On November 4th, Workers Won, Corporate Interests Lost
After a long and bitter campaign cycle, the polls have closed, the pundits' predictions have been proven right or wrong, and the dust of the 2008 election has begun to settle. One momentous outcome from this historic election is that voters chose to elect a pro-worker president and majority in Congress.
Our new pro-worker Congress is significant in light of how big business front groups tried -- and failed -- to use the Employee Free Choice Act as a wedge issue. A top legislative priority for workers' rights advocates, the Employee Free Choice Act is opposed by powerful special interests because it would help restore balance in this economy by making it easier for workers to form unions. These groups are funded by the same corporations who refuse to pay their employees a decent salary, provide health care, and keep jobs here in the United States. Their opposition to workers standing up for themselves by organizing unions should come as no surprise.
It's important to point out the ineffectiveness of their cynical crusade against the legislation and unions in general. Groups such as the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spent nearly $20 million on misleading ads in Senate battleground states. Through melodramatic TV and radio ads and outrageous newspaper columns across the country, these anti-union ideologues threw everything, including the kitchen sink, hoping something would stick. In fact, the opponents of the Employee Free Choice Act failed to affect these races, and often those candidates supporting the bill steadily rose in the polls despite massive advertising on the issue.
Not only did voters ignore these ads, they remained twice as likely to be concerned with the power of corporations than with the power of unions. For example, a survey among voters in Senate battleground states by Peter D. Hart Research Associates found that candidate support for the Employee Free Choice Act did not play a significant role in voters' decisions. Instead, issues such as the economy and corporate power were high on the electorate's minds. But the poll also revealed that 60 percent of respondents believe it is important to pass the Employee Free Choice Act, and nearly one-third (31 percent) of voters strongly believe it should be a priority for Congress.
Newly-elected Senators like Mark Udall, Jeff Merkley, and Jeanne Shaheen withstood millions of dollars in attack ads criticizing their support for the bill. They managed to not only score victories, but actually improve their polling numbers despite the negative onslaught. Why? Americans know we can't continue the status quo of stagnant wages, rampant outsourcing, reduced healthcare coverage, and high unemployment. Unions make a difference in improving not only working conditions, but wages, access to medical care and job security. Through an aggressive public education and grassroots campaign, workers' rights advocates and unions were able to remind and convince the public that policies to help more workers join unions ultimately will help save our failing economy.
Over the coming weeks and months, these new leaders will help strengthen the support that already exists for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act. New leaders on Capitol Hill and in the White House will be engaged to ensure that workers' rights are a high priority when Congress reconvenes in January. President-elect Barack Obama has already signaled his strong support of the bill, proclaiming, "I've fought to pass the Employee Free Choice Act in the Senate. And I will make it the law of the land when I'm President of the United States of America." The future of the middle class that drives our economy, and of a strong labor movement that stands up for those who don't have a voice, depends on the same courage and conviction that propelled candidates to victory on November 4.
We have only seen the beginning of the fight to restore workers' rights in this country as we can expect more sound and fury from opponents of this bill. But voters have clearly spoken. In our current economic climate, the American public is hungry for measures to strengthen the middle class, and our new Congress should heed this call and make it a priority to pass the Employee Free Choice Act.
David Bonior is a former Congressman from Michigan, and is Chair of American Rights at Work, a workers' rights advocacy organization in Washington, DC.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I've always wondered what kind of business model was used to show that cutting wages and benefits across the board would expand the consumer market. Just a little high-school math would prove otherwise.
Who can afford houses, cars and wide-screens on minimum wages?
Even old Henry Ford understood this when he increased his employee's wages by double so they
could afford his vehicles.
If they want access to the U.S. Markets they treat workers with respect or hit the road !!!!!!!!!
Hey Bonior, share your kindness and past over whatever it is that you are smoking. The Obama presidency is just fine them, and they even got their corporate inside man Emanuel in there. No change coming.
I have seen three trends since the 80s that I find troubling for American labor. The first is corporate incompetence (not corporate power). The second is corporate off-shoring and labor arbitraging. The third is the rapid diminution of manufacturing being replaced by a service sector economy (i.e., hamburger flipping jobs). If these trends are not stopped, we are digging our grave as a nation.
Maybe we can pursue a job protection tariff too. I don't mean a tariff on a particular product to help one local industry (which would just start a trade war anyway), but rather a broad fair tariff, the minimum wage tariff...
Here is how it works, if companies offshore labor, and those workers are paid at least 25 cents an hour, there is no tariff, but for every cent less the workers are paid, there is a one cent tariff. This all but forces the companies to pay at least a quarter per hour to their workers. Suddenly it isn't such a great idea to offshore all the labor, and we can start making things in the US again.
Don't hold your breath the money will talk and the workers... well you know what we'll get fornicated.
Is it not "corporate interests" that HIRE workers? If corporate interests lost, will there not be fewer jobs? If fewer jobs, then higher unemployment? Is higher unemployment a "worker interest?"
The mindless, Marxist trashing of corporations is rampant...
no one wants to get rid of corporations. But the minimization of employees, their treatment, their underpayment, while the corps. gain big bucks, pay minimal income taxes due to present tax policy not to mention all the loopholes, is what needs revamping. The rich getting richer and enslaving the working classes who don't prosper as the co. does. Expand you narrow view.
When corporate interests run rampant the workers have no rights. Silly, mindless capitalists endorsing the idea of libertarian, laissez-faire economics has brought the country to ruin.
Obama has just announced an adamant War Hawk with Wall Street connections to be his Chief of Staff. The Military Industrial Complex and the Investment Banks that have hand in hand destroyed our economy and our country, welcome this appointment. So much for the ascendancy of the Working Man.
Obama may just have made,only the first I hope,a very astute political move in picking Emanuel because he was pelosi's hatchet man and now he is going to do for Obama what he did for pelosi.I think he will do what he is told and not the other way around.Tony
Thanks David, for all your hard work.
A fair wage and safe work place for all.
And boy, do we need both. But what are the chances if the gatekeeper in the White House, Emmanuel, has this record--
"Since then, he has worked for President Clinton, paired up with Mayor Daley's patronage machine to win a seat in congress and founded the New Democratic Caucus. Rahm's caucus has supported anti-worker proposals in the Democratic Party. Under Clinton, Emanuel fought hard for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), a Republican piece of legislation that was signed by Bill Clinton. This trade agreement alone has been the most destructive piece of legislation to America's economy in the 21st Century; resulting in the off-shoring of millions of good-paying jobs. If you want to know why our economy is in the tank, the answer can be summarized by five letters, NAFTA. A nation struggling to get on its feet economically needs a pro-worker and pro-middle-class White House, not Rahm Emanuel."
What just happened to our chances when this person is the one to say yea or nay to who gets the President's ear?
You want to take away workers' secret ballot. That's fascist.
Read why George McGovern thinks this law is anti-democratic:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121815502467222555.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
This will be job killer. I'm very disappointed that those new senators support this, especially when the economy is such a mess.
When are you guys going to start grabbing our guns, and forcing kids to do community service? That's on the agenda at change.gov. I'd like to know how much time I have before my freedoms are taken away, so I can plan.
Uh, geez, look at the source of your article--The WALL STREET Journal. Oh yes, that esteemed publication of the American working class!
Why is it the only attack on this law is the taking away of the so called "secret ballot"? Workers, when they sign cards are, in fact, voting. What you're missing is the fact that the whole thrust of businesses opposing unions is to deny the rights they have when they have a union. Why don't you try educating yourself about these matters before you start mouthing off about them? Or is that too much to ask from you?
The Employee Free Choice Act might be the most detrimental piece of legislation passed in decades for business and the economy. If you want to reduce potential business investment and job growth and make US companies even less competitive vs foreign competitors than they are already, then increased unionization is the way to do it. The government needs to take healthcare costs away from business, not create a policy that increases business costs. And in an ever changing world, taking away a key economic strength like labor mobility would be very detrimental for economic growth. The lack of labor mobility has been a major reason that economic growth in Europe and Japan has lagged growth in the US for decades.
exactly. how is the auto industry (the beacon of workers rights) is fairing these days..LOL
Ford is sitting on 30 billion in cash.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
