The irony is not lost that one of the states with the most robust economic recovery and such a strong union history would come under attack by the so-called job creators. Union workers have figured so heavily in the last century of Michigan life that their impact on the state will be felt for centuries to come. Auto workers alone not only figured into the rise of Detroit, making it a name known around the world, but they also contributed to the clearing out of the city because their wages allowed them to eventually move away. When white flight took place, many of the auto workers had made enough money during their careers to "start over" in their retirement, further north, boosting local economic activity up-state. Millions of workers, spending billions of dollars created more jobs for realtors, local grocers, a host of service sector employment, boat dealerships and marinas, outdoor gear, home improvement and hardware stores, health care services, etc. Now the state has passed laws making Michigan a "right to work" state. This race to the bottom will surely undermine whatever progress has been made in the workplace as a result of organized labor.
Those who have the money never want to work with unions. I have worked for several employers who have explicitly stated that if I ever told anyone, especially other workers, about my rate of pay, that I would be fired immediately. Time Warner Cable was one of the worst. They gave me only two pay raises during the many years that I worked for them. They had absolutely no interest in the welfare of my family. They did not care one whit that I could not afford to subscribe to their "service" on the wages that they paid. They did not care that I had to feed my family by dumpster jumping. When I found out that the only reason they had given me a raise is because federal law increased the mandatory minimum wage, I quit. My second raise took place under somewhat shady circumstances, nearly doubling my take-home pay. Forcing them into finding another worker to replace me gave me individual bargaining power that the other workers did not have. This is the opposite of trade unionism. The boss's boss was unhappy about having to pay so much, but he was in a difficult position. In my long and storied history with that company, I had sacrificed greatly for both the quality of our productions and cared for the company's equipment as if it were my own. Most workers on minimum wage have no interest in protecting the interests of the corporate overlords, or putting in the extra effort to turn mediocrity into exemplary service.
Unions, on the other hand, codify professional service. In return for decent wages, union workers know that they will be expected to provide excellent service, protect the means of production (even though it is owned by someone else) and commit to making the company, or corporation as profitable as possible. This synergy makes the boss happy because they do not have to worry about sub-par performance, subterfuge, ineptitude or monkey wrenching. Union workers can only demand increased wages or better working conditions if they commit to protecting the employers interests as well. Powerful elites have effectively changed the debate. Just as the names of other laws have no relationship to what they actually do, "right to work" legislation takes away more rights than it gives. The right to organize is undermined and the wealthy are given a huge handout in the form of unorganized workers.
If I think back to my time in television production, with Time Warner, I had to work doubly hard on many occasions because the minimum wage workers were either too drunk, too hung over, too distracted, unaware, sick or just plain unable to do the work. People without skills or aptitude for certain jobs really don't have any bargaining power in the relationship between themselves and capital (their bosses). In my case, it would have taken more than two disinterested slackers to do the work that I was capable of and willing to do, but I am in a very tiny minority and my boss knew it. Still, when my pay doubled and the rest of the crew only made a few more cents each hour, I felt like I had betrayed them. Whether we admit it or not, none of us would have employment if we were not worth more to our employers than what they have to pay us. The disparity between what we are able to produce, and what the corporation has to pay us is, in large part, their profit margin. The only way to ask the wealthy to part with more of their profit is to give them something in return. Unions have always understood this give and take.
There are those who claim that increased wages and better working conditions will put their interests out of the discussion, but this has never been the case. There has never been any serious study that showed decreasing corporate profits resulting from improving working conditions, wages or more stringent environmental protections. In fact, when monetary considerations or better working conditions are provided, productivity of workers increases. The "right to work" only means that the ability of unions to organize will be undermined further. this is a slap in the face to those who built this country, a race to the bottom that we cannot afford and a huge subsidy of corporations paid for by the working poor. The same corporate interests that tried to buy the Presidential Election have gotten their way in Michigan and the public is outraged. The same sort of protests that continue to take place in the Wisconsin Capital are ongoing in Michigan as well. This revolution is not being televised, not for lack of interest, not for lack of ability, but because the monied interests just do not care.
Those who have the money never want to work with unions. I have worked for several employers who have explicitly stated that if I ever told anyone, especially other workers, about my rate of pay, that I would be fired immediately. Time Warner Cable was one of the worst. They gave me only two pay raises during the many years that I worked for them. They had absolutely no interest in the welfare of my family. They did not care one whit that I could not afford to subscribe to their "service" on the wages that they paid. They did not care that I had to feed my family by dumpster jumping. When I found out that the only reason they had given me a raise is because federal law increased the mandatory minimum wage, I quit. My second raise took place under somewhat shady circumstances, nearly doubling my take-home pay. Forcing them into finding another worker to replace me gave me individual bargaining power that the other workers did not have. This is the opposite of trade unionism. The boss's boss was unhappy about having to pay so much, but he was in a difficult position. In my long and storied history with that company, I had sacrificed greatly for both the quality of our productions and cared for the company's equipment as if it were my own. Most workers on minimum wage have no interest in protecting the interests of the corporate overlords, or putting in the extra effort to turn mediocrity into exemplary service.
Unions, on the other hand, codify professional service. In return for decent wages, union workers know that they will be expected to provide excellent service, protect the means of production (even though it is owned by someone else) and commit to making the company, or corporation as profitable as possible. This synergy makes the boss happy because they do not have to worry about sub-par performance, subterfuge, ineptitude or monkey wrenching. Union workers can only demand increased wages or better working conditions if they commit to protecting the employers interests as well. Powerful elites have effectively changed the debate. Just as the names of other laws have no relationship to what they actually do, "right to work" legislation takes away more rights than it gives. The right to organize is undermined and the wealthy are given a huge handout in the form of unorganized workers.
If I think back to my time in television production, with Time Warner, I had to work doubly hard on many occasions because the minimum wage workers were either too drunk, too hung over, too distracted, unaware, sick or just plain unable to do the work. People without skills or aptitude for certain jobs really don't have any bargaining power in the relationship between themselves and capital (their bosses). In my case, it would have taken more than two disinterested slackers to do the work that I was capable of and willing to do, but I am in a very tiny minority and my boss knew it. Still, when my pay doubled and the rest of the crew only made a few more cents each hour, I felt like I had betrayed them. Whether we admit it or not, none of us would have employment if we were not worth more to our employers than what they have to pay us. The disparity between what we are able to produce, and what the corporation has to pay us is, in large part, their profit margin. The only way to ask the wealthy to part with more of their profit is to give them something in return. Unions have always understood this give and take.
There are those who claim that increased wages and better working conditions will put their interests out of the discussion, but this has never been the case. There has never been any serious study that showed decreasing corporate profits resulting from improving working conditions, wages or more stringent environmental protections. In fact, when monetary considerations or better working conditions are provided, productivity of workers increases. The "right to work" only means that the ability of unions to organize will be undermined further. this is a slap in the face to those who built this country, a race to the bottom that we cannot afford and a huge subsidy of corporations paid for by the working poor. The same corporate interests that tried to buy the Presidential Election have gotten their way in Michigan and the public is outraged. The same sort of protests that continue to take place in the Wisconsin Capital are ongoing in Michigan as well. This revolution is not being televised, not for lack of interest, not for lack of ability, but because the monied interests just do not care.
No comments:
Post a Comment