Discussion 4

WHY UNIONS MATTER SECOND EDITION

Michael D. Yates

MONTHLY REVIEW PRESS

New York

chapter one

WHY UNIONS? Let's be honest. AJmost every person who works for a living works for someone else. We work in all sorts of jobs, in all types of industries, and under all kinds of conditions. But no matter what the circum- stances,we do not work for ourselves or for each other, which means that the most fundamental aspects of our work are not controlled by us. Furthermore, our employers try to organize their workplaces so that we cannot exert much control by our own actions. For example, each of us needs to work; we do not labor for the fun of it, but to pay our bills and support our families. Yet none of us can guarantee that we will have work on any given day, let alone for an entire working life. If our employer decides to shut down the business, move it, or intro- duce labor-saving machinery, none of LIS, acting alone, can do any- thing about it.

I was a college teacher, and J worked for the same school for thir- ty-tvvoyears. By most accounts J was a good teacher; lance won an award for my teaching. Most people would say that my job required a lot of skill; I certainly had to be a student for a long time to qualify to do it. Suppose that I had believed that [ was being paid too little for my work. [go to my supervisor, and I tell him this. He is sympathetic and saysthat he will see what he can do. Weeks go by and nothing happens, so I go back to his office. He tells me that he would like to give me more money, but the budget for the school is tight and there is noth- ing he can do now. If, at this point, I tell him that [ cannot work for the

I

II 32 WHY UNIONS MATTER

money I am being paid and that I will have to seek other employment at the end of the school year, what do you suppose he will say?Will my threat to leave get me more money? I doubt it. He will know that if I do leave, the college will do one of two things. It may place advertise- ments for my replacement, and at least one hundred applicants will seek my job. They will all work for less than my salary, and the college will be under no obligation to grant them the type of job security that I now have. Or, the college will not replace me and simply eliminate my classes, assigning them to the remaining teachers or hiring part- timers to teach some of them. In other words, I am replaceable, and nothing I can do myself can change this. When push comes to shove, my employer holds all of the cards. What was true for me is true for the overwhelming majority of

workers. If you do not believe me, just ask yourself what your boss would say if you insisted on a significant raise and said that you would not work without one. Naturally you do not have to confine yourself to a pay hike. Try insisting that your hours be cut with no loss of wages, or that your employer finance a pension for you, or that your employer purchase expensive safety equipment so you can do your job without risking your health, or that your buddy who was fired be rein- stated. Youcan ask for these things, but you cannot force the employ- er to give them to you. If we are honest, we must admit that our employers have power

over us. Some of them may be nice and some of them may be nasty, but none of them will spend money just because it would be good for us. They know that as individuals we are less powerful than they. We have only our ability to work to sell, but they have the jobs. In our eco- nomic system, these jobs belong to them and not to us, and they can do with them whatever they want. It is a simple but powerful truth that working people and their employers do not face each other as equals. Their employers have the jobs they need, and workers are replaceable. I

STRENGTH IN NUMBERS

While most working people know that they cannot do much on their own, some choose to ignore this fact. Perhaps they are afraid, or maybe they believe that they will become supervisors some day, or maybe

WHY UNIONS? 33

they think that they deserve to be controlled by someone else. Sooner or later, however, most workers will draw the obvious conclusion: if they stick together with their fellow workers, they can change things. Usually something will happen at work that sparks general anger and resentment. My wife and my daughter once worked at a daycare cen- ter run by a large national corporation. Despite the pitifully low pay, most of the women there enjoyed working with young children, and most of them showed little day-to-day animosity toward their employ- er. Yet they were unhappy about nearly every aspect of their work. Once a month, the supervisor had an after-work staff meeting to inform the workers of changes in policies and to give them the impres- sion that management was concerned about employee welfare. Ordinarily, none of them had the nerve to openly challenge the office manager at these meetings, despite the fact that most of them couldn't stand her personally and had the deepest dislike for the company. Right before one meeting, the company issued a directive that each worker had to wear a uniform and a nametag. This led to much grum- bling and discussion. A few people said that they would not comply with this policy, and if they were forced to, they would quit. At the meeting, my wife brought the issue out in the open, along with other complaints, including direct criticisms of the manager. Her courage stiffened the backbones of others, and before long a barrage of angry comments filled the air. Faced with such a revolt the supervisor was forced to retreat and make promises that she would investigate some of the complaints. And no one wore a uniform!

Direct actions such as this occur every day in thousands of work- places around the world. Through them workers learn the power of solidarity and begin to understand the great gap between what is and what could be. At the daycare center "what is" is the minimum wage, few benefits, onerous working conditions, favoritism, and no respect.' In 2006, median annual salary for daycare employees was $17,630. But this is certainly not "what could be." Surely, those who care for our children deserve better, but the corporation's greed and the inability of the workers to exert their collective power prevents "what could be" from becoming reality.

After the meeting, a few of the women began to discuss their work situation more seriously. Out of these discussions, they came up with

I !

34 WHY UNIONS MATTER

a plan of action based upon their knowledge that the center's contract to provide daycare was about to expire. The daycare provider is under contract with a large university hospital, and many of the children's parents work for the hospital. A contingent of daycare workers went to see lbe hospital administrator who deals regularly with the provider, and workers also began to speak with sympathetic parents. Their mes- sage was that unless the hospital chose a new provider, they would quit the center. This was especially upsetting to the parents, whose children were attached to the workers, and who frequently had to hire sitters to care for their children at home in evenings and on weekends. The hos- pital also did not want a mass exodus of skilled and caring workers. Ultimately, the company's contract was not renewed, and a new provider was chosen, paying higher wages and offering better benefits. On the other hand, not all of the workers were hired by the new center.

While the spontaneous organizing just described occurs all of the time and often results in gains for the workers, it is not enough to insure permanent results. First, workers quit, retire, and move, so the workers who win a particular struggle may not be there for the next fight. Second, workers may not always have the .energy for direct actions, especially in situations that they may not perceive as impor- tant. For example, suppose a worker is fired unfairly, but he has a spot- ty work record and is not universally loved by his coworkers. It is unlikely that they will threaten to quit unless he is reinstated. Third, long-term improvement in the conditions of employment may require money and constant attention. Thus, it is not surprising that working people have come to the realization that more formal organizing is necessary. In all capitalist societies those who toil for others have formed labor unions to defend themselves and advance their interests in the face of powerful employers.'

In many ways a labor union is like any other voluntary organiza- tion. Say some residents in a community are unhappy with the condi- tion of their streets, schools, and playgrounds. Some activists call a meeting at a local church and a large number of people show up. After they voice their concerns, someone proposes that they form a neigh- borhood association to pressure the town's leaders to do something about their problems. Some temporary officers are elected and regular meetings are established. Plans of action are formulated and tactics for

WHY UNIONS?

achieving the groups' goals are worked out. A committee is formed to devise a set of bylaws for the organization; these include provisions for the selection of officers, outlining the purpose of the organization, conditions of membership, and so forth. As the group grows and achieves some successes, its members decide to assess dues on mem- bers, rent office space, obtain some used office equipment, and hire an office manager. The more or less spontaneous actions that led to the original formation have generated a more formal, structured, and

hopefully permanent institution' What distinguishes labor unions from other voluntary organiza-

tions is that they are formed in response to the daily grind of working for others. The understanding that workers, as individuals, are power- less leads to a recognition that they share this powerlessness with oth- ers. They begin to identify with their workmates and this identifica- tion, based upon shared work experience, is the root cause of the for- mation of a labor union. When this sense of identity as working peo- ple combines with enough frustration at work, actions follow: sponta- neous walkouts or slowdowns, forced meetings with the bosses, the stopping of the work process. Sooner or later, the need for a perma- nent defender, an independent organization standing ready to take on the employer, is felt-and the labor union is born.

THE FIRST U.S. UNIONS'

In 1776 there were not many wage laborers in the United States. Most workers in the South were, of course, slaves. In the North, most people were farmers. What little manufacturing existed was carried on in small shops organized on a guild model, with young apprentices learning a trade taught them by skilled journeymen and master craftsmen. The masters owned the shops but they worked alongside their men, most of whom aspired to become masters themselves. With the onset of the nineteenth century, however, things began to change dramatically. The possibility of making large sums of money grew with the development of mass markets for items like shoes and clothing. Masters began to see that if they organized their shops in a more hierarchicalway they could increase their profits. They began to take on more appren-

35

36 WHY UNIONS MATTER

I

tices, Itut they confined them to doing unskilled work. And they began to resist...,. demaads by their journeymen (skilled manu- facturing workers) for higher "prices" for their work-that is, _e pay. At the same tillie, lite iIlvention of labor-saving and skill-reducing machines such as power looms led to the construe- tieR of factories illwhich Isrge quantities of goods could be pro- duced. These factories, especially the textile mills of New England, began to ltire fO'UIll farm girls io do the work. In these factories, there was a clear separation between the workers and the owners frem the beginaing, where .. ill the small crsft shops it took the journeymen seme time to see that tlteir interests were separate frOIR tIoeoe of tiM masters.

As the differences between workers and owners sharpened and became clearer, tile journeymen did what workers always do. They began to organize to protect themselves. In Philadelphia in 1806, shoemakers (or cordwainers as they were then called) presented the city's shee masters wilk a "price list" for the various types of work they did. WheA the masters refused to honor their list, the cordwainers said that they would not work for any master who would not pay litem their prices. And they would not work along- side any cordwainer who wouW work for less than the proposed rates. What they were trying to do was to create a "dosed shep," that is, an arrangement in which the masters could not hire any. one whe was not a member of the jeurneymell's union. Likewise, the young women in the textile factories struck to protest wage cuts. A strike in Lowell, Massachusetts, in 1834 encompassed one- sixth of lite city's workforce.'

These early attempts at unionization met with a host of obsta- cles. The <COROmywas subject to sudden depressions and the resulting unemploymeRt qllkkly destroyed the unions. The emp/eyers aggressively resisted the efforts of their upstart work- ers 8Jl4 the press and :many politicians condemned the unions as threats to liberty. The Philadelphia cordwainers were taken to court by the masters and the judge ruled that their union was a "criminal conspiracy,» worthy of fines and jail time for the mem- bers. The law was unifOrmly hostile to any attempts by workers to erganize,? Women workers faced special difficulties in organizing,

I

II

WHY UNIONS?

Not only did they have to contend with the normal greed of their employers, but they also had to confront the hostility of men, including most male workers, toward any acts of female independ- ence. As one woman put it, "It needs no small share of courage for us, who have been used to impositions and oppression from our youth up to the present day, to come before the public in defense

of our own rights."s Yet workers persevered, moving forward in good times and

backward in bad, but always creating the memory for their heirs that only collective actions could improve their lot in life. By the middle of the 18805, skilled workers, at least, had finally managed to achieve a permanent organization, the American Federation of

Labor or AFL.9

DO UNIONS WORK?

We are regularly told by employers and by the media that unions are neither necessary nor beneficial for workers. When employers get wind of an attempt by their employees to unionize, they usually begin a disinformation campaign. They say that workers are no better off with a union than without one, and most likely worse off. Unions, they charge, are undemocratic outsiders whose leaders are interested only in their own power and in filling the union's treasury. They ask work- ers a simple question: why should they vote in a union when the only "benefit" they will get will be the privilege of paying dues? By their argument, a union will inevitably lead them out on strike, forcing them to lose their paychecks, with no guarantee of any gains; these strikes tend to be violent, and their only result will be the breakdown of workplace harmony. Here is part of an actual letter sent by manage- ment to some restaurant workers trying to form a union:

Dear FellowEmployees:

As you know, there will be a Union election on July 9. At that

election each of you will have the opportunity to vote to determine

whether or not you want to be represented by the restaurant

workers' union.

3?

38 WHY UNIONS MATTER

You are much luckierthan the employees at Fiorello's,our restaurant on the west side. Some time ago those employees voted to be represented by the restaurant workers' union. They were led down the primrose path by Union promises of increased wage benefits. In fact, after the Union negotiated a contract with the restaurant man- agement which. in my opinion, gave the employees at Fiorello's no more than they would have gotten had there been no union-and probablygavethem less [sic],In addition, J believethat manyof theseemployeeswillbe hurt bythe inflexibilityof the Union contract. ...

On the other hand, you know from the experience of Fiorello's employees exactly the kind of contract the Union would negotiate if it became your collective bargaining representative. A contract which produces nothing more than you would expect to receive were there no union in the picture. For that. you are afforded the privilege of paying Union dues ....

The restaurant does not want a Union at Fiorello's! Our experience on the west side has shown that we can negotiate an agreement with the Union which does not cost us any more in wages and benefits than without the Union and may even cost less. But our experience on the west side has also shown us that the presence of the Union results in a tense working relationship with extreme disharmony among the employees.

This is a real cost to everyone. It can result in a loss of customers and a loss of income to our employees who serve those customers, as well as the restaurant itself. The Union benefits no one but itself.!''

The media seldom present unions in a favorable light, ignoring their positive features and highlighting and exaggerating the negative ones. Strike violence!' always makes the front page, although it is sel- dom mentioned that employers nearly always instigate such violence. If employers hire scabs to replace the strikers, the media will not ques- tion whether the companies should have the right to do so. Instead, they will highlight the confrontations between the strikers and the police brought in to insure that the scabs can get through the picket lines. The daily work of unions in securing higher wages and benefits, safer workplaces, and the right to a fair hearing for complaints against

WHY UNIONS? 39

the employer is ignored completely. In the more artistic media, such as films, the collective struggles of working people rarely take center stage,and when they do, they tend to be tainted with violence and cor- ruption. Try to remember a popular movie showing unions in a favor- able light. The only one that comes immediately to mind is Norma Rae, the exception that proves the rule. I'

I mention the negative, and, as I shall show, false, popular image of unions for two reasons. First, workers need to be aware of the lies employers will tell them when they attempt to act in their own inter- ests. Second, we must understand that the very nature of our society is disguised and hidden by elaborate propaganda repeated so often that most of us have come to think that it is true.'? It is only a slight exag- geration to state that whatever is good for working people will be pre- sented to us as bad-in newspapers, on radio and television, in the movies, and on the talk shows. Nowhere is this more the case than with unions, and the reason is not hard to discover. The corporate pur- suit of profits is the underpinning of our social order, from the daily newspapers to the haUs of Congress. Maximum profits require the maximum corporate control of our workplaces. which, in turn. means that our employers must be free to control us. Anything that interferes with this control will be portrayed as evil, not just to the employers but also to the social order itself. Since a union tries to win some control for us over our lives at work, it provides a direct threat to management. Therefore, unions will be portrayed as evil incarnate, as viruses that must be stamped out for the good of society. The fact that unions are good for workers makes the attack upon them all the more important.

One way to show the union advantage is simply to compare the wages and benefits of union members with those who are not in unions. Table I gives us the basic data. In addition to wages, the table also compares differences in two important benefits-insurance (including health insurance) and pensions. Given the insecurities of working life, these are probably the most important benefits, since they protect workers against the ravages of sickness and old age.

Two things should be noted about this data. First, the benefits are given in terms of their wage per hour equivalent; the overall union advantage for pensions, for example, is equal to an additional one dol- lar and sixty-seven cents per hour. Second, the compensation advan-

40 WHY UNIONS MATTER

TABLE I"

Union Wage and Benefit Advantage, 2005

~ges Insurance Pension Compensation ALL WORKERS

Union $24.10 $3.63 $2.39 33.17 Nonunion 18.81 1.54 0.72 23.09

UNION ADVANTAGE

Dollars $5.29 $2.09 $1.67 10.08 By percent 28.1 135.7 231.9 43.7

tage, which includes the benefits, is greater than the wage advantage. This is because union members enjoy both more and better fringe benefits than do nonunion workers. For example, in the early 2000s, 71.9 percent of union workers had pensions, while only 43.8 percent of those without a union had them." Data also show that the union advantage is greater for blue-collar workers and those with less formal education than it is for all workers, reflecting the fact that unions are of most benefit to workers of lower social status. 16

Table I shows what we might call the "gross" union advantage. We cannot know from these data alone whether the differences between the wages and benefits of union and nonunion workers are due exclu- sively,or even primarily, to the fact that one group of workers belongs to unions. There may be other characteristics of the workers that would cause their wages to be unequal. For example. workers with more education and greater experience ordinarily earn more money, so some of the difference might be due to the fact that union workers have more education and experience. To take this possibility into account, we have to hold all of the other wage-determining factors (that is, all of them except the workers' union status) constant. In this way,we would be comparing two groups of workers that are alike in all respects except union status. Fortunately, economists use a technique that allows them to do this, and, while it will not prove without any doubt that union wages and benefits are higher, it will go a long way toward making the case.

WHY UNIONS?

In Table 2 (see page 43), the union wage advantage (excluding the benefit advantage) is presented for a variety of employee groups. The following variables that might influence wages besides union status are held constant: experience, education, region of the country, industry,

occupation, and marital status. While the effect of unionization (with all other variables held con-

stant) varies from group to group, it is always significantly positive. For example, Hispanic men in unions earn wages 21.9 percent higher than do nonunion Hispanic men, even after we have accounted for all of the other factors that might make the union wages higher. These data also show that, contrary to the view of many conservative economists, unions reduce the wage gap between whites and blacks and between whites and Hispanics. This can be seen in the table, where the union impact on black and Hispanic wages is greater than the union effect on white wages: As we shall see, where there is a union, the principle of "equal pay for equal work" is guaranteed by the collective bargaining agreement. A black worker doing a certain job will get the same pay as a white worker. And a senior Hispanic worker will normally have a better chance in bidding for a higher paying job than a less senior white. Over the past three decades, wage inequality has risen. One rea- son for this has been the steady decline in union density (the share of those employed who are in a union), something we will discuss later in

this book. It is interesting to note that nonunion workers also gain when

other workers are in unions. Unionization gives rise to what is called a "spillover effect." Where unions are strong, nonunion employers will pay higher wages and benefits to discourage their employees from organizing unions. So if a high proportion of high school graduates are unionized, the wages of nonunion high school graduates will be higher than they would otherwise be. As with the inequality-reducing impact of unions, the "spillover effect" has weakened as union density

has fallen."

UNIONS AND DIGNITY

That unions improve the wages and benefits of workers is something all workers should know, since it directly contradicts the anti-union

41

42 WHY UNIONS MATTER

propaganda with which we are more familiar. It also shows that there is nothing sacred about the almighty market. Workers make low wages not because the market dictates that this is so but because they are not powerful enough to make their employers pay them more. Companies often pay low wages to their U.S. workers but pay similar workers much higher wages in their European operations. They are compelled to do this because the European workers are either organized or sub- ject to generous minimum wage laws secured by the labor move- ment."

In a society in which access to money is a life-or-death matter, the fact that unions bring workers more of it is important. However, unions do much more. One of the peculiar features of our economic system is that most of us must sell our ability to work in order to live. When our employers buy this ability, they think of it as their private property, and as with the rest of their property, they think that they have the right to do with it as they see fit. In other words, to them we are just "costs of production" to be minimized, and our ability to work will be treated no better than the tools and machines-and, to the extent that we are easy to replace, probably worse. The nature of our society allows our employers to objectify us, to treat us as mere means to the end of making money. Yet we do not think of ourselves in this way. Our ability to work cannot be separated from us; we are human beings, with a multitude of memories, hopes, and aspirations. Our awareness of ourselves as living beings inevitably comes into conflict with our employers' view of us as objects. We want to be treated with dignity and respect, but whether we are or not is a matter of chance, depending upon whether or not our particular employer is a decent person. And even if bosses are decent, they will not and cannot hesi- tate to sacrifice us for the good of the company.

A fundamental goal of a union is to change the relationship between labor and management. Again and again, when workers are asked why they support the union or what the union has meant to them, they say that their fight for a union was a fight for dignity and respect. Automobile workers in the 1930s said that the supervisors would call them by their badge numbers, not their names. I'A worker in a company that manufactures chain links says that the boss would just whistle for them." Legally, without a union, workers are "at-will";

WHY UNIONS? 43

TABLE 221

Union Wage Advantage for Different Demographic Groups, 2007

Group Union advantage (dol/ars) Union advantage (percent)

All workers $1.50 14.1%

Men 2.22 17.1

Women 1.06 10.7

Whites $1.19 12.4%

Men 1.86 15.0

Women 0.81 9.1

Blacks $2.44 18.3%

Men 3.29 22.7

Women 1.82 14.5

Hispanics $3.07 21.9% Men 3.53 23.4

Women 2.38 18.7

Asians $2.51 17.4% Men 3.75 23.2

Women 1.69 12.6

New Immigrants «10 yrs.) Men $2.05 16.5%

Women 2.29 16.2

Other Immigrants (> 10 yrs.) Men $2.10 16.4% Women 0.98 10.3

44 WHY UNIONS MATTER

they can be discharged, demoted, or transferred for any reason other than those privileged by laws, such as race, sex, disability, and union activity. Our employers are free to treat us as they please, even to cut our wages and eliminate our benefits. A union can, and usually does, change all of this, Union members can take action against their employer whenever the boss shows disrespect for them. They can do' this through the grievance procedure of the collective bargaining agreement, and, in addition, the union may stand ready to take direct action on behalf of any of its members.

In scholarly language, what a union does is give workers a "voice" in their workplaces, a way to put themselves on a more equal footing with their employers." Here are two examples. lance worked for two summers in a glass factory. My "office" was in the plant's fire hall. During the first shift the firemen were on call, so they spent most of the day waiting for trouble, drinking coffee and shooting the breeze. Every morning the local union's officers would stop by for a coffee and trade stories about work and the union with the firemen, who might then relay them throughout the plant when they made their safety inspection rounds. The union president was a feisty old-timer with one arm. He had gotten his arm caught in a grinding machine, and legend had it that he had the arm amputated on the spot. He would daily regale us with stories of confrontations with the company and how he had stood up to the plant manager. Even if his tales were exag- gerated, what if there had been no union when he had lost his arm? He would have been thrown onto the industrial scrap heap to fend for himself as best he could. But the union contract allowed him to take a job as a gate guard, a job without great physical demands. He used this job as the base from which he built support for himself as a union leader; everyone who passed through the gate knew him, and he had a lot of time to think and to plan. He had dignity despite his lack of an arm, and he owed this to the union. So too did all of the men and women who had their breath stolen from them by emphysema, one of the consequences of working in a glass factory. Some jobs involved lighter duties, and these were allocated by seniority and not by compa- ny decree.

The fate of another worker again shows the union advantage in terms beyond dollars and cents. I was the arbitrator in a case in which

WHY UNIONS? 45

a man had been unemployed for two years before finally getting a job with the local water company. The employer had a policy that required the workers to wear shoes with steel toes. It also had agreed to reim- burse the employees for shoe purchases up to an amount of $50.00. The man was too poor to buy the shoes, so his grandmother bought them for him. He took the receipt to the company, expecting to get the $50.00, since the shoes had cost more than this. Without warning, his supervisor called him in to his office and accused him of doctoring the receipt, saying that the company knew that the shoes were priced at only $37.95. In other words, he was accused of stealing $12.05 from the company. At the meeting, the worker, flustered because he did not want the employer to know that his grandmother had purchased the shoes, lied and said that he had himself purchased them for the amount shown on the receipt. At this point the worker was fired for theft.

Without a union, the matter would have ended there, because the company could have discharged him for no reason at all. But as a union member, he had rights which the employer had to respect. The collective bargaining agreement stated that no one in the bargaining unit could be discharged except for "just cause." He filed a grievance against the company, demanding his reinstatement with full back pay. The grievance procedure contained a series of steps by which the union and the company could try to resolve the dispute. The employ- erwas out to make an example of this worker because, as it turned out, he had become a solid union member and recently had been elected the shop steward, the first-level union representative inside the plant. He had been aggressively pursuing grievances, trying to make the union stronger by showing the members that it would stand up for them. This is the type of person a company hates, so it decided to fire him, expecting that his short tenure and his lie at the meeting would be enough to convict him.

But the employer was wrong. When the two sides failed to settle his grievance, the union invoked the arbitration clause of the agreement, which forced the employer to place the case before a neutral outsider called an arbitrator. At the arbitration hearing, the company's attorney tried to bully the union's witnesses and the arbitrator as well. But he could not prove that the employee had altered the receipt. So I, as the

46 WHY UNIONS MATTER

arbitrator, ordered the worker back to work with no loss of pay, bene- fits, or seniority. The employer then took a sentence from my award and used it as the basis for firing the worker a second time. But it fared no better before a second arbitrator or before the state court to which it appealed both awards. After collecting the large back pay due him, the worker resumed his duties as shop steward, a position he still holds today.

A worker standing alone is a worker in trouble. For every LeBron James, whose amazing talent gives him tremendous bargaining power, there are millions of the rest of us, eminently replaceable. Our only hope is to stand together, and, as we have seen, when we do, we can greatly improve our lot in life. There is no doubt that unions force employers to pay their workers higher wages and to provide them with more and better fringe benefits. And furthermore, unions compel employers to listen to their employees and to respect them as human beings. Employers know these things, and this is why they fight our collective efforts so viciously and spread lies about them. In their dis- information campaigns they have allies in the highest places: in Congress, in the White House, in the corporate-owned media, and in the universities. As we examine labor unions further in the following chapters, it is important that we always remember this: if unions are just in it for themselves, how do we explain their known benefits and why is it that most employers are in an all-out war against them?

chapter two

HOW UNIONS FORM Up until the end of the 1930s, the formation of a union was mainly a contest of power. Employers were intent on keeping their workplaces union-free, and they took whatever steps were necessary, no matter how ruthless. Acts of anti-union violence were common and, though illegal, were seldom punished. In fact, public authorities were often complicit in corporate violence against working people. In the coal towns of Pennsylvania, for example, the notorious coal and iron police hired by the companies to intimidate the miners and their fam- ilieswere actually sanctioned by the state legislature. Union support- ers could be fired and blacklisted legally. Employers were free to coerce their workers into signing "yellow dog" contracts in which they promised not to join a union. These were legally enforceable, and union organizers risked fine and imprisonment if they tried to get workers to break these agreements by joining a union. The courts took a dim view of labor organizations and readily issued court orders called injunctions forbidding workers to strike, picket, or boycott. More than a thousand of these injunctions were issued in the I920s alone.!

Yet,despite the combined force of the corporations and the gov- ernment, workers did manage to organize to protect their interests and improve their circumstances. The living conditions of unskilled work- ers, including most African Americans, were too harsh to allow for much success in forming unions, but skilled workers were sometimes

48 WHY UNIONS MATTER

able to overcome the employers' antagonism. They did this through what came to be called direct actions. For example, iron molders might force their employer to give in to their collective demands by striking and enforcing their strike with pickets. The molders would typically be white men of the same nationality and with strong com- munity ties. No one would cross their picket lines, and occasionally the local police would not do the employers' bidding. A strike by one gronp of workers might spread to other groups, who would strike in sympathy. Workers came to understand that the more they stuck together, the better were their chances.' A powerful tool of the skilled workers was the boycott, asking consumers not to buy products from particular companies charged with unfairness to labor.' During the 1880s, thousands of boycotts were called and honored, helping work- ers to bring recalcitrant employers into line under threat of losing their customers. Once organized, workers could maintain union wage scales and conditions only so long as they were prepared to use direct action against their employers any time the employers refused to honor their agreements with the union.

Skilled workers extended their organizations in several ways. First, as their employers began to expand from local to national markets, local unions in different cities and towns banded together to form national unions. One of these that has stood the test of time is the United Mine Workers of America, founded in 1890. Not only was it one of the first successful unions of unskilled and skilled workers, but it was also one of the few unions that actively organized African Americans.'

Second, all of the unions in a city began to form central labor bod- ies or councils. Through these local umbrella organizations, unions could coordinate their boycotts and sympathy strikes, as well as labor political activities.

Third, the various unions of skilled workers attempted to build a federation of all national unions. Snch a federation could publish a national labor newspaper, act as an arbiter in disputes between nation- al unions, lobby for political reforms, develop a staff of experts on labor affairs, and directly organize new workers into unions, making labor a force to be reckoned with on the national scene. After several attempts, the national unions succeeded in creating the American

HOW UNIONS FORM 49

Federation of Labor (AFL) in 1886, and this federation of many national unions has survived to the present day.

Fourth, unions at all levels saw clearly the need for a political response to the alliance between government and business. It might prove impossible to expand organization if the police, the courts, and the legislatures stood ready to stifle labor at every turn. Workers groped for the most appropriate political response, but there was much disagreement. Some argued for the formation of a labor party: a party of, for, and by workers, on the model of the labor parties in Europe. Others argued that the situation in the United States made such a party doomed to failure because the two major parties were too powerful to be challenged. The best political response for labor, they said,was to fight for labor-oriented candidates and policies within the major parties. As the first president of the AFL, the English-born cigar maker Samuel Gompers, put it, labor should "reward its friends and punish its enemies" regardless of their political affiliations. As it turned out, this second argument won the day. It is still the position of organ- izedlabor, although the party with which labor is most closely allied is the Democratic Party. But the discussion about labor and politics, and how the alliance of labor and the Democratic Party has failed to pro- mote the interests of workers, is far from finished.'

A LITTLE HISTORY

In the decades after the Civil War, which ended in 1865, our econ- omy took on its modern form, one dominated by large corpora- tions. As the opportunities diminished for people to own land for farming or to gain economic independence through owning small businesses, most people were forced to become wage workers. This made them vulnerable to the vagaries of the business cycle-the periodic ups and downs in economic activity characteristic of economies like ours. Over and over, vicious competition among the corporations led them to expand their production too much; they produced more than they could seU. This led to price wars and falling profits, which, in turn, led to massive layoffs and unemployment. The resulting depressions sometimes lasted for many years. During such periods it was difficult for workers to

50 WHY UNIONS MATTER

build their unions because the competition among workers for jobs was so severe. People desperate for work would take the jobs of others if they had to. However, as hard times continued, work- ers at times became so angry at their circumstances that they revolted.

The first worker revolt occurred in 1877, the year of "The Great Uprising.»6 The railroad companies were the nation's largest employers and among the most ruthless. The economy had been in depression since 1873, and the railroad companies had responded to the crisis by repeatedly cutting the wages of their hard-pressed workers. When the B&O Railroad cut wages by 10 percent in July 1877, workers at its yards in Martinsburg, West Virginia, walked off their jobs in a spontaneous strike. President

Rutherford B. Hayes sent in federal troops to stop the strike, but this so angered workers that the strike spread north and west, soon becoming a national insurrection. Pittsburgh railroad work- ers struck the Pennsylvania Railroad on July 19, 1877, and when local militia could not stop the strike, the state government ordered the Philadelphia militia into the city. Hostile crowds met the soldiers. When rocks were thrown, the militiamen opened fire and killed twenty people, including one woman and three chil- dren. In response, the workers revolted and destroyed the rail- road's property. The workers themselves restored order, although they were defeated later by federal troops. Similar events took place throughout the country, from Chicago to St. Louis to San Francisco. When the strikes were finally crushed, the nation's newspapers condemned the strikers as thugs, tramps, and com-

munists. Citizens were urged to buy guns to protect themselves from the working-class rabble.

Other rebellions arose after this first uprising, most notably in 1886, 1892, 1894, 1919, and during the Great Depression of the 1930s.1n 1886,workers throughout the country struck, boycotted, picketed, and marched to win the eight-hour day. During a rally in Haymarket Square in Chicago, a bomb was thrown, perhaps by a police agent, which killed eight policemen." The Chicago police reacted violently, killing a number of workers and wounding

scores more. Eight radical labor leaders were arrested soon after-

HOW UNIONS FORM

ward and charged with murder. Without evidence that they had committed any crime, they were quickly tried and sentenced to death. Four of the eight were hanged, and one committed suicide in jail. Governor John Altgeld, whose political career was ruined by this act of mercy, later pardoned the others. 1894 was the year of the great Homestead steel strike." War broke out in Homestead, Pennsylvania, when steel magnate Andrew Carnegie and his lieu- tenant, Henry Clay Frick, shut down the Carnegie SteelWorks and then tried to reopen it with nonunion labor. Workers actually took over the government of the town, fighting a pitched battle against aprivate army of Pinkerton detectives and forcing them to surren- der. The strike was defeated only when government troops were brought in. Twoyears later the Pullman strike erupted. This strike, led by working-class hero Eugene V.Debs, began when the work- ers in the company town of Pullman, Illinois, home of the factory that made the Pullman railroad cars, struck over repeated wage cuts. This monumental battle between employers and workers was again broken by federal troops and court injunctions. Debs was actually sent to prison after the strike for not obeying the injunc- tions.? After the First World War, amassive strike wave,notably in steel, shook the American economy. Historian Philip S. Foner called the 1919 wave"an unprecedented series of uprisings which, if only temporarily, vigorously challenged employers' control of the work force."IO

There were so many rebellions during the 19305 that it is not possible to examine them all here. II In the famous sit-down strikes to organize the unskilled workers in our mass production industries, workers would literally sit down in industrial work- places, refusing to work or leave. The unemployed took to the streets as well. A strike on the San Francisco docks spread to all workplaces in the city ina general strike in 1934. In Minneapolis, truck drivers led a similar strike, complete with roving bands of picketers and sophisticated 10gistics.12 More than one hundred thousand people demonstrated in Chicago in 1932 to protest the murder of several people by police, who were trying to enforce an eviction of a family from their home. While police and troops again intervened on the side of the employers, the rebellions of the

51

52 WHY UNIONS MATTER

1930s could not be defeated. Workers consolidated their unions and were able to win significant political victories.

Apart from a short-lived postwar upheaval in 1945 to 1946, there have been no great labor upheavals smce the 193Os.There are two major reasons for this. First, workers have not been able to overcome racial and sexual divisions. With some notable excep- tions, the labor movement has been dominated by white men, who have often acted in racist and sexist ways, even during the labor rebellions. During the 193& genuine gains were made in and through many unions against racism and sexism, but after the Second World War organized labor failed to live up to a cherished principle inearlier times: "an injury to one is an injury to all." This meant that the great revolts against racism and sexism of the post- war period, the civil rights movement and the women's move- ment, were not intimately connected with the labor movement, despite the fact that women and people of color were becoming increasingly important in the workforce.P Second, all of the labor rebellions were motivated by a search for alternatives to the wage labor system itself, which many workers could see was the source

of their bondage to employers. The challenge to wage labor was part of the politics of the labor movement and the basis for the formation of labor political parties. In the 19305 conditions were right for forming a labor party and renewing labor's historic

antagonism to the system of wage labor. Unfortunately, labor's leaders instead accepted the class structure of American society,

allied with the Democratic Party, and eventually purged the left- wing unionists from the labor movement. The result was a more conservative trade unionism, which saw itself more as partner than opponent of employers. So, while there have been many

strikes and other militant labor actions since the Great Depression, there has not been a widespread labor rebellion.

HOW UNIONS FORM

During the Great Depression of the 1930s, unskilled workers also relied on the direct-action tactics used by skilled workers in the nine- teenth century. However, the depth of the economic crisis combined

HOW UNIONS FORM 53

with the breadth of the labor movement helped to secure for working people significant political concessions. Renewed militancy led to the formation of a new national federation of unions, the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIa). Feeling the pressure from below, the federal government under Franklin D. Roosevelt passed laws, which, for the first time, gave workers certain fundamental rights." The Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 strictly limited the ability of employers to obtain injunctions in labor disputes. The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1937 provided for the payment of a minimum wage and overtime payfor hours in excess of forty per week. These laws represented major victories for workers, but the most important law enacted during the Great Depression was the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Section 7 of the NLRA gives workers the right to form labor unions without employer interference and compels employers to bargain col- lectively with unions chosen by the employees. A federal agency, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), was established by the NLRA to investigate employer violations of the act and to conduct elections in which workers can freely choose whether or not they want to be rep- resented by a union.

Since the passage of the NLRA, the vast majority of unions have been formed through NLRB-conducted representation elections. This isnot to say that a union cannot be formed through direct actions. But the law itself places serious roadblocks in the path of direct actions. So if you are ever part of a unionization effort, you will most likely use the NLRB or some similar agency. IS Over the past few years, especially during the administration of George W. Bush, when the NLRB was dominated by members extremely hostile to organized labor, many . unions have tried to find ways to secure employer recognition without going through normal NLRB procedures. One tactic has been to use economic, political, and community pressure to force the employer to recognize the union on the basis of some showing of majority support, either through a majority of the members of a proposed bargaining unit signing authorization cards or through holding an election under the auspices of an entity other than the NLRB, such as a religious or cOmmunity organization. Another has been for a strong union, such as SEIU, to use its bargaining power in one area to get an employer it hasorganized in that area to agree to remain neutral in a union organ-

54 WHY UNIONS MATTER

izing campaign at a facility of this company in another area. Such a neutrality agreement precludes an employer from using the tactics normally used in an anti-union campaign.

The NLRA does not cover all employees. Farm workers, domestic workers, railroad and airline workers, and public employees are the most important groups not covered. However, Congress and many state legislatures have passed laws similar to the NLRA that protect these workers. For example, railroad and airline workers can use the Railway Labor Act to get a union, and state and local government workers in most states can use state public employee laws. Therefore, the procedure described below for those covered by the NLRA will also be useful for most of the uncovered workers.

The principles underlying the NLRA are that, first, if a majority of workers in a workplace want a union, they should have a way to get one without having to engage in direct actions, and, second, only one union should represent any particular group of workers. Further, the workers who decide to form a union must have common interests by, for example, doing the same type of work. These workers form the bargaining unit.

Once the workers have carved out a bargaining unit, they must convince the NLRB that there is a sufficient interest in unionization to warrant an NLRB election. The board uses the yardstick that 30 percent of the members of the shop must express an interest in being represented by a particular union. This means that the workers must affiliate themselves with a union. They could constitute themselves as an independent union; glass factory workers could form the "Meadville Glassworkers Union," or some similar organization. However, it will probably be wiser for employees to contact an already existing union to help them organize. This is because winning an election or forcing the employer to recognize the union without an election is a time-consuming, expensive undertaking. Unions have organizers, legal staffs, and money, all of which may be essential for victory.

Great care must be taken in choosing a union. Although many unions today know that they must organize new members or die, it is still the case that too many unions devote too little effort to organiz- ing. So when workers make contact with a union, they should ask

HOW UNIONS FORM 55

questions and get assurances that the union will do right by them. For example, suppose that a group of nurses want to unionize. There are several unions with nurse members; the two most important are the SEIU and the CNA. The former organizes many kinds of workers, including nonprofessional hospital employees, such as those who clean rooms and serve food in the cafeterias. The latter, on the other hand, is a craft union and only organizes nurses. There are advantages in affiliating with either union. SEIU might be able to organize almost all of a hospital's workers, and this would give it ways to put more pressure on the employer than would a union that organized only nurses. But the CNA might argue that it knows more about the specif- ic problems faced by nurses, since nurses make up its membership as well as the core of its staff. It would be appropriate for our nurses to contact both unions and ask questions: are you interested in helping us unionize? What resources are you prepared to provide us' What do your collective bargaining contracts win for nurses' Will our demands be neglected because you have more members who are not nurses? Will you be able to make cooperative agreements with other groups of workers given that you only have nurse members? How independent are locals in you union? Who will actually do the bargaining, profes- sional staff or the nurses themselves? It might be that either union will do a good job. As Mike Parker notes:

Both the craft leNA] and industrial ISEIUI models address impor- tant parts of our work experience. Any union movement that wants to win power for workers needs to address both.

In principle, it shouldn't be so difficult to pay attention to both kinds of issues. An industrial union can have subdivisions that address the specific needs of its craft sectors. Within the UAW, for example, skilled workers have their own stewards and elect their own represen- tatives to the executive board. People with technical jobs such as engi- neers have their own locals. In the West Coast longshore, dockwork- ers, clerks, and warehouse workers have their own locals.

Likewise, craft unions can form councils to deal with a common employer. A bargaining council at a university, for example, could bring together separate unions for professors, teaching assistants, lab techs, clerical workers, and maintenance.l''

56 WHY UNIONS MATTER

The glass workers in Meadville chose the Aluminum, Brick, and Glass Workers (ABG), which has won contracts from major glass manufacturers. The ABG has since merged with the United Steel- workers of America (USWA), a very large union that has committed itself to organizing and has a large and sophisticated staff. But while size and staff are important, experience in the industry is critical as well. The United Auto Workers (UAW) failed to organize the glass workers at the sister plant in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, despite the fact that it had the early support of 80 percent of the bargaining unit.

The typical way in which workers show interest in unionization is by signing union authorization cards; these state that each worker authorizes the union to represent them for the purpose of collective bargaining. The union can petition the NLRB for an election once 30 percent of the members of the bargaining unit have signed the cards, although no union should ever go into an election without at least 50 percent of the cards signed-and probably a lot more. Not everyone who signs a card will wind up voting for the union. Another way to show the necessary support for the union is for the workers to sign a petition, which can also be presented to the NLRB instead of, or along with, authorization cards. As a tactic, this is actually better than sign- ing cards, because each person signing a petition will see the other names on it, whereas card signing is a private matter. To win an elec- tion, workers have to publicly commit themselves to the union, and a petition forces them to do this.

Once the requisite number of cards has been signed, the union petitions the NLRB for an election. The board notifies the employer. At this point, the employer is free to recognize the union or consent to an election. Most employers will do neither of these things. Instead they will ask the board to conduct a hearing, at which the union must show that it has enough support for an election and an appropriate basis for the bargaining unit. Employers often use these hearings just to delay the union drive and give them more time to develop their anti-union efforts. In addition, the employer may be able to convince the board that the bargaining unit is not appropriate. It may have jobs in it that are beyond its proper scope, or it may not include enough workers. The university at which I worked once held up union elec- tions for more than two years by continually challenging the bargain-

HOW UNIONS FORM 57

ingunit. The NLRB has recently made it easier for employers to chal- lengebargaining units on the grounds that some of the workers in it aresupervisors and therefore not legitimate unit members."

If the union successfully makes its case, the board will set a date (or dates) for the election. The employer is then free to try vigorously to getthe workers to vote against the union. Amendments to the original NLRA,as well as NLRB and court decisions, have greatly expanded the rangeof anti-union activities that an employer can lise. Often employ- ershire consultants to run their anti-union campaigns, and many of these are notorious for their semi-legal and illegal tactics." But even the legal tactics are appalling. Under current law it is legal for an employer to:

• Barrage the workers with anti-union propaganda, including sending letters (even videos) to the employees and their fami- lies at their homes. This propaganda does not have to be true, and as long as it is not directly threatening, it can suggest that certain bad things will happen if the workers vote in the union.

• Assign supervisors to engage in daily face-to-face "discussions" with union supporters. Prohibit union organizers who are not employees from being anywhere on company property.

• Hold captive audience meetings at the workplace. At these mandatory meetings, supervisors will puJl out all the stops to convince the workers that disaster awaits them if they vote for a union. They will tell the workers to give them another chance and things will get better. An organizer told me that one boss actually pulled out a handkerchief with an onion hidden in it, so that he could look like he was crying during one of these spiels.

Most employers will go further and commit illegal acts during the union campaign; they will transfer workers who support the union, threaten them, offer them bribes, or fire them in order to defeat the union. One researcher found that since the passage of the North Am'encan Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) employers have more fre-

58 WHY UNIONS MATTER

quently threatened to move their plants to Mexico or close them if a union won an election." Under current law, the penalties for such dirty tricks usually come too late and hurt the employer too little to make a difference.

On the election date, the workers vote by secret ballot. The union must win 50 percent plus one of the votes cast to be certified by the NLRB as the sole bargaining agent for the workers. If the union loses, it can challenge the results if the employer has violated the law by com- mitting unfair labor practices. The board will hold a hearing and has the power to overturn the election results. If it does, it may simply order another election. It can also overturn the election and order the employer to recognize the union despite the lost election, but that does not happen very often-only when the employer has so egregiously violated the law that the board feels that a fair election can no longer be held. Once the union has been certified as the bargaining agent, it has the duty to notify the employer that it wants to negotiate a contract with the employer.

SUCCESSFUL UNION ORGANIZING

It is difficult to force an employer to recognize a union, despite the pro- tections provided by the labor laws. Over the past forty years, unfair labor practices by employers have mushroomed, and union victory rates in elections have declined. For example, the unfair labor practices most germane to union election campaigns rose fourfold between the early 1950s and 1990, while refusals to bargain increased eightfold dur- ing the same period. In the 1950-1954 period, unions won 72.1 percent of NLRB elections, but by 1990 this ratio had fallen to 49.5 percent. Today it is a bit higher, but the number of elections held has fallen, as has the number of workers who are ultimately covered by collective bargaining agreements. The data available now must be viewed careful- ly because more unions have been refusing to use the NLRB at all. But while we don't have accurate figures on elections, workers covered by agreements, and unfair labor practices, there is no reason to believe that unions are surging or employers have become more law-abiding. And empirical studies still indicate that employers' tactics, including the illegal ones, have a negative impact on union success rates."

HOW UNIONS FORM

Yetit is not impossible for unions to win recognition from employ- ers. Some unions have decided to organize unions outside of the National Labor Relations Act. They do this in a variety of ways, usual- ly involving direct actions. The United Food and Commercial Workers tries to organize boycotts against stubborn employers, telling them, in effect, that the boycotts will be ended when the employer recognizes the union. Others focus attention upon an entire community, trying to raise citizen awareness of the rights of workers and participating actively in community life. Then, when particular employers are tar- geted for organization, the union has already built a favorable climate which the employer will have difficulty combating. A union might then hold an ad hoc representation election under the supervision of a community organization, and if the workers vote for the union, com- munity pressures can be brought to bear upon the employer to recog- nize it. Recently, unions have used their power in one place to compel employers to sign "neutrality agreements" for workers the union is try- ing to organize in another region." Labor law scholar Ellen Dannin, while not opposed to such organizing strategies, cautions that unions should not abandon the NLRB and the NLRA. Both still have much potential to protect workers. She argues that union attorneys need to learn to educate judges, who have been trained in a legal tradition innately hostile to the interests of employees. Most judges do not know that the NLRA makes it the duty of the federal government to encourage the settlement of industrial disputes by collective bargain- ing.22

WITH THE CALIFORNIA NURSES' ASSOCIATION IN TEXAS"

In the summer of 2007) I went with my wife Karen on a four- month nationwide book tour. For one week in mid-July we made our way across Texas promoting my latest book (Cheap Motels and a Hot Plate: An Economist's Travelogue) and talking union with members of the California Nurses Association (CNA). We made

stops in San Antonio, Austin, Houston, and Dallas, meeting in two restaurants. a union hall, and a nurse's home. Along with the new book, I sold dozens of copies of the first edition of this book, dis-

59

60 WHY UNIONS MATTER

covering once again that warms, no matter the kind of work they do, have grievances against their employers that cannot be reme- died unless employees organize.

The CNA was founded in 1903 as a professional association for nurses. As the social and legal climates changed, nurses, like public school teachers, converted their organization into a labor union and began to agitate for recognition from their employers and coUectivebargaining. CNA has enjoyed great success unioniz- ing nurses in Califentia, winning collective bargaining agree- ments that establish considerably better pay, benefits, working conditions, and voice than those enjoyed by their nonunion coun- terparts. (Labor scholar Gordon Lafer notes that where nurses are unionized, patients are safer.) The union has also been a strong advocate for the z:eneral public, sponsoring legislation in California that mandates the nation's first minimum registered nurse-to-patient ratio. When governor Arnold Schwarzenegger suspended this law in 2004, the union aggressively picketed his appearances around the state and galvanized other unions and the public to protest. Then, as Mark Brenner of Labor Notes tells us:

But rather than retreat, the governor upped the ante, call- ing for a special election in November and personally working to put four propositions on the ballot, including two that were explicitly anti-union .

..The first measure extended the probationary period for teachers from two years to five, which would make it easier to fire teachers for any reason (or no reason at all).

The second required public employee unions to get annual

written permission before using any member's dues for political purposes.

California's unions responded by pooling an unprece- dented amount of money, spending over $100 million to

defeat the four propositions. The California Teachers Association provided the lion's share, more than $53 mil- lion, while SElU put in more than $20 million between its umbrella California State Council of Service Employees and the large state workers Local 1000.

HOW UNIONS FORM

Working through the Alliance, labor also blanketed the

airwaves, sponsoring 24 separate television commercials

and countless radio ads.

As the election approached, the Alliance worked with local labor councils and the state fed to coordinate precinct

walking aud phoue banking, with more than 10,000 people

working on voter turnout statewide. But it was the nurses' performance that really stole the

show. Wherever Arnold went, from Washington to Wall Street, the nurses weren't far behind. The CNA even fol- lowed Schwarzenegger to a $lOO,OO6·per-ticket fundraiser

at the Rolling Stones concert in Boston's Fenway Park.

"People recognized us right away, and they 'even know

about the ratio issue," said Nguyen, who followed Arnold to Boston to protest outside of the concert. «They knew exactly why we were shadowing our governor."

The nurses never let up, staging JlMM'ethan 100 protests

in12 months. These efforts struck a chord both with union members and with the public. At the November 8 election,

all four of Schwarzenegger's propositions were defeated.s'

The CNA has been a steadfast champion of single-payer nation-

al health care. The union's concern for patients and the public has

given it a high and positive profile in California. To expand its

base, in 2064 CNA formed the National Nurses Organizing

Committee (NNOq and began to orgauize nationaHy.

One place where CNA is concentrating its efforts is Texas,

where many nurses work in public hospitals. Texas does not have

a collective bargaiAiRg law for public employees, which means

that while workers in state and local government have a constitu-

tional right to join a union, they cannot compel their employers to

bargain with them. An employer can voluntarily recognize a

union, but this rarely happens. For nurses at private hospitals,

workers can use the National Labor Relations Board or try for vol-

untary recognition. However, Texas is a right-to-work state, so

even if a union secures representation rights, it cannot negotiate a

union security agreement with aft employer.

62 WHY UNIONS MATTER

CNA, like some other unions (including SEIU, with which CNA has had an often rancorous and competitive relationship), has employed innovative tactics to compensate for these difficul- ties. For example, it used corporate campaigns and aggressive organizing in California to get Tenet Healthcare, one of the indus- try's largest corporations, to sign a "neutrality agreement," in which the company agreed not to interfere in certain organizing efforts in Texas. Since employer interference in organizing efforts, often illegal but seldom punished effectively, is a major reason for low union success rates, such agreements can give the union acon- siderable advantage. There has been much debate about neutrali- ty agreements, with some critics arguing that unions have made unreasonably restrictive concessions to employers to win them. However, if a union uses its power in one place to get an employer to maintain neutrality in another location, it can organize workers in might not have been able to in ordinary circumstances. On March 28, 2008, CNA's neutrality agreement with Tenet bore fruit

with a victory at Houston's Cypress Fairbanks Hospital, the first hospital 10 be unionized in Texas.2S

CNAhas also lobbied the Texas legislature to secure staffing ratios such as it won in California and freedom for nurses to act as patient advocates. It has held demonstrations in the state capital, Austin, and other cities across the state, as well as informational

pickets to inform the public about the working conditions of nurses and the need for healthcare reform.

Our first visit was in San Antonio. I spoke to a spirited group of about forty nurses, spouses, and staff persons. They asked pointed questions, showing a good grasp of workplace problems and what needed to be done about them, as well as a knowledge of unions and the labor movement. CNAhas made a point of devel- oping rank-and-file leaders and using female and minority staff. Most nurses are women, and in San Antonio many are latina. It has also understood that a union must educate its members not just about the nuts and bolts of unions and collective bargaining but also about the larger society and political economy. Workers need a political compass and an ideological code or creed that fits their needs and galvanizes them into action. To do so they must

HOW UNIONS FORM

learn much more than what they see on television or what all too many unions teach them.

The meetings in Austin, Houston, and Dallas were less satis- fying, but the fact that working nurses came to hear me at all was gratifying. And I learned once again why unions matter. Nurse after nurse told horror stories about their work-unconscionable patient loads and twelve-hour shifts, which, even if done in a shorter workweek, leave nurses exhausted and patients at risk. One nurse told us of working such shifts for two weeks straight before getting a break. Another worked sixteen-hour shifts! All the nurses spoke of constant harassment from supervisors and some doctors. Hospital treatment of patients was described as profit- driven and often unsafe. One nurse described a hospital evacua- tion in which seriously illand injured patients were forced to leave their rooms without adequate support, and without the nurse's intervention patients might have died. Nurses are time-studied and subjected to lean production tactics made common by the automobile companies. Poorly trained and less skilled workers allow hospitals to economize on the use of regular nurses. Patient loads are incrementally increased and necessary supplies are cur- tailed. Nurses must "do more with less," in an occupation where both mean worse care for the sick. Not one nurse to whom I spoke said that she would encourage her daughter or son to become a nurse. As they shared their stories, encouraged by the union staff persons, I could see the seeds of the solidarity necessary for suc- cessful union-building sprouting. From small meetings to talking at work to reading and reflecting to wearing union insignia at work to confronting a supervisor about patient loads to a public protest to the signing of a petition. Gradually, day-by-day, you come to understand that your life circumstances can only improve if those of your coworkers do as well. If the time is right, if the union is right, you come to realize that you are a part of something larger than yourself-the struggle of an entire class, the working class, for liberation.

No matter whether unions organize under the NLRA or not, we have a good deal of evidence about what it takes for a union to sue-

64 WHY UNIONS MATTER

ceed. To overcome the obstacles employers and the law put in the path of union organizing, union tactics matter. In fact, researchers Kate Bronfenbrenner and Tom Iuravich say that "union tactics as a group played a greater role in explaining election outcome than any other group of variables, including employer characteristics and tactics, bar- gaining unit demographics, organizer background, or election envi- ronment."26

A successful union often takes time to build. Those workers who strongly support the union must, with the help of the union's organ- izers, build a rank-and-file organization inside the workplace right from the beginning. This means meeting and talking with coworkers to build understanding and support long before asking them to sign petitions or authorization cards.

We often think of unions as organizations whose only purpose is to get their members more money. Vet Bronfenbrenner and [uravich found that "unions which focus on issues such as dignity, justice, dis- crimination, fairness, or service quality were associated with higher win rates than those which focused on more traditional bread and but- ter issues, such as wages, benefits, and job security."" The sanitation workers on strike in Memphis, Tennessee, whom Martin Luther King Ir, was supporting at the time of his assassination in 1968, wore signs that read "I Am a Man." The women clerical workers who organized at Vale University in the 1970s wanted respect and dignity, plus an end to racial and sexual discrimination, and not merely more pay."

To achieve these goals, a "culture of solidarity" must permeate every aspect of the union drive. In general terms, the employer must come to be understood as the class enemy of the workers, one that can be defeated only if the workers stick together, acting as if "an injury to one is an injury to all." The union should encourage a gradual escala- tion of solidarity actions, allowing workers to discover through action that unity is both possible and beneficial. For example, once an inter- nal organizing committee is formed, its members can begin to have informal meetings with other workers outside the plant or arrange to visit workers at their homes. Then, a petition of union support might be circulated. Signing a petition might be the first step in getting a per- son's commitment; once it is obtained, the worker's further commit- ment should be invited and secured. Once sufficient numbers have

.....--------~~~--------~~------- HOW UNIONS FORM

signed a petition, a rally of signers might be organized. An open rally means people stand up for what they have done and makes further actions easier. Regular events, from meetings with speakers to social events, can further solidify the workers. People must be made aware at these events of what the employer is doing or will be doing to under- mine the union effort. It is relatively easy for the union to predict the employer's tactics, since they all use basically the same ones. In addi- tion, the workers' families and the larger working community must be brought into the campaign from the beginning. Workers from other union bargaining units can be excellent organizers, since they speak from direct experience. As soon as possible, workers should begin to formulate the demands that they will bring to the bargaining table when their union drive succeeds. Perhaps demands can be presented to the employer before the election.

In their research, Bronfenbrenner and Iuravich found specific tac- tics that were especially helpful in winning elections:

• Forming an organizing committee. This workplace commit- tee should include as high a percentage of workers as possible. It should be representative of the composition of the workforce in as many ways as possible. Each department of the workplace should be represented, and the sexual and racial composition of the committee should reflect those of the workplace as a whole. Optimally, the union staff people will also reflect these compo- sitions. For example, in plants with mostly Asian women work- ers) the organizers should be Asian women, or at least women familiar with their circumstances. Similarly, organizing in the South requires unions to use African American organizers, since it is still the case that 1110st African American workers labor in the South. Those who originally form the organizing committee should make a diagram of the workplace to aid in the organizing.

• House calling. Successful unionization demands face-to-face contacts. For example, I participated in four failed attempts to unionize college teachers. One of the reasons why these efforts failed is because the teachers would not speak directly to their

65

66 WHY UNIONS MATTER

coworkers even at work. College teachers are too caught up in the middle-class view that it is not polite to infringe upon another person's privacy. It was unthinkable for many union supporters to buttonhole their colleagues in the hallways, much less in their homes. Therefore the union relied too heavily upon mass mailings and letters to newspapers. We had missed the point that the formation of a union is an emotional as well as an intellectual experience. Getting people to take actions that they have been taught all their lives are not appropriate requires that they be moved, that they get angry, that they come to see that there are principles at stake. Only through personal contact is there any hope of winning the emotional commitment with- out which a union cannot succeed. Both union-supporting workers and organizers should make house calls, for the obvi- ous reason that potential recruits are bound to be more recep- tive to people whom they recognize.

• Holding mass and smalll group meetings. Unions are collec- rive organizations and, as such. require regular meetings to work effectively and democratically. At meetings, not only can workers hear what the union is all about, they can also learn the fundamentals of democratic organization and begin to gain the confidence that will help them confront their employers. Meetings can also be social events, places at which workers can solidify friendships and make new ones. At larger meetings, people from other workplaces can inform the workers of how unions have benefited them and can help the new union devel- op its strategies.

• Using solidarity days, on which union supporters do some- thing to show their solidarity. At the Meadville glass factory, the workers showed their unity, pride, and dignity by wearing red union t-shirts. Depending on circumstances, a solidarity day can also be an occasion to challenge managerial authority in a more direct way, such as a group of union supporters formally grieving some particularly outrageous management action.

HOW UNIONS FORM

• Forming a bargaining committee before the election. People begin to see that something may become a possibility as they actually begin to do it. As workers develop concrete contract proposals, their ingenuity is tapped and they become impatient that their proposals are not already the law of the shop. The idea is to make unionization a more or less self-fulfilling prophecy.

67

Not only do such tactics make it possible to win unionization even when the employer vigorously resists the workers' efforts, but they are also crucial to the union winning a first contract. Management does not stop fighting the union once it wins the election. It will try to pre- vent the union from getting the critical first collective bargaining agreement, and it will succeed about a third of the time. It will do so by using legal and illegal tricks to delay the bargaining. In order to detect and to prevent this, the union must continue to build the rank- and-file movement after the election. Finally, to be effective, a union must convince most or all of the members of the bargaining unit to actually become members of the union. Under current labor laws, it is not possible to negotiate a contract provision that forces workers to become union members." However, the tactics that work in organiz- ing and in bargaining also work in building union membership.