Posts by Tula Connell

Labor Leader Argues for Workers' Interests Over Racism in Explosive Speech
Posted by Tula Connell, Firedoglake on August 21, 2008 at 2:31 PM.

The issue of race in this presidential campaign is one we talk around, or whisper about, or don't discuss publicly at all. Or, as with some McCain supporters, the issue of race is used as an ugly bludgeon in the spirit of Jim Crow.

But AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Richard Trumka is taking the issue head on. Beginning with a recent speech to the United Steelworkers and continuing in other union venues, Trumka directly addresses how working people can, and must, combat the racism of those who say they will not vote for a black man as president. In addressing union leaders, Trumka also speaks to all of America's workers:

There’s not a single good reason for any worker -- especially any union member -- to vote against Barack Obama. There’s only one really bad reason to vote against him: because he’s not white.

A lot of good union people just can’t get past the idea that there’s something wrong with voting for a black man. Well, those of us who know better can’t afford to look the other way.

[There’s] no evil that’s inflicted more pain and more suffering than racism -- and it’s something we in the labor movement have a special responsibility to challenge.

Trumka urges union leaders, and all of us with a stake in the economic policies of the next president, to confront, head on, our inchoate and irrational fear of black Americans:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Chamber of Commerce Gets $8,204 Bar Tab: Complains About 18% Tip for Wait Staff
Posted by Tula Connell, Firedoglake on August 7, 2008 at 3:31 PM.

They may be party animals when chugging $8,204 worth of booze but, after the hangover is over, the staff at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce goes back to being their ugly anti-worker selves.

Seems that some 100 or so Chamber of Commerce staff recently ran up an $8,204 tab at The Exchange, a sports bar within staggering distance from the Chamber's architecturally ever-so ponderous Washington, D.C., headquarters. The tab included 155 pitchers of beer, 37 bottles of beer, 208 mixed drinks, 111 shots, 43 margaritas and 11 open bottles of liquor.

And when the bosses got the tab, they weren't happy. After all, the image of Chamber staffers soaking in thousands of dollars worth of Red Bull and pitchers of vodka that sources say the party-goers ordered, strays a bit from the pin-striped image the Chamber sells its members. And then there's that problem of justifying such a large, booze-soaked expense to its frugal dues-paying members out in DeKalb, Ill., or Anaheim, Calif.

So, when confronted with the bill, the staff did what the Chamber always does -- blame workers. That's right. The Chamber now is saying The Exchange waitstaff was tipped too much.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

McCain’s Flea-Market Economy
Posted by Tula Connell, AFL-CIO on July 8, 2008 at 11:35 AM.

George W. Bush’s solution to our

nation’s economic mess—that his failed policies helped create—is to

applaud people who must work three jobs to make ends meet. 

Sen. John McCain colors his solution to working families’ financial struggles with similar crayons: He encourages us to make a living selling stuff on eBay. As reported on Bloomberg: 

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

When Did the American Dream Turn Into Forced Labor?
Posted by Tula Connell, Firedoglake on June 12, 2008 at 12:44 PM.

They sold their homes. They said goodbye to their families. After paying recruiters $20,000 for visas to take part in this nation's H-2B guest worker program, they traveled from India to Pascagoula, Miss. There, the Indian welders and pipe fitters were promised good jobs at the Signal International shipyard and the chance to bring their families here.

Like many of our relatives, they came to the United States in search of the American Dream.

Yet, what they found was modern-day forced labor. They were forced to live in a cramped space with two dozen other workers—and pay more than $1,000 per month for the privilege. Toilet and shower facilities were few, and they were not allowed off-site to purchase groceries to replace the company's intolerable food.

In April, I described here how the workers left the shipyard and traveled to Washington, D.C., to seek help from Congress in a struggle that resembled the battle for human dignity throughout the civil rights era. The Indian workers described their journey to Washington as a “satyagraha,” or truth action, in the tradition of Mahatma Gandhi.

They met with members of Congress and staff, including the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. They discussed the need for Congress to make fundamental changes to the H-2B system.

But they wanted to take an even bigger step, one in keeping with the momentous move they made giving up everything to seek the American Dream. So, on May 14, several of the workers went on a hunger strike. They camped out in Lafayette Park, just steps from the White House. The hunger strike led to a commitment by congressional leaders to hold a hearing on Signal's complicity to human trafficking and a visit to the United States by members of the Indian Parliament. Except for a few union blogs and other small media outlets, their sacrifice generated little press until publication of an article in The New York Times a few days ago.

On the eighth day of the water-only hunger strike, Christopher Glory was rushed to the hospital for strike-related health problems. In all, five of the hunger strikers were hospitalized, including Paul Konar, who went without food for 23 days.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Once Again, Bush Sells Out the Middle Class
Posted by Tula Connell, Drum Major Institute on June 5, 2008 at 8:22 AM.

The U.S. economy is in the worst shape it's been since the Depression: Home foreclosures are skyrocketing, family-supporting jobs harder to get and gas prices are the worst ever. The public has become increasingly pessimistic about the economy, with a majority now telling the Gallup Poll they are worse off financially than a year ago—the first time in the polling organization's 32-year history more than half of Americans give this sour assessment.

So when an opportunity comes along to award a $35 billion contract to a U.S. firm, one that would support at least 44,000 middle-income jobs, which in turn would expand purchasing power throughout communities in more than 40 states, the Bush administration leaps at the chance, right?

Not so. The U.S. Department of Defense in March rejected a proposal by the Boeing Co. to build a new U.S. fleet of refueling tankers, giving the contract instead to EADS, which makes the Airbus, and its minority partner, Northrop Grumman.

Well, that must mean U.S. taxpayers will get a better deal with the foreign contract?

In fact, just the opposite will happen. A new report compiled by the International Federation of Professional and Technical Employees (IFPTE) highlights the corrupt bid-awarding process involved that not only shuts the door on job creation, but slams taxpayers with massive bills and creates a potentially less safe, less green jet fleet. IFPTE, which represents 85,000 white-collar engineers and technical employees across the nation, found the Boeing model could save taxpayers $90 billion over the program's lifetime.

Here are a few of the report's findings:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Take It - The 2008 Ask A Working Woman Survey
Posted by Tula Connell, Firedoglake on May 15, 2008 at 4:00 PM.

A woman who spends years in medical school emerges to take her place alongside a panoply of male physicians—who, on average, make 38 percent more than she does. Female attorneys fare better—they make 30 percent less than their male counterparts. But it's not just a matter of higher pay for men in traditionally male occupations: Male registered nurses are paid 10 percent more than women—even though 90 percent of RNs are women.

This data, from a report by the AFL-CIO Department for Professional Employees, touches on just one of the many "challenges," to utilize a euphemism, U.S. working women face today.

Working women have lots of concerns. Equal pay. Balancing work and family. Job security. Health care coverage. Paid maternity leave.

The AFL-CIO and our community affiliate, Working America, are providing a chance to share those concerns through our just-launched online 2008 Ask a Working Woman survey [pdf]. The bi-annual survey enables working women to share workplace concerns about such issues as equal pay and stronger family and medical leave laws. (Click here to take the survey and here to share it with other working women.) The Ask a Working Woman survey runs through June 20.

We'll compile the survey results and give them to candidates running at all levels of public office to help shape the policy agendas of incoming lawmakers.

More than 22,000 women took part in the 2006 Ask a Working Woman survey—with the majority saying they were worried about such fundamental economic issues as paying for health care, not having retirement security and pay not keeping up with the cost of living.

And that was when the economy wasn't in the sewer. Today, 87 percent of Americans say the economy is getting worse, matching the year's high. But women are at greater economic risk today than in past recessions, according to a new study. In the past year, women’s real wages fell by 3 percent, compared with half a percentage point for men’s wages.

Other findings include:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Bush Hands Out New Jobs...Overseas
Posted by Tula Connell, Firedoglake on March 20, 2008 at 11:12 AM.

So, Bush's Defense Department gives a massive tanker contract to Northrop Grumman and the European firm EADS. In doing so, it shunned Boeing, which bid on the contract.

This action is perverse on so many levels, it's hard to know where to begin.

In handing out the contract--worth between $40 billion to $100 billion--for the construction of Air Force refueling tankers, the Bush administration claimed that 25,000 jobs would be created in Alabama and other southern states.

That assertion obscures several key points: Far more jobs--44,000--would have been created had Boeing received the contract, with more than 300 suppliers in 40 states benefiting, according to Boeing. At Boeing plants, those jobs would be highly paid and the workers would be members of unions. The 25,000 jobs Bush claims the contract creates involve far lower-paying jobs assembling parts made overseas. And they're not union jobs.

Since he's taken office, many of Bush's attacks on unions have been overt. But far more insidious are moves like this one, that surreptiously undermine the fundamental premise of the union movement: People who work should earn wages that support themselves and their families.

And look who was instrumental to pushing through this un-American deal: the senator from Arizona, John McCain. Time magazine reports McCain wrote letters and pushed the Pentagon to change the bidding process so that EADS's government subsidies could not be considered when deciding to whom to award the contract. This placed Boeing, which receives no subsidies, at a clear disadvantage and conflicts with U.S. trade policy.

Defense expenditures are supposed to comply with federal Buy American law provisions, which require purchasing certain products from American companies when possible. But this administration has granted more waivers of the Buy American provisions than any administration in history.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Union-Busting, the Latest Ugly US Export
Posted by Tula Connell, Firedoglake on February 28, 2008 at 11:28 AM.

We all know that when it comes to providing health care, maternity leave and retirement security for all their citizens, Britain, France and all the rest of "old" Europe make the United States look pretty pathetic.

For instance, Britain provides 72 weeks of paid maternity leave while even South Africa, at the low end of the spectrum, offers 12 paid weeks. The United States? Zero.

The list goes on and doesn't get any better.

But it's not enough for greedy corporations to endlessly lobby for their anti-employee agendas in Congress. They now are exporting the most insidious methods of preventing workers from attaining fundamental workplace freedoms: Union-busting.

Union-busting is a $4 million industry in the United States. When faced with a group of workers who want to form a union, U.S. employers all too often turn to these firms, packed with corporate lawyers who, for a steep price, provide them with all the dirty tricks they can undertake within a hair of the law. The same hasn't been true in Europe. Until now.

To better coordinate efforts against multinational union-busting, the AFL-CIO and our counterpart in Britain, the Trades Union Congress (TUC), earlier this month agreed to share information about the activity of union-busting firms in the United States and Britain. AFL-CIO President John Sweeney and TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber signed a joint agreement Feb. 12 to work together to eliminate the intimidation of workers who want to improve the quality of their families' lives by forming a union. Both will jointly lobby governments and relevant international bodies to restrict the activities of the union-busters, develop a shared database of union-busting activity and create "Busting the Union-Busters" training materials. (Click here to read the agreement.)

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »