Right to Work

[Geiseric]

http://socialistorganizer.org/repeal-anti-worker-right-to-work-law-in-michigan-now-fight-back-against-union-busting-and-concessions/

Thoughts? Cracking down on unions seems to be at an all time high in terms of the bourgeois state's priorities, which is something communists will have to deal with.

[Desy]

I live in a right to work state. And it was the bourgeois that talked the working class to vote us into a "right to work state". I think communists are going to have to deal with the confused proletarians first, and then the bourgeois. If we can't stop oppressing our selves there will be nothing to deal with, but maybe a new form of fascism.

[subcp]

Reducing labor costs while at the same time challenging the role of unions as reliable partners to negotiate a peaceful and productive labor force. Some unions thrive in right-to-work environments (the NEA and Culinary Union-UNITEHERE), most don't. The bourgeoisie is divided on the union question; some would rather make those savings immediately and screw the consequences (potential wildcats, sabotage, etc.) and some want to continue the New Deal-esque partnership between union and company (like GM and Chrysler, UPS, Vons/Krogers/Safeway).

[Geiseric]

The new deal esque partnership is the limit most anti right to work liberals (key word) are willing to go. I mean the de unionization of america has been crushing any hopes for independent working class political action, for a long time, and we need to get our stuff togather and organize nationally, as part of a labor/workers party, a real one which has been nonexistant since the 1920s CP-USA.

[subcp]

I don't think a resurgence in the classical workers movement is possible or likely. We may see more independent, extra-parliamentary/extra-union apparatus, spontaneous/temporary organizations, base unions, etc. but not a resurgence a la CIO drives.

[B5C]

As long the bourgeoisie keep feeding the people propaganda that unions are bad. We are not going to see a full workers movement. There are many Americans who accepted the non-organized life because they never had to experience the exploitation of their forefathers during the workers rights movements during 1890s-1920s.

[Geiseric]

As long the bourgeoisie keep feeding the people propaganda that unions are bad. We are not going to see a full workers movement. There are many Americans who accepted the non-organized life because they never had to experience the exploitation of their forefathers during the workers rights movements during 1890s-1920s.

Ideas floating around from bourgeois conscious intellectuals is irrelevent compared to the force that a successful strike can have. (star wars referance.) Consciousness raises from viewing and participating in victorious struggles, which all starts at the strike.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Ideas floating around from bourgeois conscious intellectuals is irrelevent compared to the force that a successful strike can have. (star wars referance.) Consciousness raises from viewing and participating in victorious struggles, which all starts at the strike.

Aye, but what form does the strike take in our current context? How is it organized, and, crucially, to what end? The strikes organized by business unions to win contracts are rarely sites where serious proletarian consciousness develops (certainly not without some sort of active intervention).

Not that taking the day off to eat doughnuts and walk in circles is a bad thing.

[B5C]

Ideas floating around from bourgeois conscious intellectuals is irrelevent compared to the force that a successful strike can have. (star wars referance.) Consciousness raises from viewing and participating in victorious struggles, which all starts at the strike.

True, but creating culture hegemony by the bourgeois is a working tactic that has been working. I've meet many union workers who support the bourgeois class or my co-workers who fall for this propaganda video.

NVqOxmb34yc

[subcp]

Lately strikes and walk-outs have been pretty eclectic; from the Wal-Mart and fast food workers and Chicago teachers which all had a heavy community influence (meaning everyone who would stand with the workers), the Hostess strike had almost 100% participation from affected workers in the BCTGM across the US, the Verizon workers are still riled up over the terrible contract the union forced on them after the top brass pulled the legs out from under the strikers, the longshoremen on both coasts have been involved in either wildcats, illegal activity (I think that local in Longview had 50-60 members, and all but 2 had been arrested for strike related activity in that time they were struggling against EGT). There's been a lot going on, and a lot of was different from the typical "take a day off to walk in circles and eat donuts" cliche strike.

Plus there's been struggles without union involvement or against the union heirarchy; Occupy, Wisconsin, the pizza factory workers in Wisconsin, the ILA wildcat, etc.

[nativeabuse]

Reducing labor costs while at the same time challenging the role of unions as reliable partners to negotiate a peaceful and productive labor force. Some unions thrive in right-to-work environments (the NEA and Culinary Union-UNITEHERE), most don't.


How exactly does the strategy change under right to work? How do they even go about organizing under these sorts of restrictions?

Also, doesn't this basically mean that once the original union people quit/retire/ get fired, doesn't the union basically just slowly dwindle and die until it no longer has any power.

Do they just try really hard to convince new employees into joining the union even though there is no clause saying they have to? Seems like this would be a shit strategy.

[B5C]

Do they just try really hard to convince new employees into joining the union even though there is no clause saying they have to? Seems like this would be a shit strategy.

As humans, we love to be cheap with out money. Why spend dollars and join a union and the company is offering the same deal without joining? So a lot of workers will sign up as a non-union employee. The goal of "Right to Work" is to lower union membership to a level it is not a threat anymore to fight back against exploitation.

This is why you see wages & benefits are much lower in "Right to Work" states than others.

[BIXX]

As humans, we love to be cheap with out money. Why spend dollars and join a union and the company is offering the same deal without joining? So a lot of workers will sign up as a non-union employee. The goal of "Right to Work" is to lower union membership to a level it is not a threat anymore to fight back against exploitation.

This is why you see wages & benefits are much lower in "Right to Work" states than others.
I've read articles saying that despite the wages and benefits being lower, there are more jobs in Right-to-Work states. I do not support RTW laws, but I think it's important to note that supporters of such laws will probably bring up that statistic.

[Jimmie Higgins]

In US labor history there tends to be a pattern: years of stagnation and attacks and lack of organization... an explosion of struggle from below which then creates new more efficient organizational methods for fightback... no revolution happens and eventually ruling class hegemony is re-established and the movements die-down... the organizations are destroyed or co-opted... the co-opted organizations help workers maintain minimally, but become a barrier to new struggle... years of stagnation...

The official trade union movement (leadership) in the US is in a catch-22 in terms of its own logic. They persue an cooperative and accomadative stance to the government and bosses even while the bosses attack and legally the unions have become increasingly restricted in any real powerful tactics (and increasingly just in being able to organize at all). They have based their power in being able to negotiate with the bosses and gaining favor from Democratic politicians - but in order to actually win struggle, it would require upsetting these parties and falling out of favor with them. The alternative is unions which base their power not on acess and negotiation but on rank and file organization, shop-floor power, and class struggle.

This has been a particularly long period of decline and stagnation for workers, but the economic crisis has disrupted the equlaibrium a bit and so because of increased pressures some small groups of workers are trying to figure out how to fight. Eventually, IMO some wildcat or some union will begin to break out of this and take more militant tactics and if this spreads, it will rapidly alter the "playing field" of class struggle.

There have always been strike waves in modern capitalism - and this name implies that labor struggles come in surges, not a straight line of march. So I am confident we will see new strike waves, new surges of working class struggle from below and in turn these struggles will produce new forms of fighting and organizing (not necissarily totally seperate from past unions or organizations).

[Geiseric]

Henry Ford is probably one of the first pioneers of proto fascist, "cooperative" right to work laws. I'm confident though if enough communists join unions and aggitate, along with organizing, thee can be a resurgance like after the Minneapolis and San fransisco general strikes.

[subcp]

How exactly does the strategy change under right to work? How do they even go about organizing under these sorts of restrictions?

Also, doesn't this basically mean that once the original union people quit/retire/ get fired, doesn't the union basically just slowly dwindle and die until it no longer has any power.

Do they just try really hard to convince new employees into joining the union even though there is no clause saying they have to? Seems like this would be a shit strategy.

It's all about internal union culture. Culinary Union members are loyal to their fellow members and the organization, very staunch trade-unionists, politically active (they gave the state of Nevada to Reid when Angle went against him in 2010)- they're like UE. People overestimate what these laws really do- what they do well is get in the way of the George Meany style leadership in the AFL-CIO: sit on a stable market share of members, cash dues checks, play golf with politicians and CEO's. Unions like the NEA adopted tactics more akin to political lobbying and a consumer's group (which has been copied by the AFT in right to work and non-bargaining public sector states to their advantage lately) than a shopfloor driven, organizing, power on the job style militant trade union. They get members by promising services and lobbying for teachers issues in state capitals, heavily penetrating local politics; and they've thrived.

[LeonJWilliams]

I read that worldwide unemployment is up by 4 million in 2012 bringing the total to 197 million jobless. The UN says this will increase further in 2013 and 2014 (and potentially for the foreseeable future).

Capitalism must come to an end now!

[LeftyBastard]

People already have the right to work, the terminology is orwellian.