iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Linda R. Monk, J.D.

Linda R. Monk, J.D.

Posted: February 23, 2011 10:53 PM

With all the lip-service being paid to the Constitution these days, you'd think unions would get a bit more respect. Without the sacrifices of union activists, the Constitution's promise of free speech might never have become a reality.

In rallies much like those currently being held in Wisconsin, and across the nation in state capitals this Saturday, workers during America's first Gilded Age fought back against the forces of corporate greed that ground them to the bone.

In those days, the Supreme Court believed that the First Amendment to the Constitution, which protects freedom of speech, only applied to the federal government, not the states and the local governments. So any governor, or mayor, or town boss was free to put you in jail or kick you out of town for saying something they didn't like -- union organizing usually being at the top of the list. But union supporters didn't take that lying down -- they flooded towns with speakers who violated local laws that limited free speech.

One of those early union leaders in the fight for free speech was Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, the "Rebel Girl" of martyr Joe Hill's famous song. Flynn worked for the Wobblies, the Industrial Workers of the World, who organized miners and migrant workers in the western states in the early 1900s. These workers had little political clout because they moved from job to job and weren't registered to vote. Presaging the civil rights movement, their principal recourse was a mass protest.

Flynn helped lead one of those "free speech fights" in Missoula, Montana, in 1908. Here's how she described it:

We sent out a call to all 'footloose rebels to come at once -- to defend the Bill of Rights.' A steady stream of I.W.W. members began to flock in by freight cars... As soon as one speaker was arrested, another took his place. The jail was soon filled.


Flynn also related some humorous aspects to the mass tactics:

Not all the I.W.W. workers were speakers. Some suffered from stage fright. We gave them copies of the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. They would read along slowly, with one eye hopefully on the cop, fearful that they would finish before he would arrest. One such was being escorted to jail, about two blocks away, when a couple of drunks got into a pitched battle. The cop dropped him to arrest them. When they arrived at the jail, the big strapping I.W.W. was tagging along behind. The cop said in surprise: "What are you doing here?" The prisoner retorted, "What do you want me to do -- go back there and make another speech?"


These mass protests in favor of free speech definitely had an effect. In 1925, the Supreme Court finally ruled that the First Amendment did apply to state and local governments, nationalizing the protection of free speech. Without the concerted action of union supporters, that victory would not have been possible.

Unions have contributed remarkable things to the American way of life: the growth of the middle class; expansion of health care and social security; paid vacations and paid sick leave; a work week that leaves time for families to enjoy each other. None of these things were possible in Elizabeth Gurley Flynn's day. As she said in 1962: "We never heard of vacations, let alone vacations with pay."

Make no mistake: What is at risk in Wisconsin, and every state in America, is the quality of life that American workers have fought -- and died -- for during the past century. When plutocrats like the Koch brothers tell the governor of an American state to roll back the clock on public employees, they are seeking to end protections for all workers. The Kochs are part of an ideological movement that hopes to end all legislation controlling wages, hours, and workplace safety -- returning America to a "Social Darwinism" that ensures survival of the fittest (read: richest). This is the constitutional theory that prevailed before the New Deal. To these extremists, Ayn Rand is on par with James Madison.

We must never forget that the most important achievement of the union movement was the protection of the right that makes all other rights possible -- freedom of speech. The First Amendment comes with a union label.


This article is adapted from one that originally appeared in the Journal of the Sheet Metal Workers International Association.

 
 
 

Follow Linda R. Monk, J.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LindaRMonkJD

With all the lip-service being paid to the Constitution these days, you'd think unions would get a bit more respect. Without the sacrifices of union activists, the Constitution's promise of free spee...
With all the lip-service being paid to the Constitution these days, you'd think unions would get a bit more respect. Without the sacrifices of union activists, the Constitution's promise of free spee...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 277
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
11:53 AM on 02/27/2011
Linda, I'm curious what your read is on all this is in light of Citizens United case. I haven't explored the figures. But, my suspicion is that the Republican/Libertarian midterm sweep may have been largely a function of the money that was able to pour in because of CU. I'm sure you've heard the ongoing debate that if unions are taken down then the primary funding source for Democratic campaign financing will dry up. Such a trend juxtaposed against the increased sourcing that the CU case makes possible for the GOP does appear to be a game changer.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ProfessorDuh
06:27 AM on 02/26/2011
The Tea Partiers think they've been stabbed in the back, and they're right.
What they don't know is that the people they've been trained to attack are the ones who are trying to help them, and the people whose interests they've been trained to serve are the ones who stabbed them.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
04:03 PM on 02/26/2011
There is a core of populism that can be brought to bear against any elitist movement, including the billionaire Koch brothers. Libertarians are inherently elitists, who think they are smarter than the average joe and "deserve" all the money they make free of any taxation. OK then, destroy the social contract and see where that gets you. No man is an island.
01:09 AM on 02/26/2011
In order to guard the public, first responders willingly ran into hell on earth on September 11, 2001. 343 firefighters and 60 police never returned. Many more are said to have died due to exposure to toxic conditions. First responders were then widely mourned and hailed as heroes.

Genuine heroes.

Fast forward to 2011, and many revile the public sector as greedy parasites who prey on the taxpaying public. Something very weird seems to be erasing our ability to remember. Many seem also to have entirely forgotten just how it came to be that the economy crashed and why the treasuries of states and cities have become so depleted in the first place.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
03:56 PM on 02/26/2011
The libertarians have money, but not wisdom. The extremism of their positions is coming out full force in Wisconsin, just like Bull Connor's firehoses during the civil rights movement. And they will meet a similar fate in the ashbin of history.
photo
PC Contrarian
Political Correctnes­s is the opiate of the left.
04:18 PM on 02/26/2011
Hi Linda, it's been awhile.
I hope all has been well with you.

OTOH, let me take issue with some of your points.

“The libertaria­ns have money, but not wisdom."
Not all libertarians have money; just like not all libertarians lack wisdom.
Libertarians come in all classes and all levels of consciousness; just like socialists.

"The extremism of their positions is coming out full force in Wisconsin,..."
Please give three positions by libertarians that you consider extreme when it comes to supporting the just elected governor's budget repair proposal.

"...just like Bull Connor's firehoses during the civil rights movement."
Not even close. If anyone is displaying overly aggressive behavior and is threatening others, it's the unions and their friends. Secondly, there is no comparison between asking moderate concessions from workers funded by taxpayers, and resisting desegregation.

"And they will meet a similar fate in the ashbin of history.”
Have a crystal ball, or just hopeful?
Let me make my own prediction.
Not only will Gov. Walker sign the bill, and Wisconsin will be better for it; but other states will pass similar measures out of necessity, or will lay off large numbers of employees (like Rhode Island, a very Blue state).
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
02:02 PM on 02/25/2011
[From my cousin in Mississippi:]

I am Union, my father is Union, my brother is Union. It is very, very hard.

I have worked in conditions that you would not send any one you know into. Lime kilns that blistered the skin off my face and my hair fell out; weeks in ditches boring under roads, less than five feet from semi trucks so your family could drive safely. I have put septic pumps into culverts 30 feet in the ground that would gag a buzzard. I have worked construction when other crews quit, with nothing between you and hell but a cyclone fence. I am not complaining; this is just the facts.

I have never asked for a hand out, never took a vacation in 25 years of work. I average 50 to 60 hours a week; my boys grew up without me for the most part WITH DADDY AT WORK to support a family on one income. I have no sick days, vacation, holidays. If I don't work I don't get paid. I make a wage for what I do. Nothing is given to me just because I am "UNION."

So I try to do what the Good Book says on the subject, "Do your work as unto the Lord." That is the best I can do. If anyone has a problem with that, I can do nothing to change their misconceptions. Short of sayin' "Walk in my shoes, brother."
10:05 AM on 02/25/2011
Great post, Linda! Thanks.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
11:19 AM on 02/25/2011
Thanks for the feedback!
07:17 PM on 02/24/2011
"-- returning America to a "Social Darwinism" that ensures survival of the fittest (read: richest)."

Kings and Emperors have typically claimed that their right to rule has been authorized by God. Aristocrats appeal to alleged self-evident superiority by virtue of accumulated property. Then there is the claim of "survival of the fittest".

Yet human beings display a unique integrated blend of individual initiative and cooperation, foreshadowed but unmatched by any other creature in nature. That is actually our Darwinian advantage. No other species has written a book or walked on the moon, and neither could we without extensive cooperation. Especially in a modern, industrialized society, we exist in a vast and intricate cooperative web. For the most part, we take this for granted, and some among us see a personal advantage in helping us to forget how many and deep those connections actually are.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
08:09 PM on 02/24/2011
Wow!! Pure poetry. Where did you learn to write?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbrett480
06:19 PM on 02/24/2011
Great column. Unions have always been at the forefront of protecting workers rights and civil rights. This is a fight that all Democrats need to get behind, regardless of what they believe is the most important issue to them. This means gay rights groups, immigration rights groups, civil rights groups, etc. Even though the Wisconsin issue might not seem as important to them as their own interests, they need to back the unions because the unions have supported them.
02:05 PM on 02/24/2011
Unions need, and have needed for a while, to build alliances with voters on issues of mutual concern. Is business evil? No, it is the primary way we share our labor and our talents for mutual benefit, but power tends to corrupt whoever wields it. Note that Lord Acton said that it “tends”. It is not automatic but has that definite tendency, and examples the perils of absolute power are to be found in abundance.

I believe in a free market that is also a fair market. I don’t think that is fantasy. Rules (most of which are already US law) can and have been crafted to encourage innovative and fair trade of goods, labor, and money, while protecting the larger interests of society and our environment. (Selling financially distressed families reverse-amortization loans, hiding the risks by securitizing legerdemain, and selling the resulting products short while promoting them to clients, is an example of business that does not adequately maintain the interests of society).

Manipulation of the market, by corporations, unions, or by anyone that aims to increase profit at the expense of fair exchange is toxic. It always harms someone and often harms many. Unions help all when they balance power and foster fair trade.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
03:15 PM on 02/24/2011
I agree with your first sentence, in spades. For instance, I think union folks should be helping the unemployed workers who are appealing their denial of unemployment benefits, many of whom have been shafted. And they don't know how to stand up for their rights. And in many states unemployed workers who can't pay their child support then have their drivers' licenses revoked. How are they supposed to look for jobs? Those are the kind of measures union folks can support that would build good will among nonunion workers.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
demar
05:05 PM on 02/24/2011
This is what solidarity is all about. It applies to more than other unions. solidarity is what scares the economic royalists more than anything else. That's why they fight single payer health care.
Only business gets the best deal. Workers pay retail.

Conservatism is Sam's club for rich people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RyanCSmith
Locke for people, Hobbes for corporations
08:46 PM on 02/24/2011
Adam Smith believed in the same thing. Anyone claiming he advocated for laissez faire economics has never read his book.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
11:20 AM on 02/25/2011
Glad you're keeping the discussion honest.
12:31 PM on 02/24/2011
I wonder if would call FDR and founder of AFL-CIO extremitists like Ayn Rand since they were against public worker unions?
12:59 PM on 02/24/2011
I'll just call them wrong.

I believe public unions are essential to the job security of public employees that would otherwise be at the mercy of each different administration that may have very different ideas about the public sector. A union contract gives them security.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
02:16 PM on 02/24/2011
It also gives the public a better quality of employee than would otherwise be obtained through bribery and graft.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
01:01 PM on 02/24/2011
No, because Ayn Rand was against any union of any kind. FDR can be wrong (as with internment of Japanese Americans), without being totally wrong. The Ayn Rand objectivist (so-called) without obligation to any fellow citizens does not exist. Atlas may have shrugged, in her world view, but then she's no Atlas. And neither is any other libertarian. We all depend on the social contract to some extent. The system has to be fair enough that most people will cooperate. Otherwise go buy yourself an island and live on it.
12:27 PM on 02/24/2011
HELL-O!!!!!! did anybody listen to Walker's election campaign rhetoric.......He's doing EXACTLY what he said he would do and got elected by 54% of the voters!!!!! So democracy only works if it's what YOU like....to hell with the voters...Liberal haters get over it...There will be another election and you can cast your votes then....
Remember two years ago the infamous quote "WE won, get over it".....
sometimes your words come back to bite you in the ass.....
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
01:39 PM on 02/24/2011
I agree that the "we won" thesis usually just sets up its antithesis--as I'm hoping you will soon discover in Wisconsin.
02:54 PM on 02/24/2011
LIAR--
He said he was going to have teachers pay on health care and pension--which union agreed to do.
He said nothing about attacking the right to have a union!

WE won, get over it---was said to a senator. The senator who took for granted he "devine right to rule" regardless of elections.........no one ever said he would not engage in the process of governing!
12:05 PM on 02/24/2011
and don't forget that unions are also responsible for fighting the British for our indepedence, freeing the slaves, allowing women and minorites the right to vote, and everything else good about our country. (eyes rolling).
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
01:10 PM on 02/24/2011
Actually, the committees of correspondence in the colonies functioned like unions to educate colonists and focus their demands; working people opposed slavery because it drove down wages in factories and profits on farms; abolitionist groups tended to support workers' rights; and suffragists also saw the vote as a way to improve working conditions for both minorities and women. That once established some unions (like AFL) actively discriminated against women and people of color, while others (like CIO) did not, means that the fault was not in unions but in society. Unions are not perfect, but they are essential to a fair valuing of the contributions of labor.
01:30 PM on 02/24/2011
as to your last sentence; with all due respect....no they're not. They are not "essential" anymore. I will grant you that they had their place and were helpful for a period, but that was a long time ago. Now, they are nothing more than a drain on taxpayers.
02:56 PM on 02/24/2011
because we all know that "master" would have given us decent wages and working conditions out of the goodness of his heart--someday
04:46 PM on 02/24/2011
no, he/she wouldn't and they didn't. The unions helped get decent wages and working conditions a long, long time ago. To that, we should all say thank you. They have morphed into something that is damaging our country now.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Martha Fair
Professional RepubliBilly Factchecker
11:29 AM on 02/25/2011
fave you on that. Funny as hell.
11:01 AM on 02/24/2011
How can you even begin to compare the Union activist from a long ago era to what they have morphed into today. Tell any union leader he must do his job for half the pay and the reward for helping his fellow man is enough, watch how fast he runs for the door. GREED has destroyed the unions and GREED is why a majority of Americans are so disgusted with them.
photo
thereisonlyoneparty
more amazing than you
11:12 AM on 02/24/2011
Or seek assistance of a union after choosing not to pay one's dues.

So much for the helping people angle.
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
11:27 AM on 02/24/2011
So there is no GREED by the Owners or CEO's? Only workers that are making $60k or $80k a year are GREEDY, but CEO's making $40k a DAY are being paid a fair wage?
photo
thereisonlyoneparty
more amazing than you
11:30 AM on 02/24/2011
What is the value to the company for a CEO compared to a "regular" worker?

You are saying that the value of their labor is equal?  Nice to know.

I will check back with you whenever I need to know the value of a commodity.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ralph Perman
Unapologetic Progressive Liberal
10:55 AM on 02/24/2011
It will never cease to amaze me that collectively, as a Nation, We made business Possible.
We created the Infrastructure that business uses to conduct their business. From the Trans-Continental Railroad to the Federal Highway system to Broadband Internet. These things were all bought and paid for with Tax Dollars. Now that it has been built, business uses them at little or no cost.
Unions are our Last Hope for the Middle Class. Without it we will be reduced to a Third-World Plutocracy. With no hope and no future.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
11:18 AM on 02/24/2011
I agree with you totally about infrastructure investment that benefits business, yet from then on we are expected to approach them as "laissez-faire." Public investment but private profit. Whether building infrastructure, or inventing new drugs, or establishing cell phone frequencies, the government is supposed to turn any profits over to a private company that then complains about paying taxes. Go figure.
photo
thereisonlyoneparty
more amazing than you
11:23 AM on 02/24/2011
America will be reduced to a "third world plutocracy" because its people are stupid and unable to adapt.  Instead they seek to keep old ways of thinking alive and try to ignore the world around them.

China can produce cheaper?  Well, then we need tariffs.  That was worked really well in the past and it is sure to make America better.

We need to keep unions alive because they are important.  So what if they are detrimental to industry and the public sector by increasing costs?  They help "us", and by "us" we mean those of us who pay into the union.

And all the while dumb Americans think that they will survive on such backward thinking.  I cannot wait until China is the world's sole superpower and I do not have to hear about America anymore.
12:55 PM on 02/24/2011
Let me help you pack and move. China 3,000 girls packed into a dorm making 300 a month making stuff for Apple. They have had to install nets to keep them from jumping to their deaths. Eh, by the way China has no unions and it is a Communist socialist country. Your lovely globalists have shipped generations of sweat equity to China and China will not need to invade they own us now. You will get your wish Pluto
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
10:45 AM on 02/24/2011
The situation in WI seems purely political, but as an IL resident I can sympathize with some anti-public union sentiment. In IL we have a pension with $50 billion in assetts which is paying out $6 billion and growing net of contributions. That means that, barring a federal bailout or an unprecedented bull market, our pension fund will be going broke in the not too distant future. I do place some of the blame for this situation on unions because in IL at least they have more influence than any other constituency. This situation has been bearing down on IL like a freight train for well over a decade. The market downturn was merely a catalyst that accelerated the rpocess. Did the unions campaign for better contributions to the fund? Would they allow discussion on whether or not employees ought to contribute more? The answer is no on both counts. They knew this day would come. Their total lack of concern leads me to believe that they saw this coming and figured that IL would just raise taxes to cover the inevitable pension bust.

I do see a fundamental problem when the union is electing the other side of the table.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
11:13 AM on 02/24/2011
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. Do you think that the workers in WI were willing to contribute enough to address the fiscal problem? As I understand it, the public workers agreed to all the governor's requests EXCEPT the right to have a union itself. Did I miss something?

Both unionists and anti-unionists vote. So when anti-unionists win they get to shut down unions? And what about the unions who support the Republicans, as in Wisconsin. Are they equally affected? The political argument cuts both ways.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
12:11 PM on 02/24/2011
From what I have heard the unions have been willing to make concessions. Again I think what is happenning in WI is political theatre on the part of the local Republicans. I am not at all familiar enough with the relevant history or the current situation there to render an opinion on much of anything in that particular case.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
12:17 PM on 02/24/2011
On the voting question I would say that there hasn't been an anti-unionist voting block until this past election while unionists have been a solid voting block for decades. Again I am much more familiar with IL where the unions have huge sway in the state legislature. We do have an actual fiscal crisis where benefit concessions will be a necessary part of any realistic solution. That topic really hasn't come up though and I have to assume its because there is not enough political will to fight that battle. It was an ugly fight to wring some concessions out of future employees' pension benefits. It seems like the pols that run this state have decidied that enough has been done on that front. The problem is we hiked individual income taxes by 66% and corporate income taxes by 40 some percent, and we have only closed half the budget deficit, done nothing about unpaid bills that total 1/3 third of annual revenue, and done nothing to start to right the pension system (the afore mentioned changes have a negligible effect before that fund goes bust). In IL the unions have been part of the historical problem and are proving to be obstacles to any solution even being discussed. I think a significant portion of the anti-unionist sentiment in WI may be misdirected, but I can certainly understand the general animosity from a tax payer's point of view.
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
11:29 AM on 02/24/2011
So the only way to fix this problem is to remove the rights of Unions to bargain?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
12:42 PM on 02/24/2011
I don't think there is any best way. Each state seems to pose its own difficulties, and there doesn't seem to be much of a problem in WI in the first place. In IL I would like to see future employees moving to a defined contribution retirement plan and for esixting employees concessions on retiree health benefits increased contribution to current health benefits and increased contributions to the pension fund. I think some reductions in pay and in the government labor force would make a lot of sense, but I can't see either of those things happening. To the extent that the unions refuse to play ball on the above issues they may, in my mind, bring the question of their existnce into play.
jeito
Se todo mundo sambasse, seria tao facil viver
10:41 AM on 02/24/2011
Thanks for a thoughtful article, which reminds us of how far we have come and how much we owe to unions.

I believe the entire argument about unions needs to be re-framed in a discussion about checks and balances, much like our government functions. In the best of times, the power of corporations and rich individuals is held in check by the power of unions and the restraint of government regulations. If one leg of this triangle gains excess power, an imbalance occurs. It doesn't matter in which of the three this happens, abuse of power is to everyone's detriment. Jimmy Hoffa and Gadafi are excellent examples of abuses of power in the labor and government domains.

And if the corporate branch became too powerful? We'd see unions dismantled and destroyed, pensions robbed, jobs and benefits lost by the millions, and corrupt politicians being bought and paid for by the corporate class. Oh wait, that's happening right now!

Don't buy the divisiness being peddled right now by the powers-that-be. If the people rise up, TOGETHER, left and right, tea party and union supporters, we can take back our power and balance the triangle. We need unions in this fight now just as much as ever.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Linda R. Monk, J.D.
Constitutional Scholar
11:05 AM on 02/24/2011
I agree, and I also agree that the Tea Party can be part of the solution (if they will address the abuse of power in private as well as public spheres). That's why establishment DC is so afraid of them. I especially agree with you that Wisconsin et al is essentially a checks and balances movement that resists the concentration of power in any one institution. As James Madison said in Federalist 10, faction against faction prevents the takeover of power by any ONE faction.
12:38 PM on 02/24/2011
To add to why Unions are important. Unions keep non-union workers pay scale higher as well. This is everyone's fight because it will eventually touch all of us in the future. Think of your own children and see if you want them to work for slave wages, no benefits. I can't believe the public believes the Republicans have any moral conscience if they really understood what they are trying to do with the middle class and the poor. Why people support Billionaires who have a lot of control that will determine what kind of America we will live in. Voting Republican is their enablers.