Log in

View Full Version : Labor unions may have to abandon Obama to beat Corporate America



DJ-Anarcho-Redist
16th May 2010, 15:53
Labor unions may have to abandon Obama to beat Corporate
America

By Mike Elk, AlterNet Posted on May 13, 2010

alternet .org/story/ 146705/

As president of the AFL-CIO, Richard Trumka is emerging as
the voice of an increasingly irrelevant labor movement. As
unionized work sinks to only 7 percent of the private
sector, the labor movement is losing its influence within
the Democratic Party. To revitalize labor, Trumka must not
only challenge Democratic leaders, but wage political
battles outside the bounds of party politics by bringing
labor back to its working-class activist roots.

The failure of President Barack Obama to make a major push
on the Employee Free Choice Act -- let alone give even a
single speech dedicated to the topic -- is a telling sign of
organized labor's declining momentum inside the Beltway. As
Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson noted in February,
"For American labor, year one of Barack Obama's presidency
has been close to an unmitigated disaster." Labor ranks so
low on the president's list of priorities that a new
generation of Obama activists is now planning for a
political environment altogether devoid of the labor
movement.

The Obama administration demonstrated a clear lack of
concern for labor when it allowed nominations to the
National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to be ignored in
Congress for a full 14 months. The vacant seats on NLRB
prevented the panel from issuing any decisions over this
14-month period, meaning there was no functioning court to
protect unions from the illegal practices of big
corporations. Needless to say, this was a big problem for
both labor and the country at largeâ?"imagine the president
allowing a federal circuit court to sit inactive for more
than a year. Most of the direct blame for the delay rests on
the shoulders of Republican senators. But Obama's timid
negotiations with conservatives allowed the problem to
fester. In March 2009, Obama appointed former union lawyer
Craig Becker to the NLRB, but the nomination didn't clear a
Senate Committee until October of that year. Republicans
then filibustered Becker's nomination, ultimately killing it
in the Senate by Christmas. Organized labor responded by
pushing for Obama to give Becker a recess appointment in
February, which would have filled the NRLB seat without
subjecting it to filibuster in the Senate. Obama's initial
response was a refusal: he wanted instead to cut a backroom
deal with Senate Republicans in an effort to attain some
variety of Obama's ever-elusive Holy Grail of public policy
goals, bipartisanship.

After Obama's rejection, labor had two options. It could
play nice with the administration and hope to be rewarded
for their loyalty, or it could take a stand and criticize
the White House for cutting this backroom deal. Trumka
choose the latter. He blasted the secret deal with the
Senate GOP as one that "left working people out in the
cold." He urged union members to bombard the White House
with phone calls in protest â?" the first time the AFL-CIO
had asked workers to do this during the Obama presidency. It
worked. As a result of the pressure the AFL-CIO put on the
White House, Obama was forced to grant Becker a recess
appointment during the next recess in March. Trumka risked a
lot, including much-coveted access to the White House, in
order to pressure Obama on this issue. But the White House
feared so open a denouncement from labor, and it folded
quickly, appointing Becker as soon as it could. When labor
suffered a massive loss on the Employee Free Choice Act this
year, Trumka learned an important lesson. Obama spent most
of his first year in office pretending EFCA did not exist,
mentioning the bill only in occasional throw-away lines when
he appeared before labor-dominated audiences. It was never
an issue he even pretended to put political capital behind.
But while labor fought for EFCA alone, labor leaders did not
publicly criticize the White House for failing to push their
top legislative priority. Instead, union leadership played
an inside game with Obama, hoping that by cooperating with
the White House on health care and other issues, labor would
eventually get the support for EFCA it wanted. But despite
this cooperation on Obama's signature legislative efforts,
EFCA was never scheduled for a Congressional vote, and died
with barely a whimper. In an August interview with Politico,
Trumka criticized labor leaders, saying they hadn't been
nearly aggressive enough with Democrats on the issue. Trumka
refused to let the mistake be repeated. He put Democrats who
blocked EFCA on notice when the AFL-CIO backed a primary
challenger, Lt. Governor Bill Halter, D-Arkansas, against
the incumbent Senator Blanche Lincoln. And whatever the
results of the Arkansas primary, Lincoln has moved
substantially to the left following the challenge, penning
strong financial reform legislation cracking down on
derivatives, the financial instruments that sunk AIG. Labor,
in short, has already helped secure better financial reform
by refusing to play nice. Labor is at a crossroads. Many in
the movement fear denouncing the White House more openly and
upsetting key relationships with the White House. While
union support was critical to Obama's election, everyone who
watched Obama's campaign contributions in 2008 knows that
corporate backers played a tremendous role in getting Obama
into office. Last year, the Obama campaign's own national
finance director, Penny Pritzker, wrote the president a
public letter urging him to kill the Employee Free Choice
Act. If labor takes a more critical stance against the
administration, it could force Obama to rely more heavily on
his corporate backers and set unions back even further.
Labor has plenty of enemies within the Democratic Party that
would like to push the unionzed percentage of the workforce
down from 7 percent all the way to zero. Obama has already
made overtures to these factions, most notably when he
applauded the mass firing of union teachers at a school in
Rhode Island.

So labor really could pay a heavy political price for
getting tough. But going bold and getting wiped out isn't
something union workers should fear. The labor movement has
been wiped out many times in this country's history with
bullets. But each time, it has gone down fighting and risen
up again. A third-generation union miner, Trumka grew up
hearing tales of the fabled battle of Blair Mountain. In
1921, union miners went on strike throughout southern West
Virginia, shutting down the coal industry. The coal
companies went to war, and over 100 miners were killed at
Blair Mountain, with the federal government even sending in
airplanes to bomb union worker encampments. The battle of
Blair Mountain was a heavy blow to the United Mine Workers
of America (UMWA) in West Virginia, but over time, it proved
to be a pyrrhic victory. As a result of the struggle, the
UMWA strengthened its resolve -- workers knew they couldn't
cut any deals with the boss, so they focused on organizing.
It took years, but once the Wagner Act passed in 1936, the
UMWA organized the entire coal industry workforce --
hundreds of thousands of miners. It created an industry-wide
contract that prevented mine owners from pitting one mine
against another. If bullets couldn't kill organized labor,
politics can't either. The most serious threat to the labor
movement is a leadership that insists on self-defeating
compromises rather than strong demands. This was exactly how
labor officials were acting when Trumka came into the labor
movement in the early 1980s. Trumka was elected president of
the UMWA in 1982, and made the union such a force to be
reckoned with that anti-worker forces called in a bomb
threat to his wedding. In 1989, he led the successful
nine-month strike against Pittston Coal Group for cutting
off medical benefits to pensioners and the disabled. The
long strike led the UMWA to the brink of bankruptcy, and it
was fined nearly $64 million during the strike. But the
workers stood firm, and the Pittston Strike became a
rallying cry against the tide of union busting that had
swept the nation during the Reagan era. A full 37,000 miners
went out on wildcat strikes in solidarity with the Pittston
strikers. There are only two tools in the union negotiation
toolbox: strike and solidarity. These are the forces that
big corporations fear, not Capitol Hill deal-makers. People
join the labor movement out of a desire to feel a sense of
dignity and respect on the job. They gain that sense of
dignity by standing up for their rights. They form bonds of
trust, dedication and solidarity that can become stronger
even in defeat. Workers will always be willing to get back
up and fight again if their fellow workers fight with them.
All the political favors in the world won't help workers if
labor leaders don't stand up and fight. Richard Trumka knows
this and has chosen a bold, aggressive approach for
organized labor. But Trumka is just one leader, and the
economic battle is just beginning. Make no mistake: Wall
Street is taking aggressive steps to wipe out the labor
movement entirely, and Wall Street has many friends within
the administration receptive to this message. If unions bow
to those in the White House that want labor to remain silent
amid this assault, the damage to the labor movement will be
more severe and long-lasting than the fallout from taking on
the administration. Workers might not win in their political
battles today, but the real fights don't have to take place
in Washington, D.C.â?"they're in mines, fields and offices
all over the country.

Mike Elk is a third-generation union organizer who writes
for Campaign for America's Future. He previously worked for
the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers (UE).

© 2010 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.

View this story online at:
alternet .org/story/ 146705/

The Gallant Gallstone
16th May 2010, 17:01
Labor unions will have to do more than just abandon Obama if they want to beat Corporate America.

They haven't even found a decent way to organized temporary workers. Granted, it's not an easy thing to do, but it seems that the unions aren't even really giving the issue much thought.

Qayin
16th May 2010, 17:39
Organized labor in the country is effectively dead.
The right wing won the rhetoric and now people
find the reason the car industry failed in America
is because the unions.

I heard union membership in America was at an all
time low. In America were losing hardcore

Unions are dying, the left has been effectively killed.

We need New Noise

Proletarian Ultra
16th May 2010, 18:34
This is a hilarious article.

Q: Why is labor losing?
A: We elected the wrong guy to be genocidal poolboy to the ruling class.

Liberals tell themselves it would have been better with Hillz, or Nader, or some other clown. As if the problem was the guy in the presidency, not the presidency itself and the anti-labor, white supremacist U$ KKKonstitution that defines it. Liberals will get all hot and bothered about FDR, as if he wasn't forced into it by an actually insurrectionary labor situation.

BTW: American union membership as % of work force posted its first gains in decades from 2006-2008. It wasn't much, but let's cheer for our team here.


sorry for the mim-speak. or not, really.

Astinilats
16th May 2010, 19:19
I met Trumka a few months ago. He gave me some hope he isn't a shitbag, and I think he is well aware of how useless the democrats are.

The fact of the matter is, labor spent $400 million on Obama, and got shit. Labor spent more money on Obama than all other interests combined did, and received nothing but slaps in the face. You can't even buy off the Democrats with more money than everyone else combined. That's the lesson the labor movement should learn from Obama, and hopefully they will begin to act accordingly.

RED DAVE
16th May 2010, 19:33
I met Trumka a few months ago. He gave me some hope he isn't a shitbag, and I think he is well aware of how useless the democrats are.

The fact of the matter is, labor spent $400 million on Obama, and got shit. Labor spent more money on Obama than all other interests combined did, and received nothing but slaps in the face. You can't even buy off the Democrats with more money than everyone else combined. That's the lesson the labor movement should learn from Obama, and hopefully they will begin to act accordingly.Could you give details of the meeting. It sounds fascinating.

RED DAVE

Astinilats
16th May 2010, 19:54
No, you ridiculous Trot.

Qayin
16th May 2010, 20:10
No, you ridiculous Trot.

Yawn

Homo Songun
16th May 2010, 20:55
The fact of the matter is, labor spent $400 million on Obama, and got shit.
Where did you find this?

Robocommie
16th May 2010, 21:04
Would it do any good if workers started seizing factories? Even though the cops would just shut them down, could occupation strikes prove a viable tactic in the long run?

DJ-Anarcho-Redist
16th May 2010, 22:03
I think the temporary services are a scab line. They should be boycotted and sabotaged.

DJ-Anarcho-Redist
16th May 2010, 22:06
The car industry died cause we produce dumb shit like gas guzzling SUVs. The Hummer a piece of flashy shit is our biggest export.

Moro ever the capitalists move work offshore where workers have no rights. If everyone joined the IWW then they would have to deal with the union no matter where they moved. The way to fight global capitalism is international unionism.

People say Germany produces a good car cause of unions and the actually have a say in what they produce vehicle wise.

DJ-Anarcho-Redist
16th May 2010, 22:07
I think occupying the factories can work.

The Red Next Door
16th May 2010, 23:10
Yeah, its time. that we stop kissing his fake lying ass.

Uppercut
17th May 2010, 00:07
American workers will never wake up. We're too corporate and "bourgeoisified" to make any progress, and so long as we have our football and our McDonald's, we'll stay in our current position. People will continue to put with shitty hours and wages in hopes that if we work hard enough, we'll achieve that "American Dream" that supposedly makes this country famous. If you enjoy giving your boss BJs on your break, you just might get to be as "successful" as him someday. But if you actually care about the working class, you'll be left behind. That's just the mentality of Americans these days and there is little anyone can do about it. No amount of organizing or agitating in these little hick towns will get us to change course.

The best chance we have is to pray for an economic crash, a wake up call that knocks us off our ass. Maybe then Americans will start to learn something.

Red Commissar
17th May 2010, 00:14
When labor unions realize this it will be a good day, a better one once they find a means to reassert themselves in an America where they have a bad reputation.

But even if we were to have a good change in leadership and some devoted union members to work from the bottom, there still is the issue of the Republican pseudo-populist bantering to working class whites. The Republican Party seems to be making in roads in the midwest working class.

So hopefully they'll just abandon both parties all together, rather than be bought out by the opposition parties.

Astinilats
17th May 2010, 00:21
Where did you find this?

It's a commonly cited number:

http://www.counterpunch.org/macaray03022010.html

Red Rebel
18th May 2010, 04:21
Having the AFL-CIO & Change to Win break from the Democratic Party is hardly socialism in any form but is a major step forward that labour needs to take if it wishes to be anything like a movement. Hopefully the failure of the Obama adminstration will actually make labour federations rethink their political strategies.



The car industry died cause we produce dumb shit like gas guzzling SUVs. The Hummer a piece of flashy shit is our biggest export.

Moro ever the capitalists move work offshore where workers have no rights. If everyone joined the IWW then they would have to deal with the union no matter where they moved. The way to fight global capitalism is international unionism.

People say Germany produces a good car cause of unions and the actually have a say in what they produce vehicle wise.


The UAW actually suggested in the 1950s that GM (could be wrong which corporation) should produce more fuel efficent cars. Ridiculous. :lol:

KC
18th May 2010, 04:42
Would it do any good if workers started seizing factories? Even though the cops would just shut them down, could occupation strikes prove a viable tactic in the long run?

This isn't the 1930's. The US isn't filled with high capacity, high employment factories. The working class in the US has effectively been atomized into smaller production centers with a greater disconnect between individual workers.

This phenomenon, surprisingly (as understanding the conditions of the US is essential to constructing a program), has hardly been studied by American Marxists, who tend to opt for single-issue causes or focusing on struggles outside of the United States (not to mention the incredibly and pitifully low level of theoretical development and study in which the left engages, instead resorting to basically sloganeering on almost all issues).

Occupation strikes aren't a viable tactic because costs have been cut to such an extent where it is not much more costly to export the factory itself. Hell, this goes on without strike action. Add to this the small size of factories, which drastically diminishes the impact of an individual strike and these are in no way realistic. And that's not even taking into account the issue of consciousness.

Besides, the vast majority of the American working class isn't in factories. Only 11% of the American workforce are factory workers, and among these 11% are probably some of the highest paid workers in the country. So stop focusing on them so much. This isn't the 19th/20th century.

http://news.thomasnet.com/IMT/archives/2004/01/dispelling_the.html



Moro ever the capitalists move work offshore where workers have no rights. If everyone joined the IWW then they would have to deal with the union no matter where they moved. The way to fight global capitalism is international unionism.

International unionism isn't a viable strategy either because it cannot take into account the national differences. Not to mention all of the practical reasons that make it unfeasible.

The internationalization of capital exists alongside the sovereign nation states and national capital, which means that they exist at the same time. You can not deny one or the other in your analysis.


American workers will never wake up. We're too corporate and "bourgeoisified" to make any progress, and so long as we have our football and our McDonald's, we'll stay in our current position. People will continue to put with shitty hours and wages in hopes that if we work hard enough, we'll achieve that "American Dream" that supposedly makes this country famous. If you enjoy giving your boss BJs on your break, you just might get to be as "successful" as him someday. But if you actually care about the working class, you'll be left behind. That's just the mentality of Americans these days and there is little anyone can do about it. No amount of organizing or agitating in these little hick towns will get us to change course.

The best chance we have is to pray for an economic crash, a wake up call that knocks us off our ass. Maybe then Americans will start to learn something.

Yeah! Fuck the American working class! They need their lives ruined; that'll show em!

Robocommie
18th May 2010, 05:00
Besides, the vast majority of the American working class isn't in factories. Only 11% of the American workforce are factory workers, and among these 11% are probably some of the highest paid workers in the country. So stop focusing on them so much. This isn't the 19th/20th century.


Listen man, do me a favor and chill your tone. It was a question, not a call to action. You made some interesting points but you don't need to be condescending about it.

But now I'm going to want to hear your alternative. Or did you just want to grouse about what won't work and how the left is in such a pitiful state these days?

Anyway, the points you made are fine, but this is the kind of thing that inspired my question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_Windows_and_Doors

As well as the reclaimed factories movement in Argentina.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FaSinPat

KC
18th May 2010, 05:05
But now I'm going to want to hear your alternative. Or did you just want to grouse about what won't work and how the left is in such a pitiful state these days?

I don't have one. I'm not going to act like I do. I'm trying to figure it out myself.

I think that the problem is threefold - theoretical, organizational and practical. We need to develop our theory to explain the development of capitalism in the last few decades, both in the US and globally; we need to develop a practical response; and we need to restructure organizationally.

Die Neue Zeit
18th May 2010, 05:33
The working class in the US has effectively been atomized into smaller production centers with a greater disconnect between individual workers.

[...]

Occupation strikes aren't a viable tactic because costs have been cut to such an extent where it is not much more costly to export the factory itself. Hell, this goes on without strike action.

[...]

Only 11% of the American workforce are factory workers, and among these 11% are probably some of the highest paid workers in the country.

[...]

International unionism isn't a viable strategy either because it cannot take into account the national differences.

What you said in your first sentence was already mentioned in Mike Macnair's Revolutionary Strategy (http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?do=discuss&group=&discussionid=2383).

I have a feeling you are beginning to appreciate the solution that Ferdinand Lassalle had to the above problem, when he explicitly attempted to turn the German General Workers Association into a political party.

You see, despite what Marx said about the Iron Law of Wages and its Malthusian demography, Lassalle had a very political point to his agitation. He invoked it as an anti-union shibboleth and contrasted it with the idea of a massive, class-based political party (universal suffrage and producer coops with state aid being his two key "single issues").

Without adopting Lassalle's agitation, his bias towards the latter is the means towards class emancipation, and has always been.

TheCultofAbeLincoln
18th May 2010, 05:47
Fuck the labor unions. Not the factory workers, railroaders, longshoremen, truckers, grocery store workers, electricians, steel workers, or anyone who is in a union. Compared to many non-union workers these employees have it better in many places. Rather, fuck the aristocracy which runs many of these unions, in which the union bosses still make fat bonuses and still pay millions in dues to Democrats simply because they are a better option.

Fuck the afl-cio especially, but that's just me.

This is a great article about the UPS strike in the 1990s, I recommend it strongly. Many of the lessons also apply to the CAT strike, along with quite a few others.

The most disheartening thing about the UPS strike, however, is the fact that the worker won concessions, which were shad upon by UPS and labor leaders willing to play ball.

http://www.isreview.org/issues/55/bigbrown.shtml

DaringMehring
18th May 2010, 06:01
American workers will never wake up. We're too corporate and "bourgeoisified" to make any progress, and so long as we have our football and our McDonald's, we'll stay in our current position. People will continue to put with shitty hours and wages in hopes that if we work hard enough, we'll achieve that "American Dream" that supposedly makes this country famous. If you enjoy giving your boss BJs on your break, you just might get to be as "successful" as him someday. But if you actually care about the working class, you'll be left behind. That's just the mentality of Americans these days and there is little anyone can do about it. No amount of organizing or agitating in these little hick towns will get us to change course.

The best chance we have is to pray for an economic crash, a wake up call that knocks us off our ass. Maybe then Americans will start to learn something.

Far too defeatist. The working class in America is, like workers everywhere, the target of exploitation. Ultimately it is reduced to the conditions of the reproduction package, which is getting further and further depressed here in the USA.

Marx didn't predict that the revolution would come in the advanced countries first for no reason.

When you say "no amount of organizing or agitating" can change things, that is the negative consequence of defeatism. You absolve people from organizing and fighting for change where they can --- where they are part of the community. There cannot be a revolution with that attitude.

The USA is a crucial theater for the world revolution. We need a patient approach, not one that is too depressed to try, or one that just tries to attach itself to whatever power it can hoping for immediate success. We need to develop independent workers organizations.

KC
18th May 2010, 06:07
Marx didn't predict that the revolution would come in the advanced countries first for no reason.In Marx's time the largest production centers and the greatest amount of capitalist exploitation was happening in the "advanced" countries. That has changed significantly since Marx's time. The vast majority of class struggle is happening in developing countries, which proves that Marx's assertion that "revolution would come in the advanced countries first" no longer applies (or at least not strictly).

I'm not a third-worldist by any stretch of the imagination, but to cling to this dogma without acknowledging that reality contradicts it is delusion.

EDIT: Sorry Robo just saw this:



Anyway, the points you made are fine, but this is the kind of thing that inspired my question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_Windows_and_Doors (http://www.anonym.to/?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_Windows_and_Doors)

That was definitely an exception. I never said that it couldn't happen but I highly doubt it would ever happen on a scale larger than a few individual factories, at most. Like I said before, most factories in the US are highly capitalized and pay their workers pretty handsomely.

AK
18th May 2010, 12:22
Labour unions may have to abandon Obama to beat corporate America.

That's a shocker.

Die Neue Zeit
18th May 2010, 14:32
But now I'm going to want to hear your alternative. Or did you just want to grouse about what won't work and how the left is in such a pitiful state these days?

Try joining RevLeft's Revolutionary Strategy (http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=205) usergroup.

black magick hustla
18th May 2010, 15:30
No, you ridiculous Trot.

if you think you are getting away with your bona fide trolling you are wrong

consider this a verbal warning.