Unions in modern capitalism

[Die Rote Fahne]

So, I have a few courses this term that involve discussing unions. I'm hearing a lot of negatives about workers who abuse the union, unions protecting workers who are abusing, unions that are too strict on certain things like not allowing one worker to help another worker with a different job.

It got me to thinking, what are the main issues with modern unions? What is the relation of capitalist unions to the system, etc?

What are the main goals of modern unions? What are some reforms they may need?

Are thee radical unions being ignored?

[Rooster]

I believe that the main problem with a lot of unions is that they focus too narrowly on strictly economic issues (protecting wages and job security) while not paying enough attention to political issues. But, I still think that unions are important places for workers to learn about class struggle and that those economic struggles are important.

[Sugarnotch]

I believe that the main problem with a lot of unions is that they focus too narrowly on strictly economic issues (protecting wages and job security) while not paying enough attention to political issues. But, I still think that unions are important places for workers to learn about class struggle and that those economic struggles are important.

This, mostly.

It all happened right around the post-WWII time, if I recall correctly. Unions became quite ironically bureaucratic and hierarchical. The union fatcats prefer to make cozy backroom deals with the capitalist class rather than risking their paycheck by initiating, for example, a strike. They lost their sociopolitical edge.

A lot of it has to do with bourgeois media and the popularity of the Mohawk Valley Formula. The complacent strategies of today's unions are used almost out of necessity. The public perception is that strikes are breaking the peace, trying to disrupt the "harmony" (the propaganda that capitalists and politicians and workers are on the same side -- and strikers are the enemy). There's really one way to mend the broken unions. And that's to promote class consciousness and reach the point that the general public become aware that they are inherently allied with the striking workers, not opposed to them.

[Jimmie Higgins]

So, I have a few courses this term that involve discussing unions. I'm hearing a lot of negatives about workers who abuse the union, unions protecting workers who are abusing, unions that are too strict on certain things like not allowing one worker to help another worker with a different job.There are many problems with both restrictions on unions (solidarity strikes and real pickets that prevent scabs are both illegal and both really effective militant tools) and the way unions have been run.


It got me to thinking, what are the main issues with modern unions? What is the relation of capitalist unions to the system, etc?All unions to one degree or another suffer from a strange sort of class position. On the one hand they are organizations for workers to potentially defend themselves against the capitalists. On the other hand as a defensive organization, unions also have no answer to the conflict between capital and labor and so also are institutions OF capitalism. This strange position tends to create a bureaucracy that is both dependent on workers and so need to at least try and defend their interests to some degree, but are also dependent on their relationship to the bosses.

Specifically in the U.S., this contradictory position of unions has produced a cooperative collaborationist approach to union strategy: business unionism. It came out of the post WWII period where bosses did make concessions on a pretty regular basis because after the destruction of WWII, they wanted labor peace rather than a return to pre-war class struggle. But these concessions lead to an atmosphere where union leaders and negotiators became the engines for winning higher wages or benifits, rather than worker self-activity and militancy. Of course when the bosses called-off their "partnership" strategy, unions were organizationally and ideologically unprepared. And so in the 1960s "business-unionism" partnerships meant that unions asked for cost of living increased and negotiated that with the bosses - post 1970s "partnership" meant that union negotiators tried to "help" the bosses make the business more profitable.


What are the main goals of modern unions? What are some reforms they may need?I think from a radical perspective, the main things are increased rank and file democracy and organization - this will help build up leadership and confidence among rank and file workers to take on both the bosses and the bureaucrats and will make our struggles much more effective... it's good for the struggle and good for the class.


Are thee radical unions being ignored?Not by the mainstream unions when they poach from their organizing efforts. I think with the state of the union movement and low unionization rates, radical unions like the IWW will play an increasingly important part of the class struggle - especially in organizing the unorganized (the service sector comes to mind). But I think we also have to struggle within the existing unions.