While Morning Joe Crew Says All Unionized Business Fail, 1,000 Execs Endorse Pro-Union Bill

A day after the journalistic gabbers on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program claimed unions doomed all businesses to failure, it turns out that over 1,000 business leaders have endorsed the Employee Free Choice Act -- and many are part of a new coalition, Business Leaders for a Fair Economy, backing the bill with full-page ads today in The Wall Street Journal, Politico and The Hill. And that's supplemented by a letter to Congress calling for swift passage of the legislation.

The chairman of the new coalition, Roger Smith, the President and CEO of American Income Life Insurance Company and National Income Life Insurance Company, proclaims:

I believe that in these tough economic times we need solutions that protect workers and support long-term growth and sustainability for American businesses. It does not have to be an either/or scenario. I personally can attest you can be a responsible employer that respects workers' rights and have a thriving, profitable business accountable to its stakeholders.

Historically, giving workers access to unions and negotiating with them in good faith to reach fair collective bargaining agreements has resulted in a dynamic workforce with shared prosperity. It is imperative for the future of American enterprise that business leaders support policies that create a robust middle class. The Employee Free Choice Act is good for the middle class, and what's good for the middle class is ultimately good for our bottom line.

Compare those comments with the clueless smackdown of unions joined in by all the Morning Joe guests, sparked by Mad Money's Jim Cramer denouncing "card check" and The New York Times business reporter, Andrew Ross Sorkin, who said, "Name a successful unionized company. Think. You're gonna go to break before you come up with one."

As Media Matters pointed out, "If Andrew Ross Sorkin's name sounds familiar, that's probably because he's the reporter who started the myth about the average GM worker being paid $70 an hour. MSNBC's Keith Olbermann named him "Worst Person in the World" for that bit of blatantly false anti-union, anti-worker propaganda."

Indeed, Sorkin and his allies on The Morning Joe show came in for a thorough thrashing from union leaders and progressive bloggers yesterday for their ignorance. Media Matters capsulized progressive outrage at the show's mindless echoing of anti-union Big Business talking points:

The Morning Joe crew was on an anti-union tear this morning, claiming the union label on a company means "sell." Mika Brzezinski went so far as to say of unions: "They cripple the system that makes a company work." Collectively, the journalists on Morning Joe couldn't name a single "successful" unionized company.

This says more about their qualifications to discuss public policy and labor relations than it says about unions. To pick just one obvious example, UPS is unionized -- and the company made more than $3 billion last year. That's "billion" with a "b," and those are profits, not revenues.

Oh, what the heck, let's take one more example. GE is one of the world's largest companies; in 2006, its revenues were greater than the gross domestic products of 80 percent of UN nations. The company made more than $18 billion in 2008 -- again, billion with a b, and again, those are profits, not revenue. All that despite (or, perhaps, because of) the fact that 13 different unions represent GE workers.

Oh, and GE owns NBC-Universal, which owns MSNBC, which pays Joe Scarborough a handsome salary (and the unionized workers who help get his show on the air considerably less.)

Does Joe Scarborough think NBC and GE are not "successful" companies? Does Mika Brzezinski think the unionized workers she no doubt interacts with every day are crippling her ability to do her job, or her employer's ability to be successful?

All this comes in the same week that the Chamber of Commerce is ratcheting up its lobbying pressure on moderate Senators even as the extremist legal expert it funded, University of Chicago professor Richard Epstein, announced in this month's In These Times that the nation would be better off without unions, minimum wage laws or the regulation of sweatshops. Apparently, Richard Epstein has like-minded allies among the nation's journalists, including Boston columnist Mike Barnicle, self-styled Democratic champion of the "little guy." Take a look at this video excerpt:

The TPMDC blogger Brian Beutler, among others, aptly pointed to the countless businesses that support unions and flourish economically, as compiled by American Rights at Work:

If you want more information than you'll ever need on the wealth of successful business employing unionized workers, you need look no farther than the group American Rights at Work. Every year they publish the Labor Day List, to "recognize successful partnerships between employers and their employees' labor unions that are working well in the global economy."

You can download the 2008 report here (PDF), and see a full list of past reports here.

Indeed, Talking Points Memo compiled its own list of successful unionized companies. Among the companies that Sorkin, Jim Cramer and Scarborough couldn't think of were these firms:

UPS
Kroger
Southwest Airlines
All six major Hollywood studios
AT&T and Verizon (I think all the telecoms qualify as successful and unionized, but we're checking)
Costco (not entirely unionized, but that gets at another issue, which is how many companies have important divisions or subsidiaries which may be heavily unionized, while other elements of their business are not)
CSX, BNSF, Norfolk, (the nation's other major railroads also remain profitable and heavily unionized)

Union leaders added their own views in comments to Beutler:

I just got off the phone with Nancy Mills, the Deputy Chief of Staff for AFL-CIO, who had some thoughts for us on the substance and the implication of Sorkin's statements on MSNBC.

"One of the things it points out is that the American public in general, and those who have an axe to grind, who are promoting this ignorance, don't seem to know who's in unions." Mills said.

She noted that there's no shortage of companies with successful worker-employer partnerships adding that "People think of these as good places, successful, interesting, and they don't stop and think that they might be unionized, because there hasn't been a picket line."

Andy Stern, the president of SEIU, zeroed in on the value unions bring to the economy, from strengthening the middle-class to boosting consumer demand with decent wages:

"Unionized companies are a driving force in our economy, from Kaiser Permanente to Securitas," Stern said in a statement to TPMDC.

The bigger question this country is really asking right now is how do we define a successful company? Is it a company that turns a profit by driving down employee wages successful? Is cutting off benefits or putting people out of work to improve the bottom line for shareholders a business model we as Americans want to embrace? Are we going to embrace the Wal-Mart model as the standard of success, or are we going to raise the bar and rebuild the middle class in this country?

We think it's time to have a serious national discussion about what we want the future of our economy to look like--and the voices of women and men who work are critical to that conversation. That's why we're supporting the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill to help create an economy in which companies succeed based on the quality of their services, not on their willingness to exploit or silence workers.

The business leaders in the coalition calling today for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act understand as well as anyone why partnerships between business and labor are essential to economic growth and recovery.

As the coalition's leaders announced today:

"As a business owner, I believe that workers should have the freedom to bargain with employers for good wages, health care and the opportunity to retire with dignity," said Diana Ortiz, owner of Colorado-based Ortiz Enterprises, LLC, and member of the coalition's advisory committee. "Better wages mean that the whole community has more money to spend and to build our economy." Ortiz's business was recently named "Small Business of the Decade" by the Pueblo Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

Business Leaders for a Fair Economy was created to counter the myths and misunderstandings that unions are bad for business. The employers that support the Employee Free Choice Act say a level playing field will create a more sound economy and that when workers and business rise together, it's good for their bottom line. Measures like the Employee Free Choice Act will restore balance to our labor laws and help companies compete in this new and ever-changing economy. Smith affirmed, "A strong, solid middle class that is able to purchase our products and services will allow us to invest in our businesses, hire new employees, and give back to our local communities."

UPDATE: While forward-thinking businesses are supporting the Employee Free Choice Act, the Chamber of Commerce has been facing a blizzard of negative news in its latest lobbying efforts and promotion of misleading talking points about the legislation (via SEIU blog):

The Chamber of Commerce and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Lobbying Day
By Christy Setzer

From the moment they flew people to Washington, DC to lobby against the Employee Free Choice Act, things were just not going the Chamber of Commerce's way...

From bringing a major labor law violator to lobby on behalf of (wait for it...) labor law reform, to getting caught in a lie by Sen. Feinstein, this can't be how the Chamber wanted their lobbying week to go.

TERRIBLE: As one of their main lobbyists on labor law reform, the Chamber of Commerce brings to Washington... a major labor law violator.

One of the Arkansas business leaders that the Chamber flew in was Michael Keck of St. Vincent Health System, where multiple unfair labor practices have been filed against management. (As an executive, Michael is "management.") It took St. Vincent nurses more than 3 years to get a union contract, during which time the National Labor Relations Board had to step in at least twice. Read the full TPM piece here.

HORRIBLE: The Chamber claims that Sen. Dianne Feinstein no longer supports Employee Free Choice, and is promptly smacked down...by Sen. Feinstein. After a local California Chamber group met with Sen. Feinstein, they put out the word that she was changing her position; she did not support the bill. The only problem? It was flatly untrue. In response, Sen. Feinstein issued this clarifying statement:

"A statement has been put out mischaracterizing my position on this bill. The truth is that I am working to find common ground between the needs of both business and labor in order to reach a bipartisan solution. I believe we must find a way to protect the privacy of individual workers so that they may elect whether to form a union free of intimidation."

The same day, Sen. Johnson came out in favor of Employee Free Choice.

According to Wednesday's Argus Leader, Sen. Tim Johnson told a delegation of South Dakota business leaders Wednesday that he would vote to bring a controversial labor bill to the Senate floor for debate. "His decision to vote to consider the Employee Free Choice Act is a blow to local and national business groups, which have lobbied strenuously against the measure," wrote the Leader. It's "very significant," acknowledges the state Chamber president.

NO GOOD: According to a Maine small business owner: The US Chamber of Commerce doesn't speak for small businesses any more than Burger King speaks for cows. In response to a statement by the US Chamber of Commerce that Small Business owners oppose the Employee Free Choice Act, Mainer Ben Wootten said: "The US Chamber of Commerce doesn't speak for small businesses any more than Burger King speaks for cows. While the Chamber works overtime to represent the narrow interests of bloated, wealthy corporations, our nation's small businesses are struggling simply to keep their doors open. We need common-sense measures like health care reform and the Employee Free Choice Act to help small business owners control costs and ensure that their employees feel truly invested in the long-term future of their workplace."

Comments

[rain33]

joe scarborough, mika b.,joe cramer and the crew are against efca because they think like ronald reagan.unions made companies rich,employees made the companies rich too so why all of us can get a fair share.we can't be like china meaning paying less dollars than what our workers get paid for.

[poaster]

Do yourself a favor and not watch Morning Joke. The show is awful. I'd rather watch a Billy Mays infomercial, than this snore fest.

[WestcoastSteve]

It kills me how many Republicans are rabidly anti-union, but are the first in line to show their support for police and firefighters as a show of patriotism. Of course, police and firefighter unions don't threaten corporate abuses or ask for a share of the profits for the labor they put in, so they're acceptable unions.

[rodnacious]

I guess that is why we have so many banks failing...

[WestcoastSteve]

Exactly. And all those non-unionized investment firms etc. Bad management destroys companies, not unions.

[garydf]

I don't know how many first rate companies and organizations are unionized, but I am certain that some ot the most disfunctional, inefficient and ineffective are unionized. As examples, I cite General Motors, Chrysler, the educational system, the state governments, the post office, Delphi, the railroads, the dockyards, and on and on. I would not want Card Check implemented to make it simple for union hacks to intimidate companies and workers.
Note on the UAW for example - for 2008, the UAW spent $10 million on lobbyists and political contributions, paid $45 million in STRIKE BENEFITS (why are they striking during a depression??), and still made $54 million of net income at the bottom line. And the UAW is sitting on $1.2 BILLION of cash and treasuries while the taxpayers are bailing them out and Obama is giving them major ownership interests in GM and Chrysler - FOR FREE. (All this data on file with report to Dept of Labor).

[reasonshouldrule]

Your prejudice on this issue is obvious, but more importantly, you are making a logical fallacy in suggesting "disfunctional" etc. companies are that way because of unions. This topic is too large to contain in a few words, but if you look at the whole picture--that is, the rise of unions in the early 20th century--you will see that they were a necessary correction to the abuses of the 18th and 19th centuries, and in fact, were the prime cause of the development of a "middle class" throughout the world. 19th century worker exploitation is still a problem in the 21st century, enabled to some degree by ignorance of the very workers who are often exploited. And finally, when you see a company that is clearly inefficient, losing money, etc., you can almost ALWAYS attribute it to poor management. NOT whether or not they have a union.

[JessWonderin]

so right . . . no doubt our "friend" enjoys 40 hour work weeks, overtime, employer health benefits, work site safety, lunch hours, breaks, and a decent living wage . . . all due to the generosity of "companies" . . . .

The great middle class was based on organized labor rising the standards and the post war G.I. Bill that educated the itself to become the most productive creative work force in history . . . and decimated by Republican rush to "liberate business" . . . .

[rodnacious]

If you did your homework, you would find that the unionized middle class is what kept this country going. When those jobs were sent overseas and reduced through union busting tactics, we saw the beginning of the decline of the economy.

Now that there is no middle-class, we have the concerted attack on paying taxes of any kind. California is a prime example of how to destroy municipal government with thoughtless notions of what is good and not good for the country.

[LeftRight]

You need to go look at what the unions DID for organizations like GM, and you will see that the UAW is the only thing that kept GM going for as long as it did!

[WestcoastSteve]

I'm just going to save my breath here and say you're full of BS. I doubt rational arguments would work on the likes of you.

[johnnynyc]

Joe Scarborough, while campaigning to be elected to Congress, found the time to defend one of this country's first abortion clinic bombers PRO BONO!!

Yes he did!!

http://www.villagevoice.com/content/printVersion/396288

[spanky0719]

Excellent reporting!

[noaxe397]

In the 1950s-1960s 35% of the private workforce was unionized. We had the highest standard of living in the world.

Today, 9% of the private workforce is unionized. Real wages have been stagnant for a quarter century.

Funny how 9% of the work force is responsible for 100% of the industry and business's problems.

[LeftRight]

Ain't THAT the truth!!

[sonoffestus]

Thank You! Having spent time as a union member AND over 25 years in management I would say you summed it up quite well.

The Captain of a ship, runs it up on the rocks and its the engine's fault. Yeah, right.

[reasonshouldrule]

Well-stated!

[WestcoastSteve]

Nailed it with this post.

[enochsmoky]

Unions only work in monopoly or oligopoly situations where the employer can pass the higher wages off in the form of higher product prices. Whenever there is a competitive situation, a union will cripple the company and eventually lead it into bankruptcy as witnessed by the auto, railroad, steel, tire, airline and government industries. The old union mantra "more pay for less work" does not work in a globalized, competitive world market. The rest of the world is not stupid and is using its comparative advantage of low priced labor to steal market share. We cannot turn back the hands of time no matter how much a bunch of starry eyed labor activists want us to. If you want to see the logical conclusion of rampant unionism look at postwar England and the workers Utopia in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union before the fall of communism. At what % of the workforce being unionized does paralysis set in?

[LeftRight]

WRONG!!! Unions actually work BETTER in a competitive market, since they are able to raise the wages even for their non-union brethren, since the non-union shop will have to raise wages to comparable numbers just to get people to work there!!

[illusionpainter]

I'm a RN and I can keep your #1 baby alive in the NICU, I am also unionized. Should I have my wages cut too? I went to college for 6 six years, just for that degree. I also have another one too, BFA. So what should I make? How about $7 or $8 per hour.

What about the pilot who keeps your plane flying. what should he/she make? What about the stewardesses, what should they make? What about the fire fighters that help to keep your home from burning you down or saving you while your in it? What about the police officers that keep you safe? What about the paramedic that keeps you alive until you get to the hospital? What about your teachers or your college professors, didn't they teach you well?

THEY ARE ALL UNION WORKERS!!!!!!!

[ThePen]

All the unionized employees of GE should get together and run a petition against the Morning Joe show in support of the Employee Free Choice Act and deliver it to GE and the Morning Joe show. They should also start wearing their Support the Employee Free Choice Act buttons at work, especially on the set of MSNBC. The anti-union comments expressed on the Morning Joe Show should be looked upon as an opportunity to organize and educate around the fight for the Employee Free Choice Act!

[montyc]

I am glad Texas is a right to Work State. compaired with the rest of the country our 6.7% unemployment rate looks darn good.

[jazabelz]

Our unemployment rate in Texas is about to climb to 10% when GM plants are shut down as well as auto dealers! Your figures are wrong -- as usual!

[noaxe397]

But how many of those Texas jobs are under, say, $10/hr? How many have benefits? Note to Republicans, Texans and anyone else who hates the working man: benefits are not welfare, as some are trying to describe them as.

[johnie2xs]

"Right to work" is a euphemism of "bend over and say hello to my leetle friend".

No representation = no money & job insecurity It keeps the South Poor.

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

Joe never has knowledge of facts, he has only his opinions which he believes are facts. Just ask Zbignew Brezhenski, little meek Mika's dad. He told Joe that to argue with him was embarrassing due to Joe's lack of knowledge. And when challenged, his only reaction is to shout and rant until the next commercial. How MSNBC can allow him to stay on the air without being ashamed is beyond me. I have heard so many misrepresented "facts" on that show. Joe braggs that in his book he states that Ronald Reagan never disrespected anyone who disagreed with him. Perhaps he forgot Reagan's speeches when running for governor. He really enjoyed calling residents of San Francisco unclean monkees. That is only one example of his ignorance. I've also noticed that they are almost devoid of democratic guests. I also think they will soon make Liz Cheney a permanent cast member. Pitiful!

[illusionpainter]

On the subject of Ronald Reagan, I find it very baffling how he could go from being the Screen Actor's Guild Union President to breaking the union and firing the Air Traffic Controllers when he was President of the United States. Then, to hurt the middle class even further, he took away the ability for people to be able write off the interest on their credit cards or auto financing; however, he sure did take away any tax write offs for the rich....

[LeftRight]

It's even more disturbing when you consider the fact that he was a bleeding heart liberal in the Ike era, and then around the time that JFK got elected, raygun had changed to a neocon!

[JessWonderin]

not hard to believe . . . seems "Republican" means giving up all pretense of "brotherhood" once you get your OWN . . . sort of get on board and pull up the ladder

. . . didn't the Republicans OPPOSE stem cell research which might have helped Ronnie live long enough to realize how screwed the Republicans are????

[wgsalter]

No company should be responsible for retirement or health care. As we enter the debate on health care this year, imagine where our economy would be if we had had national health insurance for the last 40 years (when Nixon and Ted Kennedy were discussing it!) GM would still be with us, among other firms. And why should we not take the same approach to retirement? If we had MANDATORY contributions to personalized accounts, social security would not be insolvent, nor would we have to worry if every generation had more babies than the previous one (would should make greens sit up and smile) in a desperate demographic ponzi scheme to pretend that there are funds in Mr Gore's "lock box". There aren't; instead, the US has $70 trillion in unfunded liabilities. And why would I want an employer investing MY money in ITS stock plan?
Companies should make widgets, not serve as our life planners. Let companies compete on the basis of the goods and services they provide, and let employees compete on the quality of their labor, and let investors decide where to invest capital on the basis of the market for widgets - not the status of the company's labor agreements, or opaque liabilities. Imagine a labor negotiation that ONLY involved pay, where government manages equal opportunity and safety, and employees knew that their retirement and health was secure even if Widgets, Inc went out of business tomorrow.

[illusionpainter]

I agree with you on most points. But one thing I do have to point out is GM employees have voluntary PSP (Personal Savings Plans) for extra retirement funds that were contributed by the employee 100%, no company contributions. Well, almost all of the stock for those plans was GM. Now those employees have lost almost all of their GM retirement plan and their extra retirement because GM stock is 75cents. Now 70, 80 and 90 yr. old people are going to have to go back to work or freeze to death, die of heatstroke, go without their medication and/or starve to death.

[Ken Maddox]

You are so right! Without Unions the same stupid management would have brought GM to its knees. The only thing different is there would be tens of thousands of broke, homeless, and sick autoworkers living on food stamps, welfare, and recieving their medical care at your local hospital emergency room. Some how uninformed conservatives can point out all the things that are wrong with America, but haven't a single clue about how to fix a single one of those. Union workers are the hardest working, most productive workers in America. This is provable and a well known fact. Union workers receiving health care benefits are more likely to receive proper preventive medicine than non-union workers so are able to work harder than non-union workers.

[Chalkeater]

Whenever Mika voices a left wing point of view, Joe screams at her until she literally bows her head in submission. It's emabrrassing to watch.

Joe's current talking points - Obama's destroying the economy, no one in the Obama administration knows anything about business, we're less safe with Obama, kidnapping and torturing foreigners whenever the President feels like it is necesarry, health care will destroy the economy, unions destroy the economy
http://www.villagevoice.com/content/printVersion/396288

[burt2009]

You can only understand this if you actually have ever had a job. As I was closing in on retirement I checked with my BA from the Union as asked about teaching at the apprentice school. He said fine but I needed to speak Spanish. The students didn’t have to know English the instructors had to speak Spanish. And you wonder why there are so many accidents on construction sites. Just think of it, you see a worker ready to be injured if he is not warned and you say STOP instead of ALTO not only he, because he didn’t understand STOP but anyone near him could be seriously injured.

[ReMarker]

In a perfect world, when there is a reason for a union (workers being abused), our government (by the people, FOR THE PEOPLE) isn't doing its job. In an imperfect world, unions have value.

[billsmile]

I agree with you. Also if gov't is doing its job then charity isn't necessary.

[wgsalter]

That's nuts. Just because someone has a cause that they want to raise money for, that means that government has failed? So if I'm concerned about the fate of kittens or victrolas or the untalented artist down the street, the government should have been there first (or at all)? ALL potential places where ANYONE might contribute should be covered by government? Well, here's one: How about my rent, my cable bill, my groceries, my clothes, my kid's vacation camp, and tickets so I can go see Iggy Pop?

WHATare your SMOKING??!!??

[Samnchgo]

Aren't the camera, floor and control room crew on Morning Joe unionized? When Mr. Scarborough and Ms. Brzezinski slam unions like this, they're slamming their own crew.

For that matter, has anyone checked to see if Mr. Scarborough and Ms. Brzezinski are members of AFTRA? That's a union too!

Or is it just unions that don't protect overpaid talking heads who'd rather be shills for Starbucks than give serious news analysis which are the problem?

MSNBC should dump this joke of a program. It's not providing anything resembling balance.

[Lerrin]

In my work I use ENCO (one of the software audio programs used on MJ) - not a trivial system to run correctly, as it can be temperamental for new users.
Maybe they want Starbucks' barristas to step in and take the union jobs on their set - let's sit back and see how that would work.
More likely it would be management scabs doing the job.
Let's start the $$ pool for how many seconds/minutes they'd stay on the air.
Would love to see some barrista/s­cab/manage­ment flunky come in and resurrect ENCO when it crashes mid-show!