Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Labor's New New Deal

By Andy Stern, The Nation. Posted March 24, 2008.


We are as far today from the New Deal as the New Deal was from the Civil War.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Nobel Laureate Slams the Bible, Calls It "A Catalogue of Cruelties"
Mario de Queiroz

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
How Biased Media Can Brainwash You
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Andy Stern

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

It's no accident that the New Deal followed by four years the presidency of Calvin Coolidge, who once famously declared, "The chief business of the American people is business." The human cost of the Great Depression created a change in climate that became the philosophical underpinning of the New Deal: the business of the American people was the people themselves -- all of the people -- not just the tycoons who made the "Roaring Twenties" roar and then crash.

Of course, we are as far today from the New Deal as the New Deal was from the Civil War. We cannot expect that work will be valued and rewarded in a global economy by reflexively copying strategies from an industrial economy. Although our values stay the same, our strategies must change. In the 1930s, employers were local, so local unions were strategically aligned with their employers. Today capital has gone global, trade is global, finance is global and, most important, companies are global -- so how can unions assist members by just acting locally? "Workers of the world unite" is no longer an ideological slogan; it is the basis of an effort SEIU embarked on four years ago to create global unions of workers who work for the same employers.

Moreover, almost all labor issues in the 1930s pitted American unions against American businesses. The relationship was almost always adversarial. Today, America needs to act more as a team and create a new plan to compete in a global economy. That plan must start with universal healthcare. We simply cannot compete if we are the only nation on earth that asks our businesses to put the cost of healthcare on our products.

While modern developments -- the Internet, fiber optics, cellphones and a globalized workforce and economy -- have resulted in a profound transformation of the American economy, they have not erased the basic debate about the proper role of government. Coolidge's heirs today are corporatists who have succeeded in rolling back many elements of the New Deal and the subsequent reforms that helped create a great American middle class.

Roosevelt understood that in addition to government programs, a balanced economy requires strong labor unions. Then, as now, increased unionization created higher wages and benefits for both union members and unorganized workers. As unionization increased, the middle class grew. And as the percentage of workers represented by a union has declined in the past three decades, the disparity of wealth has increased.

Corporatists have persistently tried to weaken two of the New Deal pillars of economic fairness and redistribution: government and the law enacted in 1935 to give workers the freedom to form a union under the oversight of a National Labor Relations Board. In recent years, the NLRB has increasingly been dominated by corporate interests issuing rulings hostile to workers' rights and creating new barriers to workers who want to form unions.

Today, more than half of all workers say they would join a union if they had the opportunity, yet less than 8 percent of private workers are in unions. Billion-dollar corporations hire professional "union avoidance consultants," who gang up on workers in unending private interviews, require them to watch hours of antiunion videos in "captive audience" meetings, punish or fire key supporters, threaten wage cutbacks and closings. These corporations face no consequences for their actions or meaningless sanctions under the current weak law.

Where the New Deal once served to rebalance the power between labor and capital, we are now perilously out of balance. In recent years, CEO salaries have gone up more than 600 percent. Had we only tied CEO pay to the minimum wage in 1990, the minimum wage would be more than $23 an hour and the average production worker would make more than $110,000 a year.

This is why Congress needs to enact the Employee Free Choice Act: to permit workers the choice to unite their voices at work. The House of Representatives has already passed it, but Republicans blocked it in the Senate. Both Democratic presidential candidates support it, and its passage is critical to restoring fairness to the workplace.

As in 1935, America is faced with a choice. Is the role of government to serve the 99 percent of hard-working Americans or only corporations and the super-wealthy? The answer will lead to very different decisions on taxation, education, pensions and healthcare.

We need to take into account the vast changes that have occurred since the New Deal, and we must continually adjust as new changes take place. America still needs strong unions -- as well as a government on the side of working people -- as part of the solution to rebalance power, provide greater fairness, make work pay and ensure that the dreams of all American children can still come true.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: labor, globalization, unions, new deal

Andy Stern is president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Kudos
Posted by: ProgressiveManiac on Mar 24, 2008 6:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is really good to see an article like this. Since the dawn of the Regan era there has been a real lack of labor commentary in newspapers, TV and radio concerning labor issues. In recent years, the only other place I have found it has been on the Thom Hartmann show.

Prior to Regan, it was not at all unusual to turn on a Sunday talk show and find an interview with a labor leader. There were labor sections of newspapers and magazines and even in general news reports there would often be mention of the labor position on issues.

In an even earlier era, before labor experienced its brief period of fair treatment by the mainstream media, labor unions had their own newspapers and magazines that appeared on newsstands. Labor unions should consider a revival of this kind of thing, but internet contributions like this are a great idea as well.

This country is past due for a revival of labor and of media focused on the issues of labor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

New world order?
Posted by: carbon-based on Mar 24, 2008 7:58 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't agree that unions were the cause of the rise in middle class. Do remember that much of America is self employed - they are the backbone of the nation.

Unions have been nothing but corrupt organizations who's only purpose is their own existence - and they paid the price.

Unions do have to start working with companies andI think they have made great stride in that regard.

As for Universal Health care..somebody has to pay for it..Companies may not directly pay out of their pocket, but they and the American people will pay through increased taxes - and will pay for our government involvement as they will alays screw it up - so in the end I dont see how this will help our ability to compete in a world market!


The New Deal mind set is still alive in america, the problem is not having any politicians capable of makeing it work Reagan did the right thing for the times.

To think that something whivch was in place 60 years ago will work today is nonsense - what Reagan put in place during his time wont work today either. Stop living in the past and think of whats needed today.. a world union will have as much chance of working as the UN does!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hate for America Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
» RE: Hate for America Posted by: carbon-based
» Lets not forget the past Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
» RE: Lets not forget the past Posted by: carbon-based
» Ignorant much? Posted by: de aqui
» RE: Ignorant much? Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Ignorant much? Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Ignorant much? Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Ignorant much? Posted by: Cybershaman
Medicare for Everyone ... Tarifffs ...the Employee Free Choice Act ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Mar 24, 2008 10:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We need all three ... To protect industry and jobs from currency manipulation, product dumping and subsidized production.

Tariffs are the key. They would keep jobs here and add many more.

To protect companies from slave labor overseas.

And just what policy made this country great? ... Tariffs ... It is only in the last 60 years that we have been lowering tariffs constantly and irrevocably. Our whole industrialization was accomplished under tariffs to keep other countries finished goods from killing our own industry.

The Civil War was fought between the 'free trade' South and the 'protectionist' North. The South being a cash crop region, while the North had industry. The issue caused the Civil War...

To be fair, I believe other countries should use tariffs too. They need to protect their local industry from the multi nationals. Every country needs a mix of business to be economically healthy and provide decent jobs.

For a Great Article on What Creates Good Jobs and Trade :

The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism'

A Must Read ...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement