Moderated by Tom Sabulis
Unions are in the news, as calls continue for MARTA to privatize services and Michigan enacts right-to-work laws. Today, a Georgia union official writes about the benefits union workers bring to our state, while an expert from Emory University’s Goizueta Business School says right-to-work freedoms are needed for states to remain flexible in the new global economy.
Commenting is open below Ray Hill’s column.
By Charlie Flemming
As we approach the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom organized by A. Philip Randolph, vice-president of the AFL-CIO, we are reminded of Martin Luther King Jr’s 1961 fight against anti-unionism. “In our glorious fight for civil rights,” King said, “we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, as ‘right-to-work.’ It provides no ‘rights’ and no ‘works.’ Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining.”
Despite his warning, the anti-union crusade continues as de-industrialization, globalization and offshore production have diminished wages and greatly reduced the availability of good jobs.
Unions, despite the premature proclamation of their death, remain relevant in the continued fight for fair wages, decent benefits and safe working conditions. What happened in Michigan this week is a perfect example of corporations and politicians interfering with the freedom of employees to work together in unions to improve their lives. It not only undermines our belief in a voice for all who work, it lowers living standards for all of us.
Now more than ever, we need to be unified to create jobs and restore the middle class across our country, because work connects us all. While Martin Luther King Jr. made the ultimate sacrifice standing with the sanitation workers of Memphis in 1968, the work he gave his life for continues.
U.S. workers in right-to-work states, for example, earn an average of $5,538 less a year than their counterparts in states where they have the right to collective bargaining. Every citizen is diminished by these inequities, because the reduced salaries represent missed tax revenues and reduced money circulating in the local and state economy.
Unions and collective bargaining also make a difference in workplace safety; right-to-work states report 50 percent more workplace deaths. The campaigns for fair wages, decent health care, and safe working conditions through labor contracts are a continuing responsibility of the American labor movement.
Union concerns extend beyond the needs of our members. What is often left unreported is how unions work with business, civil society and government to realize the democratic vision established by our country’s founders. During the 2012 Georgia state legislative session, the AFL-CIO championed freedom of speech by opposing SB469. The bill would have curtailed the right to picket, a traditional American tool for social justice advocacy. Who can forget the picketing Memphis sanitation workers with their “I Am a Man” placards?
Organized labor also benefits the larger society in other ways often invisible to the public. More than 900 Georgia AFL-CIO members assisted in recovery efforts following the devastation of Hurricane Sandy. Each year, AFL-CIO members in Atlanta and Georgia provide millions of dollars of charitable donations to the United Way and many other charitable organizations that assist Georgians in need.
Organized labor also advocates for the reintegration of our U.S. veterans into the economy through our “Helmets to Hardhats” initiative. The program pairs our transitioning military veterans with quality career training and employment opportunities within the construction industry.
In the coming legislative session, we will fight for the constitutional and economic rights of all Georgians. We’ll push for Buy Georgia, Buy American legislation, which gives preference to products made in Georgia and/or the United States. We will also work on mass transit issues, immigration rights, privatization, unemployment, corporate tax breaks, living wages and public education.
In sum, your dreams for a better state with ample employment opportunities are what drive our work every day. The Georgia AFL-CIO will continue fighting to realize the dreams of all Georgians.
Charlie Flemming is president of the Georgia AFL-CIO.
By Ray Hill
Right-to-work laws generate passionate arguments on both sides of the issue. All sorts of statistics are cited by those for and against these laws. Although econometrics was one of my Ph.D. fields, I don’t put much stock in any of this “evidence.” Too many factors contribute to an economy’s ability to create jobs and grow incomes to isolate the effect of right-to-work laws with much quantitative precision. I would rather consider right-to-work laws in a much broader context.
When we think of all the factors that contribute to an economy’s success, it seems clear to me that flexible labor markets are becoming more and more important in a world of globally connected business and rapid technological change.
The evidence is pervasive. A decade ago, Germany instituted a series of reforms designed to loosen up its very rigid labor market . Throughout the 1990s, Germany’s unemployment rate had been on par with France and much of the rest of Europe, and was consistently about twice that of the U.S. Ten years after these reforms, Germany has an unemployment rate half that of France but still pays its workers significantly higher wages. Indeed, Germany’s unemployment is now below that of the United States.
On this side of the Atlantic, we have the example of decades of migration of automobile manufacturing out of the highly unionized Midwest, where GM was required to pay its employees whether or not they actually worked. Even closer to home is last month’s bankruptcy of Hostess Brands (maker of Twinkies), brought on by incredibly rigid rules imposed by their unionized delivery workers.
Labor unions have made important contributions to promoting safer working conditions and other employee protections, most of which have now been written into our nation’s laws. However, unions also have the effect of reducing an economy’s flexibility and undercutting its ability to adapt to the rapid changes we experience in the global economy.
Unions’ ability to raise workers’ wages are a commonly cited argument in favor of right-to-work laws. High wages are great if you have a union job, but aren’t worth much if you are unemployed in a state with slow growth or shrinking industry. High wages are also not very useful when your company relocates to another state or outsources your job to another country. Even promises of job security are of little value when your company goes into bankruptcy, like Hostess, because it can’t compete.
By not requiring workers to finance unions as a condition of employment, Georgia’s right-to-work law helps to keep Georgia competitive. This is becoming more important every day since the rest of the world is moving in Georgia’s direction. In the U.S. as a whole, union membership as a percentage of the workforce fell last year to a level not seen since the 1930s. Private sector participation in unions fell below 7 percent.
Earlier this year, Indiana, in the old industrial heartland of America, became the 23rd state to adopt a right-to-work law, and just this week, Michigan became the 24th. Only in the government sector, shielded from competition, is union membership not shrinking. However, the budgetary problems of Greece (and Illinois!) should remind us that even governments are not immune from the inability of a unionized workforce to adapt to changing conditions.
Ray Hill is senior lecturer at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School.
34 comments Add your comment
Allan Richardson
December 14th, 2012
3:44 pm
I see several people have repeated the right-wing phrase “union BOSSES” which is the labor-bashing equivalent of the N-word (not QUITE as hateful). Don’t corporations have BOSSES also? Those bosses make their income by paying workers as little as they can to keep them from quitting (and before you talk about “competing on skills” remember that the great percentage of jobs COULD be done by anyone with the minimum required skill, so there is no reason to pay a truck driver more because he/she is a GREAT truck driver). They are, in other words, paid for keeping wages as low as possible.
By contrast, the people whom you refer to as “union BOSSES” are working members of the union, working their company jobs AND volunteering their time; and they are ELECTED by the workers in the union (know of any CEO’s elected by their employees?), and when they do receive expense money, it is usually only part of what they spend out of pocket. Why? To get higher wages and better and safer working conditions for the MEMBERS who elected them. Their only rewards are the pride of accomplishment, respect of their peers, and a higher wage on their own company day jobs. They are far from BOSSES, because their members can vote them out! Essentially, they are “politicians” within the world of their union; but they are more easily kept honest because union members are more diligent in forming their opinions than most voters are.
And as for being out for themselves only, the fact is that ONLY after unions were accepted and legally recognized (rather than being beaten up and shot TO DEATH by private soldiers) in some industries and some states, did wages and working conditions begin to improve for OTHER workers also. Weekend, vacation, overtime, worker’s compensation, unemployment insurance, etc. would not be here if not for unions, and WILL NOT be here for long if unions are destroyed.
As for the “freedom to join a union” you do realize that the benefits of union membership in an open union shop extend to non-members-by-choice also? Just as non-pledging listeners can hear all the public radio that pledging members can. So other than self-respect, why would anyone pay to get what he or she can get for free? Maybe so that the organization that makes it possible will CONTINUE to be there for them in the future! And right wing politicians use “right to work” as a means toward killing all unions, for that very reason.
J Jackson
December 14th, 2012
12:17 pm
No one is forced to join a union. There are many many more non-union companies than union ones. If some one does not want to be part of a collective bargaining group he/she can chose not to work for a company that has one. But if someone does choose to accept the wages, benefits and representation of collective bargaining, that choice should include contributing to the system making them possible. Today companies belong to associations that seek to advance their collective interest. These organizations interfere with free market competition that would allow wages to rise naturally. Getting rid of unions now because you think they are no longer needed is like getting rid of your home security alarm because your house hasn’t been broken into.
The Fundamental laws of economics
December 14th, 2012
12:04 pm
Unions fight for the dreams of unions – period. Higher wages mean higher dues which mean bigger salaries and bigger homes for union bosses. Minimum wage laws only serve to push overall wages higher while eliminating the competition of less skilled labor from the workforce. MLK gets cited as a champion for labor, but lets not forget that MLK was basically a socialist, and unskilled black youth currently suffer from the highest levels of unemployment of any demographic, in no small part because of union protectionism and minimum wage laws (and mandatory increases).
An employer is only able to employ someone at a wage rate that is equal to or lower than the amount of benefit they will derive from the labor employed. If someone can only deliver $5 an hour of contribution to the company, they will not be hired if the minimum wage is $6. The same applies no matter what the rate of the minimum wage or the union-mandated wage. It is assumed that an employer can just pass these additional costs on to his customers, but then we are simply socializing the costs to everyone and ultimately there is a limit. Or it is assumed that the employer will simply reduce his profits, but this impacts everyone in reduction of the tax revenues (though I advocate a complete elimination of corporate taxes) and eliminates the capital available for production improvements, etc. that profits are used for.
There is plenty wrong with our system. We do not have free market capitalism, but rather crony capitalism or corporatism in which powerful influence groups use the power, force, and guns of government to manipulate the economy to their benefit. Wall Street, the banking cartel, the military-industrial complex, the prison-industrial complex, and unions are all examples of groups who employ the government guns to their benefit and we as citizens are ALL poorer for this intervention into the economy.
I have no opposition to collective bargaining, but no government special priviledges should be afforded to anyone who chooses to engage in such a method of change with an employer. First and foremost, the business is the property of the owner, not the employees, and government (if it exists at all), should be in the business of protecting and defending property rights (even from the majority). That is what a constitutional republic was supposed to have given us. Tragically we can see what the influence of Progressives and other destructive forces have had on that ideal.
Mary Elizabeth
December 14th, 2012
10:29 am
@ Union Raised, 10:17 am
You personal testimony is well-taken and your testimony is important for others to read, especially in Georgia. Thank you for sharing it.
To repeat your closing line: “For all of the working families…. The mantra remains the same: we are stronger together.”
Scott B
December 14th, 2012
10:24 am
That 5000. more per year that they show as improved wages goes into the union cofers to provide a wide range of benefits to the union management as well as lobbying for whatever liberal cause their leaders decide to support. Face it, unions are organizations that suck the vitality out of our national motivation to “do better” in each suceeding generation. Kinda like welfare does!
Union Raised.
December 14th, 2012
10:17 am
My father has always been a union – loading trucks in Atlanta, GA and then a letter carrier in Cleveland, OH. Because of my father’s union jobs and hard work ethic I was raised in a stable environment that included access to healthcare, transportation, a roof over my head and more. This stability growing up allowed my sister and I to flourish, both of us attended universities and were able to pursue the studies that most engaged us.
It saddens me to see such vitriol in this comment section. Union members are hard working people like my father, my next door neighbor and both of my best friend’s parents.
Working people will rise when we work together. Working people will remain in poverty when we are divided. The right wing ideologues understand this very keenly and their narrative can be seen injected in this comment section.
For all of the working families…. The mantra remains the same: we are stronger together.
Whirled Peas
December 14th, 2012
9:20 am
To force a man to join an organization in order to keep his job is immoral and a threat to our very freedom. Talk about basic human rights. How about the human right to join or not join an organization and pay dues to it.
straitroad
December 14th, 2012
8:53 am
Let the workers decide. If union membership is as beneficial as the union bosses say it is then there should be no reason to force workers to join.
Rick in Grayson
December 14th, 2012
6:49 am
I have worked with Union members (Steel Workers) and it was not a pleasant experience. They slowed down work during normal work hours to force management to put them on overtime to get the work finished. How about the auto company that had to reinstate workers that were drinking and smoking pot during their lunch time. This is not a description of all Union members, but the Union certainly protects thugs and poor workers in the work force to the detriment of all workers and the companies that employ them.
JPolk
December 13th, 2012
11:49 pm
The simple fact is you cannot justify as a freedom-loving person the notion of forcing someone to join a union. It simply cannot be done. So once you embrace your anti-freedom stance for unionization you open yourself to tyranny.