, yes. Dictate, no.
Jack A. Burris
Gilbert
chuckles3 posted at 9:19 am on Wed, Jun 13, 2012.
Yes Sir.
Cerulean posted at 12:21 pm on Wed, Jun 13, 2012.
Actually, it was women who were the first to form unions. Today, women are still undervalued, in that our average pay is 77 cents to the dollar that male employees are paid. Jack would have you believe that “common-sense changes have now become ingrained in both the legal code and our national experience.” Really? I feel like your common-sense %#*&$s the larger population of the working poor!
President Obama would like to change that fact. He supported a bill that would have made it possible for women to investigate their pay in comparison to that of their co-workers. Senate Republicans threw the Bill away (June 5, 2012).
Thank you Bodo Diehn - I read your blog.
chatmandu002 posted at 1:26 pm on Wed, Jun 13, 2012.
The reasons for private unions have been taken over by the government. Public sector unions are and will continue suck the life out of the taxpayer with the help of union supported politicians.
Cerulean,
The Equal Pay Act of 1963 is still in effect. The new bill was only a democrat election gimmick to get votes and provide full employment for lawyers. Your partisanship is showing, there were democrats that voted against the new bill.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 2:38 pm on Wed, Jun 13, 2012.
Folks, don't you just love the ...HYPOCRACY...of the Democrats ???
Here we have the... Obama......posturing that the Republicans are ....ANTI-WOMAN.
And you have....Obama....and the same Democrats.....voting down ..........ANTI-FEMALE, GENDER DRIVEN .....A.B.O.R.T.I.O.N.S.
Obama and the Democrats don't mind murdering female fetuses but want the ones that survive the Abortion to get .......EQUAL PAY.....does that make any sense to anyone ???
Unions were started by Marxists, Leninists, Communists and Socialists......just look at the teacher's unions, the manufacturing unions, the labor unions and the worst of the lot....the so-called.....Public (like these workers give a hoot about the "Public") Sector unions.
Strikes and Labor Violence and Arson were tools used by these Communist labor/electoral groups in Russia and Europe and a few times even here in America.
Cerulean posted at 5:37 pm on Wed, Jun 13, 2012.
Leon – are you talking about the Trent Franks bill that 1st, would only have applied to the District of Columbia (or Washington D.C.) and 2nd, the Republicans killed it through a ‘special rules’ procedure.
Chatmandu, The Equal Pay Act does no one any good if the Supreme Court chooses to evade it. For example, the recent Supreme Court judgment concerning discrimination in pay and promotions for the Wal-Mart case, the Court did not say that Wal-Mart does not discriminate (they do). The Court decided that the case could not be brought as a ‘class- action suit’. So, how are individual women supposed to find out if discrimination exists if they are legally barred from obtaining information that would prove otherwise. They cannot! Republicans killed the bill that might have given them the legal tools to discover.
Here is what Justice Scalia said about sex discrimination “Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't. Nobody ever thought that that's what it meant [referring to the 14th amendment, equal protection laws]. Nobody ever voted for that. If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws.”
samkat posted at 6:42 pm on Wed, Jun 13, 2012.
Leon: If you dislike abortions then don't have one. In the meantime, feel free to adopt one or more of the 12,000 unwanted children the state is caring for. :-)
fae4now posted at 7:03 pm on Wed, Jun 13, 2012.
Well now, this letter puzzles me right from the start - the title. The writers fails to make any point whatsoever regarding the "lack" of connection between the middle class and unions.
In fact I think he makes a strong point in favor of unions. If bargaining collectively was needed to bring about "common sense" changes it would suggest that the employers lacked common sense in the first place. Who says that today's employers are any smarter? Today's workers have little voice in the workplace. Only the threat of workers choosing to unionize serves to "ingrain" today's practices in the workplace. Ban unions and see what happens!
He seems to take issue with union leadership while supporting workers' right to "meet and confer". A headless body is ineffective be it in a union, government or corporate body. Lacking a clearly defined purpose, organization or leadership what you'll have will resemble Occupy Wall Street. Adrift.
I have yet to encounter a union leader who earns anywhere near what the corporate CEO across the table from him earns. So much for the "taxpayer burden" for those "outrageous benefits" for leaders.
Dale Whiting posted at 6:56 am on Thu, Jun 14, 2012.
So Jack,
For what group are you a spokesman?
Rather than discuss unions in general, you choose to perpetuate with out definition the term "strong union." Care to define that term or give us examples?
And are you saying that unions had nothing to do with increasing pay for members?
Your points about union leadership corruption are well taken. Union leadership corruption is not without parallel. Ever studied politics?
Cerulean posted at 10:44 am on Thu, Jun 14, 2012.
Chatmanduu, One Democrat, Harry Reid changed his vote to against so that he could bring the bill back to the floor at a later date.
Otherwise, the cloture vote was party line with Independents in the 'for' column.
VofReason posted at 11:51 am on Thu, Jun 14, 2012.
If I remember correctly, if you don't feel you are getting paid for your value, there is a freemarket to explore to see if your assumption of your value is real. "If you dislike abortions then don't have one. In the meantime, feel free to adopt one or more of the 12,000 unwanted children the state is caring for". For Samkat, this is a bigger reason to prevent irrisponsible people from getting pregnant, not for giving them carta blanc to murder their babies.
Arizona Willie posted at 4:18 pm on Thu, Jun 14, 2012.
Wages and working conditions have gradually been declining for the middle class. It is NOT coincidental that it is happening in sync with the decline of unions.
If the Republican businessmen get their way and outlaw unions it will not be long at all before things are back like they were in 1910.
Ask yourself ... if my cellphone rings at 8:30 PM and I see my boss is calling --- can I decide not to answer the phone? Will he be angry with me tomorrow?
If you answer the phone, will you get paid extra for working outside businesss hours?
If even this simple scenario would present problems for you --- YOU NEED A UNION.
Only the possibility of unionization keeps your boss from cutting your pay and increasing your work hours.
Republican politicians have cut funding to below the minimum needed ( way below ) for enforcement of the OSHA workplace safety laws and Wage and Hour enforcement is a joke.
Many states have laws required paying prevailing wage on pubic works but only the unions do any checking or try to enforce that.
If you think unions have outlived their usefulness --- watch what happens as soon as business gets them broken completely.
My working days are done. Won't matter to me.
But if you have a brain in your head you better start re-thinking your attitude towards unions.
Unon workers are just people just like you. They are not evil. Nor are they lazy scum trying to get paid for not working. They are simply regular people who managed to get a better deal than their non-union counterparts.
fae4now posted at 7:25 pm on Thu, Jun 14, 2012.
Can't make it any more plain.
Thanks Willie!
Leon Ceniceros posted at 8:38 am on Fri, Jun 15, 2012.
Arizona Willie (boy does that nickname hit the nail on the head......[wink])
Maybe it was your Boss calling to invite you to be his guest at a Coyote's game right in back of the Penalty Box or a Sun's basketball game right there on Center Court next to Ellen Degenerate or some other Celebrity.............Boy,did you miss out................LOL.