Labor associations - not unions

Great Debates
21

Unions serve purposes your labor associations would not.

The biggest problem with your plan is that employees and employers do not generally have common interests. The employer is (or represents) the ownership of the workplace. Their goal is to maximize the profit of the business. The employees are providing a service (their labor) to that business. While they both have an interest in keeping the business going, their more immediate goals are divergent. The most obvious is that the employees want to obtain a high price for what they’re selling while the employers want to pay a low price for what they’re buying - and they’re buying and selling to each other.

I’m also not seeing the need for a politicalization of unions. Why assume that union members have a common political agenda? Their political views on most issues are probably highly divergent. The only issue they presumedly have in common is the desire to have the right to collectively associate for job purposes - and that political agenda can be advanced by a union as easily as it could be by a labor association.

22

I consider them the equivalent of the US Chamber of Commerce which represents all businesses (corps, anyway. Not so good at representing smaller businesses). I am thinking a labor equivalent to the National Restaurant Association or the American Banker Association. Or working class equivalents of the AICPA or AMA. The focus in not on labor relations - I am leaving that aspect of the labor movement to the unions, but on personal and professional development.

I think the major reason the working class has no cohesion in this country is no one interacts with workers at other establishments on a professional basis, while the professional classes probably interact equally with others as well as their coworkers.

23

Are you a union member? You seem to not fully understand how unions are structured and what they do.

My union local has a credit union. The reason the credit union exists is to help provide a place for union members to get affordable loans to finance houses, cars, etc. Our pension fund is administered by a trust that is 3 union members who are elected every couple of years. The CU has nothing to do with our pension because you don’t want to be loaning out pension funds. Our annuity fund is administered by an investment trust.

I am a member of a union local. The umbrella organization for my union us known as “the International” to us, and they are the ones who do most of the lobbying at the federal level. They also coordinate with other union internationals and trade organizations when we have common interests.

Both my local and the International have training programs, professional development classes, etc.

In other words, unions already have an organizational structure that handles things the way you describe and unions already do the things you think they should be doing.

24

No I am not currently. Nor could I join one if merely wanted to, except as a labor organizer working for the union, (something I have considered). They only offer membership to employees of unionized workplaces, if my understanding is correct. Membership in affiliates like Working America might be sufficient, but I doubt it, or the AFL-CIO is seriously dropping the ball on organizing labor.

And while unions do provide the benefits described to its members, those are secondary to their main purpose of collective bargaining and protecting workers on the job. And as union membership declines, so do the workers able to access its non-employer benefits.

Associations would make the benefits their primary purpose, which would also allow unions to focus all of their resources on their primary purpose. And membership would open to anyone belonging to that occupation - regardless of employment, or the union status of their employer.

As far as pension funds, I am not suggesting those funds should be used as main deposits for credit unions, though a greater portion of them could be used for loans to workers or entrepreneurs. Currently, they are one of the major institutional investors of the corporations. (Why pensions invest in companies that actively break unions is for another thread.) But their management could be part of the credit union federation.

It was noticing the additional benefits that unions do provide that got me thinking on this - how to provide those benefits to more workers, and how to let workers provide their own benefits and not rely on employers, which often force them to tolerate inferior working conditions so not to lose their health insurance or other benefits.

An aside - I do think defined contribution plans such as 401Ks are better than traditional defined benefits plans, but 401Ks could be offered by the federation, and not rely on Wall Street brokerages. And the power of pension funds is perhaps the only effective pressure point left that can affect corporate behavior, and I think that is one of the main reasons behind the current attack on unions. I guarantee the funds themselves are on the hit list also.

25

I, OneMan, am new to this discussion, but have been thinking on this for years. I worked for many years in Wisconsin and am in sympathy with all the working Badgers. I very much like Agnostic Pagans ideas. I think the entire labor movement needs an UMBRELLA organization that markets by billboards in cities all over America, and in magazines etc., to the non represented worker about there not being informed of their trade and work. Give them an 800 number to call to ask for the oppropriate ASSOCIATION to belong as only an ASSOCIATE, not a union member to be regularly kept up to date on their work field and what’s up.
The AFL-CIO and other labor groups need to get through their heads that in todays world it is all about education. The faster any worker can learn about what is happening regarding them the better. These associations in my mind are like the minor leagues. The yearly fee should be cheap–$5 or dvertize to the non represented workers that they are in the dark, and deaf to what is going on around the country and world, and they can be smart about their work if they are at least associated. THEN, when the day comes they get the difference between their “right to work” and their right to collective negotiation, they will consider the next step.

26

Okay, I see that the sheer scope of ignorance about this is impeding the deserved swift end to this idea.

Your idea for an umbrella association with membership open to any worker won’t work for a number of reasons, and I’ll give you one that should have been spotted a mile away: if you just let anyone join, eventually you will have management types and even business owners joining. Since your hypothetical association’s express purpose is diametrically opposed to an owner’s (or manager’s) interests, you will have allowed a dilution of power and purpose which will retard the ability of the association’s members to properly take care of things that are in the best interests of the membership it purports to exist for.

This is one reason that union membership is, in general, restricted to people who actually do a specific type of work: we don’t want management/owners to know what we’re doing or how we plan to go about something until we have all our ducks in a row and are ready to speak with one voice.

Also, in re: credit unions: what do you mean by “compete with the big commercial banks”? My credit union already has the assets & credit needed to be able to provide financial services for it’s members. We don’t want to loan money to non-members; that isn’t why the CU was created.

27

I have no desire to not let managers and business owners join - since associations will be based on democratic rule, if, by the disgrace of Og, they ever claimed a majority, then we don’t deserve a labor movement. Unlike corporations, I believe in transparency. And so let them attend meetings and raise any objections. I would rather hear them then, at the beginning of the process, and counter them at that stage, then propose policies and have the business community rally against them at the voting booth or legislature floor - which they most likely would do anyway, but learning their objections earlier is better than latter.

And labor and management are not necessarily diametrically opposed. While the current business leadership encourages a race to the bottom, associations - through empowering workers and developing their professional and occupational skills could start encouraging a race to the top.

I really do want to end the antagonism between labor and management - we all should have the common goal of developing our economy, and thus our society to its greatest potential, not drag it down to its bare minimum. Work should not be seen as a necessity to provide the basics of material living standards, but as the opportunity to contribute our knowledge, skills and abilities to create a stronger society. That attitude should be instilled in both the entry-level burger flipper, to the highest paid executive - their goal should not to be maximize profits, or minimize costs, but how to increase productivity and use our resources for the greatest benefit for the greatest number (yes, I am a fan of John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham).

As far as credit unions go, I just want as much money under democratic control as opposed to the bankers of London and Wall Street. Any meaningful economic and social reform will fail until the majority of the people have meaningful control over the wealth they create. The $14 trillion GDP was created by the working people of America, yet it is the cadre of bankers, CEOs and their elected officials that determine where the majority of that income goes.

I do believe in the free market - or rather the fair market, but the first step is to free it from the golden shackles of Wall Street.

While I am not certain if this proposal is the correct one, but we need something to reawaken labor and build solidarity. Wall Street learned how to divide and conquer a long time ago, and does it effectively. It divides the blue collar from the white collar. It divides the rural areas from the urban areas. It divides using race, gender, sexual orientation, and dozen other ways of keeping labor divided while they raid the treasury for a trillion dollars, they now divide the private sector against the public sector.

There are only two sectors - two classes that are important - owners and their managers, and labor. And the goal is not to have one dominate the other. I despise the dictatorship of the proletariat as much as dictatorship of the plutocrat. The goal is to merge the classes - because there is only class that truly matters in a democracy - the citizen. Everyone must be part labor, part manager, part owner.

And the first step needs to be the awakening of labor and that they deserve all the benefits and respect equal to any CEO or investment banker or hedge fund manager.

Agnostic Pagan’s Manifesto - Part VII :stuck_out_tongue:

28

Well, I see quite quickly by Snoboarder Bo’s comments like “scope of ignorance” and “a swift end to this idea” regarding sub level associations, that having one’s head in the sand for a third of a century is why unions have lost so many members.
Organizing as in the days of yore, my grandfather on the railroad, and my father as a Teamster, those ways are not working today. By the unions establishing work group associations that allow workers in all different trades to associate with their own work kind, and get information on issues at the union level, would allow them to be super educated on all topics. Only very ignorant dunceheads would send out info to associates regarding stratedgy and tactics or plans of action. The info would be legal issues and cost of living information and benefit type info that could be fought for. If you do not choose to understand this future of promotional marketing for organized labor, you will continue to decline in numbers until gone. You must market your union to non union people and the simplest way is to offer them an easy way to be connected. I worked in a one person shop—me, and still paid dues to the union. Most people would not do that, but if they are interested they would most likely want to be associated with those who have a contract and bargaining power. Think outside the books and see a new way to build a whole new future for labor.