Unions: Still Relevant? Or Relics?

Posted by Barbara O'Brien at 11:58 AM on March 31, 2009.

Corporate and financial institutions that once seemed as solid as Mount Everest have turned out to be sand castles. Are we seeing the Twilight of the God-Tycoons? Or just a temporary eclipse?

Either way, are the shifting fortunes of corporate America an opportunity for unions to make a comeback? And should they? Are unions still relevant to U.S. working life?

Today fewer than 8 percent of U.S. workers belong to unions. A quarter century ago 17 percent of workers were unionized, and shortly after World War II about a third of workers belonged to unions.

Yet a majority of Americans favor unions. Gallup has polling numbers going back to 1936 (available on pollingreport.com; scroll down) showing consistent public approval for unions. For many years the part of the American public with favorable ideas about unions has hovered at around 60 percent, give or take. Approval for unions is 60 percent right now. Yet actual union membership has declined.

Why Unions Declined

At Forbes, Karlyn Bowman writes that “In 1954, 46% said big labor represented ‘the greatest threat to the country in the future,’ followed by 16% each who responded big labor or big business.”

Unions were the greatest threat to the country? If you know your history, you ought to be able to guess why folks in 1954 thought that way. It was Red Scare time.

In the 1930s and 1940s the American Communist Party put a lot of energy into union organizing, and by the 1940s some unions saw internal power struggles between pro- and anti-Communist Party factions. By the 1950s red-baiting politicians and anti-union interest groups had planted an association between communism and unions in the public mind. This association lingers on the Right to this day, although the Communist influence in U.S. unions was never that strong and disappeared entirely decades ago.

During the 1960s and 1970s — the Jimmy Hoffa era — unions became associated with corruption and the Mafia — rightly so, in some cases. And speaking as the daughter of union members I remember that some workers saw the big unions as just another power establishment, out of touch with the real needs of workers. Further, in the early 1970s the New Deal coalition of the Democratic Party, of which unions were a vital part, crumbled under pressure from antiwar and civil rights movements.

The 1970s also saw the rise of a new power pyramid of the Right. A cabal of wealthy conservatives such as Richard Mellon Scaife and the Coors family, special interest groups such as the National Chamber of Commerce, and other corporate interests began building an infrastructure of “think tanks” and media outlets. This infrastructure crafted conservative messages and pushed those messages relentlessly at the American public through right-wing TV and radio channels, such as Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News Channel. And, of course, they’re still at it.

A big part of this well-coordinated propaganda campaign is that unions are a problem. Too much unemployment? Blame unions. U.S. automakers struggling to compete? Blame unions. On the Right, to this day unions by definition are corrupt hotbeds of communist sympathy that cause a drag on the economy with their unreasonable demands. (The Right, of course, has two answers to every economic problem — cut taxes for the wealthy and bust unions.)

The “Card Check” Controversy

Union organization has declined in part because employers have learned how to fight it. One way to do that is to bully and intimidate workers from organizing and holding secret ballot elections. Another way is to refuse to recognize and bargain with the new union once it has organized.

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) was written to remedy these problems. It would allow employees to organize a union by “card check,” or simply signing a card indicating union preference rather than by secret ballot. This kind of election doesn't require much advance preparation, so it can be done quickly before company management can mount an intimidation campaign. The EFCA also provides for mandatory mediation if employers refuse to bargain with the new union.

The Right claims that the EFCA would take away workers’ right to a secret ballot. This is a lie; under the EFCA workers could still hold a secret ballot election if they choose to. Yet right-wing news media continues to claim that “card check” would take away the secret ballot. One television ad showed a worker being intimidated by thuggish looking men (mob or union bosses?).

The propaganda has had its effect. In a recent Gallup poll, 53 percent of adults nationwide said they would be in favor of a law that would make it easier for workers to organize unions. But in a recent Diageo/Hotline Poll, 50 percent of registered voters nationwide opposed “card check.”

Last week Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) announced he would support a filibuster to keep EFCA from coming to a vote. Conventional wisdom says this has effectively killed the bill until after the 2010 elections, because without Specter’s support (he has supported similar legislation in the past) the bill has little chance in the Senate.

The surreal part of this is that as soon as Specter made his announcement, anti-union organizations heaped praise upon Specter on on behalf of workers. Groups like the National Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) could not broadcast their tender concerns for workers loudly enough. NAM released a statement that expressed relief workers would be saved from a “system that would expose employees to intimidation and coercion.”

What they really meant was they are relieved employees can still be intimidated and coerced from joining unions.

What Can Unions Do?

Once upon a time, in communities large and small across America, young people graduating high school could reliably find stable jobs with good wages and benefits in local factories and mines. The wages paid for new houses and cars and furniture and behemoth Winnebagoes. The benefits paid obstetrician and pediatrician bills and gave retirees something to live on.

That way of life is nearly gone. These same communities now are poorer and shabbier places today. Jobs don’t pay as much, and many don’t come with benefits. The standard of living that one wage-earner could provide a family in 1970 now requires at least two wage-earners and a lot of maxed-out credit cards.

The reasons for this are complex. A great many jobs have gone overseas, of course. Revitalizing unions will not bring back the sweet economy of 50 years ago. Do we need unions at all? I think so, although going forward they may not play exactly the same role they played in the past.

Globalization. American workers feel left behind by globalization. Some unions, including the United Auto Workers, are attempting to build alliances with unions overseas. Eventually it is hoped that world-wide union organizing will reduce the pool of dirt-cheap, exploitable labor. These multinational union alliances also have global climate change and other environmental issues on their agenda. This effort has a way to go.

Workplace safety. Unions give workers a voice on the job and a way to say no to hazardous conditions. Non-union workers are at greater risk for employer abuse, and workers cannot count on law alone to protect them.

For example, at least one meatpacking worker in ten is injured on the job every year. Government safety inspectors are only able to inspect about 75 of the more than 5,000 meatpacking plants annually. For another example, statistics show us that most asbestos exposure happens in a workplace, and asbestos exposure leads to mesothelioma and other deadly diseases.

Wages and benefits. There’s no question that the cost of providing health care and benefits to workers and retirees is a big part of what sank the auto industry. The Right has an insane idea that everyone should be left to the tender mercies of the health insurance industry. Congress and the Obama Administration will be pushing forward with health and retirement benefit programs. Workers could use the clout of unions to give them a voice in Washington, or else the legislation will be written by the likes of NAM.

Going forward, unions may be more about advocating both for a broad spectrum of workers’ needs than perpetually striking for more wages, although I doubt strikes will become a thing of the past.

However the financial sector and auto industry crises are settled, the remedy must not forget workers and working families. If workers’ wages and standard of living continue to decline, there can’t be much of a recovery.

Oh, and Karlyn Bowman of Forbes says that today only 11 percent of Americans see unions as the "biggest threat to the country." That's down from 46 percent fifty years ago. Looks like opportunity to me.

Tagged as: workers, unions, employee free choice act

Barbara O'Brien is the owner/proprietor of The Mahablog. She writes about Buddhism for About.com and and now blogs on behalf of the Mesothelioma and Asbestos Awareness Center on their new mesothelioma blog. She has guest blogged at the Take Back America Conference and for Crooks and Liars.