It is unfortunate that we are seeing an attempt in Congress to scapegoat America's unions for the economic problems that beset us.
After all, it was not America's grocery clerks, nurses, teachers, postal workers and electricians that nearly caused the meltdown of the economy. It wasn't America's labor unions that were pushing for tax loopholes that made our revenue system a hopeless, inefficient mess. It wasn't unions that pushed for shortcuts for worker safety that produced the tragedies that we have seen in our mines. America's working men and women didn't engineer poor loans, cheat consumers, and transform financial institutions into giant casinos.
No doubt there are some consumers who took unfair advantage of the system, as well as others who were not as vigilant as they should have been before the meltdown, but the truth is that they were part of an unprecedented economic scheme that played on those weaknesses, gullibility and often greed, turning it into a vast industry.
Are there some areas where unions have been too effective in securing benefits for their members? It probably depends on who you ask about the give and take of the collective bargaining process. The leadership structures of unions are in fact much more democratic than their corporate counterparts. Officials are routinely challenged for reelection, and there are insurgents in even the most powerful and entrenched unions -- something one seldom sees in a corporate boardroom. How many of those directors are defeated? It's not easy to even have opposing nominees through today's shareholder democracy. It's much less democratic than what happens with unions.
There is a very direct remedy in the negotiation process. I've been on both sides of this issue and I've had ups and downs with some of my friends in organized labor. For 18 years I was a local elected official, part of that time responsible for the collective bargaining program. I like to think that I bargained tough and fair. But the point is that I bargained. I've supported collective bargaining rights for public employees from my first session in the Oregon legislature and still believe that honest, tough, principled negotiation will lead to the best results. Having somebody dictate working conditions is not calculated to enhance productivity. It matters how people are treated and how they feel. Employee-owned corporations, particularly those that also have unions, illustrate this principle in spades.
One of the best-performing economies in the world is Germany, where they still manufacture and have a huge export market for high-value products. Germans work hard to integrate labor and business with government in the decision-making process, something that is all too rare in the United States.
Unions are not the answer for every employee and every company, but every employee and every company deserves to make that choice. That fact is that even non-union companies benefit from the strength of collective bargaining in our economy. I have had executives at successful manufacturing companies candidly tell me that they treat their employees right because they don't want them to unionize. Even these non-union companies' employees benefit from higher wages, better benefits and a system that respects the worker because it is a strong part of our culture.
Yet instead of treating employees fairly by allowing them to organize, far too many corporations have chosen instead to attack the fundamentals of collective bargaining. It is an art form to stall, delay, intimidate, and even to flagrantly violate the laws of collective bargaining in this country, weak and ineffectively enforced as they are. Collective bargaining has been under systematic attack from my Republican colleagues in Congress, and Republican administrations have sought to transform the National Labor Relations Board into a toothless, passive entity that is unable or unwilling to protect the rights of employees to organize. This is not calculated to produce a spirit of cooperation, and it is not clear that people need to cheat the system in order to avoid any excesses of collective bargaining.
I would argue the opposite is true. It is not just workers who benefit from unionization -- it is society as a whole. It was organized labor that spearheaded efforts for a 40-hour work week, and it is not just rhetoric when people say that unions were the ones who brought you the weekend. Unions have played a key role in extending health security to millions of Americans, workplace safety to millions of employees, and consumer and environmental protections to our families.
I don't pretend that unions are perfect, and I've had some differences with them over the years. But make no mistake: unions are amongst the few who stand up for justice in the workplace, protecting the unorganized, and fighting for a livable minimum wage. It's important to reflect upon our collective bargaining system. I'm all for fine-tuning, but I am adamantly opposed to gutting the rights and protections of workers. We all should start by acknowledging the debt we owe to unions, and work to stop this wholesale assault on the American worker.
Follow Rep. Earl Blumenauer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/repblumenauer
Making the puzzle fit in GOP/unions standoff - politics - msnbc.com
What do you think offsets the million and millions of dollars spent to relocate production in another country? It is the elimination of the outrageous union salaries.
Keep pandering, but the reality always wins.
And since it is too expensive (with union wages) it will cease to exist. The system is working, OUR system is working. The fatcat, lazy union workers need to start producing or they are toast.
There are more likely "suspects" for our ongoing financial crisis (other than elementary teachers, hospice nurses, hotshots that jump into burning forests from helicopters, police officers, etc)
If you look at the predatory behavior of private lenders (and everyone who was trying to profit in the loan process), you will understand [just] how much money what was in play (real or imaginary), what little regulation was in place (due to fears of recession) and just how much risk actually existed (that consumers were not aware of).
I am so embarrassed at the greed and utter lack of concern for the economic stability of our country and fellow Americans!
I am also saddened that today it is uncool to even call out for consumer protections, let alone justice (for fear that we will lose job creators) while our citizens still suffer under the effects of this economic crisis.
As if because some of us got taken, we must be dumb, and so we got what we deserved?
Here is the full report: http://fcic-static.law.stanford.edu/cdn_media/fcic-reports/fcic_final_report_full.pdf
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/07/22/128700329/mortgage
At any rate - the money is gone and revenues are down. Bottom line is if tax revenues are down, sometimes cuts to public funds are required. If cuts to public funds are required then public employees will take cuts in compensation. If public unions get in the People's way - the public unions will be crushed.
Are you going to blame me too? A private sector, self employed American who is also paying the price of this financial meltdown between lost pensions, investments, savings and current depressed business income as a result?
You think the average person contributed and so, are okay that they bear this economic burden with lower wages [if they have a job], while Wall Street, Big Banking, Big Business refuse to take a risk on leading this recovery, for fear of regulation while sitting on trillions in cash?
Wow. Good for you.
Cut spending, cut employment, instead of increasing revenue via removing loopholes, credits and subsidies that allow profitable big corporations to create a negative income tax. That's okay with you?
Enjoy your rosey glasses too. No wonder we cannot move forward. There is no in between, no, "well, yeh, we gotta reduce wages, but we need to also increase tax revenue too."
It is one or the other, but not both. This country is doomed. Enjoy another six years of economic depression as that is what we ARE looking at if we cannot find an in between place called "shared sacrifice".
Hope you got enough set aside to weather this ongoing storm. Enjoy.
Many of those defaulting never intended to occupy these homes as their primary residences, AS WAS REQUIRED for federally backing. This was fraud, plain and simple.
Why aren’t these loans investigated and these "investors" prosecuted, especially since it’s still happening every day, especially since there are so many foreclosed houses out there to be bought up cheap.
Foreclosures should determine whether the loan was fraudulently granted, which would not be too difficult to do. Many of these "investors" live in handsome homes in great neighborhoods, while the properties being foreclosed on are in poor neighborhoods and were never worth the loans being taken on them.
The system is out of control. Brokers know when a "buyer", living a ritzy address, is not going to move to a poor neighborhood across town. So does the lender. Kicking back a portion of the "purchase price" to cover the down payment is rampant, as is appraisers’ SOP of starting with the purchase price and "appraising" the property to the value of the purchase price. How’s that an "objective opinion"?
Make mortgage and realty brokers as liable for these frauds as the buyers. Toss a few Realtors and bankers in jail as "fiduciary representatives" of the fraudsters and we'll go a long way to fixing this crisis.
You are spot on here. The people who are against unions have no understanding of their history and effectiveness in fighting for the many things we now take for granted like weekends, workplace safety and the 40 hour work week. They also don't understand that every political system, and a union is one, is going to be run by people and people just are who they are. What they can't seem to get their minds around is that unions are voted in by the workers and the workers elect their leaders. Something about Democracy or the like.
Everyone is against public sector unions. Big difference.
So go ahead, call the American People hitler.....see how that works out.
Unions are indeed responsible for many improvements in working conditions & compensation -- although not all of what the pro-union folks claim.
Today there are laws on the books to address all of the issues that caused workers to unionize in the first place. For that, we owe them our gratitude.
However, since the law now addresses these key issues, what is the function of the unions?
1) Drive up their members wages & benefits through legalized extortion (strikes) at the expense of the rest of America.
2) Make the cost of doing business in America prohibitive and drive jobs out of the country.
3) Ensure that even if the industry they work for collapses the tax payers will bail them out so they can keep their jobs, again at the expense of the rest of America.
4) Promote mediocrity in the workplace rather than personal excellence.
5) Ensure that government bloat continues to suck the life out of America's economy (public sector unions).
6) Manipulate the political process through massive campaign contributions and lobbying.
In regards to the last point, why is it that liberals lamenting the SCOTUS decision in Citizens United always point to the evils of the giant corporations but not to the unions, which are now also free to fund politics as they see fit? (For the record, I disagree with Romney and the courts. Neither corporations nor unions are people.)
"I've supported collective bargaining rights for public employees from my first session in the Oregon legislature"
1st - Colelctive bargaining for public employees is not a "right" - it is a law. Big difference. Why? FDR put it best and this is exactly what we are finding now with today's public unions:
All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters."
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=15445#axzz1Y3xZaU00
Also ironically George Meany -- the former president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O -- in 1955 said “It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government.â€
Unfortunately, Big Unions (Teamsters, autoworkers etc..) became as corrupt as the industries they were trying to reform. Organized crime is well documented in relation to these behemoth unions.
We do not have a nurses union in Colorado. I would love to have the collective bargaining power that a union would afford. But I wouldn't want my union dues to go to supporting administrative fat-cats making deals behind closed doors for their personal enrichment.
Unfortunately many private-sector unions are in decline, and public unions are destroying the name of those before them - and abusing public employees for their own twisted form and view of governance.
That is why I cannot in good concience support what Rep. Earl Blumenauer - in his own article he talks mainly about the efforts of the accomplishments of the early private sector unions and tries to warp that into the stuggle of today's public sector unions.
Glad more and more people see what frauds public sector unions are.
And in Wisconsin - when public employees were finally allowed to make that choice - most chose not to join the public union. Wonder why that is........................
Gee wonder why. Google Greece and Union.
It’s a little disingenuous to imply that the state and local compensation hasn’t played a role in the current economic struggle. State and local employees take up a significant of government budgets. That’s not an inherent problem, but when collective bargaining awards state and local employees a total compensation packages that far outstrip those found in the private sector (http://eng.am/pZofYR), you’re left with big problems.
Is curtailing collective bargaining the only way to fix the problem? Probably not. But if there was ever evidence that the public sector needs rethinking it’s in the fact that we’re seeing traditional “blue†states like New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts putting forth significant efforts to save their states money through reform in the public sector (http://eng.am/n5bzkO).
There are a plethora of causes for the current financial woes, but ignoring one of them because they weren’t always a problem would be unwise.
To the extent that Unions can help, they have, by negotiated givebacks on benefits and wages, ... NEGOTIATED, not stolen by the likes of Scott Walker and governors like him. You would steal what they have earned and been promised in the past, and pretend it was fair.
How fair would you feel it was to have your pension disappear after 30 years at a corporation?
Unions represent the smallest proportion of our population in many decades. Those who would have them reduced fuirther or eliminated are like blood thirsty hyenas, ... seeing a weakened animal that is easy prey.
Unions are all that stand between Americans and a virtual Right Wing Plutocracy in America.
It is not surprising that the shadowy Corporatists the Right follows, want their followers to strike a death blow to them. It would make the coup so much simpler.
(Not to mention public employees were not forced against their will and not forced dues involuntarily taken out of their paychecks anymore).
Funny thing was, after public employees had a choice - the public unions de-certified. Turned out the public unions got so greedy and fat they did not even know who the people they claimed they "represented" were - they didn't even know their names.