Labor needs a new survival plan

[Earth Bound Misfit]

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/01/29/labor_needs_a_new_survival_plan/
By Steve Early | January 29, 2010

REPUBLICAN SCOTT Brown’s Senate victory last week deprived President Obama and the Democrats of their filibuster-proof super-majority in the Senate and made Obama’s health care plan a high-profile casualty. There was also collateral damage for already-frustrated union backers of the president. The White House staffers and congressional leaders who’ve been assuring them that labor law reform was next on Obama’s agenda now can’t prevent a filibuster of the Employee Free Choice Act.

snip

Last June, top union leaders met with Obama and were told that health care legislation would come first and then the Free Choice Act. Since then, the administration has repeatedly dangled the carrot of labor law reform whenever labor made common cause with other critics of “ObamaCare.’’ Unions were even pressured to accept things like a future tax on negotiated medical coverage because defeat of the president’s plan would be a victory for the Republicans and, thus, the death-knell of the Act.

Now, in a true case of déjà vu all over again, Americans are seeing the latest opportunity to strengthen their workplace rights, as promised by the Democrats, simply vanish. In the president’s State of the Union address Wednesday, the state of unions - and employee free choice - wasn’t even mentioned.

In the wake of this latest rebuff, labor activists must return to the drawing board and quickly develop a fall-back strategy - for defending and extending collective bargaining - that doesn’t hinge on amending federal law. It won’t be easy.

Steve Early, a labor journalist and lawyer, is author of “Embedded With Organized Labor.’’

[howaboutme]

1. Business and Public Unions

I totally support Employee Free Choice and the need for more organized labor in the business sector. I'd like to see Wal-Mart unionized as well as many other business sectors that can not be outsourced. But I have mixed emotions about organized labor in the government sector and especially the right to strike.

The business unions served to help all Americans while the latter served to help politicians increase their pensions and create patronage jobs and a class of what USA Today has said is overpaid over benefited over pensioned government jobs that will soon be crushing to most non public employed Americans. We don't have a choice when it comes us taxpayers paying government workers.

We're approaching a new era in the USA where government workers (public servants) will be the have mores with benefits and pensions and good wages, while the rest of America will be the serfs. Government job pay and benefits should be kept on par with business but not be in excess.

Unions need to make some major PR changes and I think one that could help would be to change the organizational structure to one is flatter and one that doesn't give the union heads big salaries and benefits. Many Americans still see the union leaders as corrupt and skimming the cream for themselves. Unions need to more broadly serve the rank and file, where leaders don't have disproportionate benefits and they share the sacrifice.

[Omaha Steve]

2. I'm AFSCME (Local 251) & work for the City of Omaha

I got no raise last year. I got no raise 5 years ago. I got 0.35 the year before that. The proposed contract for this year has no raise. But I will be paying more for health care & my pension. You can see I'm rolling in the cash. I can't strike. State law. I'm well below average on pay with the private sector too.

But the mayor has hired several new management level people with 30 to 60% raises to get "quality" personnel.

OS

[howaboutme]

3. Several comments - meant as reply to Steve

Steve your situation in Neb. may be different than some locations. BTW my wife is from your area and has relatives in Omaha and surrounding area.

Around here in PA the only people getting raises are government workers (local, state, federal) and they already have the best benefits and pensions available. We have lots of state government retirees being handed huge $100K pensions and up with full benefits and 6 digit lump sums for years of "unpaid leave time, etc". These salary and pension raises don't come through choice as do those from customers buying products. These raises are paid for through the force of government (the same who benefit) enforcing tax law whether it be income or property tax or sales tax.

Government doesn't know the meaning of the word austerity. They keep increasing wages and tacking the burden onto millions of taxpayers earning less. In PA in 2001 the legislators gave themselves a 50% increase on their already generous pensions in the dead of night, just like they gave themselves a pay increase. But we almost had a rebellion on the latter. They gave government workers a huge pension increase on top of their generous pensions to cover their tracks. This increase is going to cost taxpayers enormously because it is creating huge deficits. There should be a parity index that keeps the total cost of government employees on par with the rest of us in similar jobs.

I agree with your outrage about politicians hiring their special friends at huge salaries. That is one more example of officials that freely spend other people's money, not knowing the importance of symbolism and austerity. Much of Obama's stimulus went to help government entities fund their pensions and keep their workers on the job, not creating jobs or highways.

We are going to need (in the not too distant future) a major sacrifice by all, and a huge sacrifice by the wealthy that already have so much. That might mean across the board cuts in wages and benefits in lieu of laying people off and major tax increases for the rich.