"Hey, youse wanna join our union?"
As I take this day off from work, I have to ask myself in all honesty, why do we make this a holiday? To celebrate workers? That seems to me to be like...celebrating law-abiding citizens. Should we make a holiday out of that also?
Labor Day as a national holiday goes back to 1894. Prior to that, New York City celebrated their first Labor Day in 1882. It was organized by New York's Central Labor Union and the Knights of Labor. The whole thing was originated to pay homage to labor unions.
I realize that some persons reading this posting may belong to a union and thus, resent what I am going to say here. Nevertheless, I don't see much to celebrate when it comes to present-day unions.
I recognize that historically speaking, there was once a dire need for unions in the times when employees were exploited by their employers. That day, in my view, has passed.
In the past couple of generations, the corruption and abuses of labor unions are legion. We have witnessed case after case of union bosses living rich life styles off the forced union dues of their members. For years, Teamsters Union bosses went to prison one after another. Violence and intimidation has also been regularly practiced by many unions against employers who resist them and workers who replace strikers (scabs). I remember when I was a boy in 1956, syndicated columnist Victor Reisel, who wrote regularly about union racketeering, was blinded when a union hitman threw sulphuric acid in his face. (He kept on writing.)
When I was in college in the 1960s, my father got me a summer job as a grip at Sam Goldwyn Studios in Hollywood, where he was a unit production manager at the time. When I reported for work, I had to register at the union office. Though I didn't have to join then, I would have to join after 5-6 weeks on the job. When I got that notice from the union that I would have to now join the union or the studio would have to dismiss me, I decided it was time to quit. I didn't like the idea of being forced to join a union and pay dues, so I quit the job. (I hated it anyway.)
Later, when I went to work for the government as a Customs agent (1970-73), the AFL-CIO attempted to unionize us. We had an office meeting to discuss the issue, and one agent said something to the group that I have always remembered. He said, "If you want to put yourselves at the level of _____________, go ahead and join a union, but you can't call yourselves professionals." (I am leaving out the job he mentioned so as not to offend anyone.)
Later, as a DEA Agent, I recall when President Reagan fired the air traffic controllers who walked out on the job, putting the flying public in peril. I think it was one of the best things Reagan did. To me, there are certain professions whose workers should not be allowed to strike (public safety, police and fire, etc.)
Today, we still see union abuses even as their membership has fallen to 12.1% of the workforce (Orange County Register editorial Sept. 1, 2008). As we speak, unions are trying to muscle in on employees by having the federal government change labor law in such a way as to eliminate secret ballots in union representation elections.
Let me explain how. Currently, under US Labor law, workers are entitled to have an election to decide if they want to join a union. The ballot is secret. There is now in Congress proposed legislation called the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Sounds great, huh? Not quite. Under this so-called "card check" system, a paid union representative would present a ballot card to each worker on the question of whether that worker wishes to join a union or not. The worker would fill out the ballot in the presence of the union rep. So much for secret ballots. How many are going to vote no with Vinnie and Sluggo standing over them?
The EFCA was introduced earlier this year in Congress. Representative George Miller, (D-CA) was the leading sponsor while Ted Kennedy (D-MA) was lead Senate sponsor. The bill passed in the House, but died in the Senate. Nevertheless, it is expected that the bill will be reintroduced in the next session of Congress.
Not surprisingly, the unions have a strong ally in the Democratic Party, which is beholden to them. The next time you hear a Democrat talking about "special interests" on the Republican side, ask yourself if labor unions are not a special interest. You bet they are.
To me, employment is a simple idea. If you are not happy with your job, your boss, your working conditions, your pay, your benefits or whatever, the solution is easy. Get another job. Your employer owes you one thing: an honest day's pay for an honest day's work. If you want to walk off your job, your boss should have every right to find someone who will perform that job without him or that worker being subject to intimidation.
So happy Labor Day- and while you enjoy your day off, remember the EFCA (which hopefully will not become law.)
6 comments:
While I don't think that the idea of unions is completely past its time, I do agree that there are some serious problems going on.
With the problems that have been going on in my district, the main problem is the superintendent and certain members of the board who seem to think he walks on water no matter how bad he screws up. Still, the mess that we're in is also partially the responsibility of the union.
Still, I worry what it would be like if we didn't have a union. It's the only semblance of a unified front that we teachers have.
So, I'd say that we need to fix them but not completely get rid of them.
Oh, and regarding why we have Labor Day - Shhhhhhh!!!!! I'm enjoying my day off playing with my Playstation 3.
Lance,
I question the idea of teachers being in a union. (I am not.) I know I am shooting from the hip here, but teachers are one category I would say should not go on strike.
I understand how somebody could feel that way, but what recourse do we have if we're not treated fairly?
I mean, think about it. We could do as you say and find another job. This state has a hard enough time keeping teachers, and a teacher shortage is expected in the near future.
There was a strike in my district about a generation before my time, and it looks like there very well may be one again if things don't turn around. The way I see it is this:
Will the kids be negatively impacted by a strike? Absolutely. But in the long run, it will make our school a better place when you have teachers who feel as though they're appreciated and being compensated fairly. I mean, as of right now, we go as much as a month without a qualified teacher filling various classes (usually a substitute who isn't really qualified to teach in that particular subject.) Perhaps if my district didn't bargain so unfairly, we would have more people who'd want to work there.
Ideally, yes, teachers should not strike. Unfortunately, sometimes things simply aren't ideal. It definitely should only be done as an absolute last resort. The thing is, going on strike might be the only way for our district to take us seriously - because with all the delays they've put on negotiations (it has really been unconcionable - to the point where two board members have called for the superintendent's resignation), they sure aren't paying much attention to us now.
I respect your point of view, Lance, and I am not qualified to comment on your own personal labor issues, but would it have been right for me as a DEA agent to go on strike? (Don't answer that.)Should cops or firefighters go on strike? I say no way.
By the way, I just posted this piece on the Daily Kos as a comment to their tribute to unions piece. Talk about being the skunk at the garden party!
Should cops go on strike? Nah, I saw that happen in the movie Robocop and I wouldn't want that. (Unless, of course, the city had a half-man, half-robot cop to clean up the streets.)
In all seriousness, I hope that our cops and firefighters never feel the need to strike. I think making sure that they don't should be the real priority.
Post a Comment