Treat All Working People Fairly to Restore Justice in America

Post Comment

(September 3, 2007) — What does labor want? We want more schoolhouses and fewer jails. More books and fewer arsenals. More learning and less vice. More constant work and less crime. More leisure and less greed. More justice and less revenge."

Samuel Gompers, president of the American Federation of Labor from 1886 until his death in 1924, wrote those words during the industrial depression and financial panic of 1893. Labor's specific goals may have evolved since then, but Gompers' words are just as relevant today.

Shortly after the Wagner Act of 1938 was passed giving workers the right to join unions for collective bargaining, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote that we could have democracy, or we could have great wealth in the hands of a few, but we could not have both.

What working people need most this Labor Day is to achieve the vision of Gompers. In my lifetime, working people had power but the corporations took it. We intend to get it back.

When the middle class surged after World War II, there was a rough balance of power between labor and employers. That allowed us to negotiate a social contract that assured workers would fairly share in the wealth they created. As productivity rose, real family incomes doubled, causing the largest and fastest jump in living standards in history. The poorest families made even faster gains than the rich. This increasingly shared wealth had a direct and positive effect on the great social movements for workers' rights, civil rights, women's rights and the rights of people with disabilities that took place concurrently.

Americans today are the world's most productive, working longer hours than those in any other developed country. American workers generate $13 trillion a year in income, but our wages stagnate and our health care and retirement security are disappearing. Our progressive tax system has been weakened by President Bush's several-trillion-dollar tax cuts, mostly to benefit the rich. Manufacturing jobs, once the backbone of our middle class, have disappeared through technology and globalization, which has enabled corporations to ship work to low-wage, no-rights countries where the environment is poisoned and workers are exploited.

Americans are surprised and angered that their support of cheap labor and cheap goods could endanger their children, their pets and their own health.

When working people had collective power, we did not have corporate coal executives in charge of mining safety, agribusiness and drug companies setting policy at the FDA, and Big Oil writing energy and conservation policy.

As our nation has embraced the corporate agenda, we now know that 45 million Americans are without health insurance, more than 25 percent of whom are children, and eight of 10 people without health care are working. And Consumer Reports just announced that 60 million of us with health care have bare-bones coverage, leaving us unprotected if faced with major medical expenses. From 2000 to 2006, family premiums on average have soared 81 percent to an amazing $11,480 per year. In other first-world democracies, health care and retirement security are rights, not benefits.

Our agenda this Labor Day includes the right to a job; the right to be respected for the job we do; the right for all to have wages, health care and retirement security that allow us to live in dignity; and the total freedom to form a union and bargain collectively. We want to contribute to, and fairly share in, rebuilding a world-class economy in a just society.

Those of us in the labor movement, along with the coalition groups that support us, know that the level of justice in our society is directly related to the power of working people. We know that the path back to a balance of economic power is neither short nor smooth, but it will be successful.

Sam Gompers had it right: Labor wants more justice and less revenge. Happy Labor Day!

Bertolone is president, Rochester & Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation, AFL-CIO.

Post a Comment   View All Comments Quote from essayist: "Manufacturing jobs, once the backbone of our middle class, have disappeared through technology and globalization, which has enabled corporations to ship work to low-wage, no-rights countries where the environment is poisoned and workers are exploited." Disappeared through technology? Way back in my younger days, when I was more open to the idea of joining a union, the IAM tried getting into the shop where I worked. These organizers turned out to be the biggest liars, and were the typical "tell them what they want to hear" types. One of the reps claimed that the advent of computer numerical control (CNC) and robotics were bad for American manufacturing, amongst other modern technologies. American manufacturing has stayed strong because of these technologies. Increases in productivity here in the states are directly related to grasping the latest technologies and creating work environments where worker skills and education are valued and rewarded. This creates wealth, helps companies to keep jobs here, and enables this country to remain competitive. To hear and read the same old diatribe from these folks makes me think they all rehearse the same old canned remarks, reactions, etc. Today's American union leadership still have that same old "us v. them" mentality, which is one of the main reasons why American companies are closing or simply shipping jobs overseas. They memorize catch words and phrases, then repeat them to get people all riled up. The fear and panic they create in some folks' minds borders on the criminal. The vast majority of union people I've met are xenophobic, intolerant, and seem to be stuck in their own little world. Unions have taken on this fear of the unknown mentality, all the while circling the wagons to keep the dues coming in. Negotiations fall through, then jobs are lost due to the unions' relentless pursuit of keeping the status quo. Or, in the case of public employees' unions, they leave the taxpayers on the hook for health coverage and cushy retirement packages, and never face layoffs or early outs. NY is the only state where union membership has increased, in large part due to the public employees' unions. moparboy Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 4:12 pm to MedPro: "at will employment" is unfair. The problem is that there is no reasonable alternative in a market based economy. Employers, both left wing and right wing both love and support at will employment. This is one area where they always agree. But for folks that don't like unions, that means you do not want a market based economy. Unions, like other contracts, are merely another way to add competition and negotiating power in business dealings. If unions can organize workers, they are just using market based forces to compete. This is the exact same thing that company managers do. But union management is no different from corporate management; that is they are primarily concerned with their own well being and not the well being of their union members. But that is OK too, that is the free market. The problem comes in when union leaders tell the public that they are being altruistic, rather than greedy. That is a lie. Union leaders are just as greedy as corporate leaders and, just as greedy as most workers. The workers are not saints either. Most of the time they will through a fellow worker under the bus for a few more dollars or a little more job security. You can't fight human nature and human nature is what makes the market place what it is: A cut throat environment, with some, very limited exceptions. gagalbert Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 3:16 pm I wonder if James V. Bertolone really believes what he says......or is it what he has to say because that is his job? I never understood what "collective bargaining" really was. I would think it would be an effort for the workers to be compensated fairly. Why do I get the feeling that it is legal bribery and threats to get ALL that they can. This just doesn't feel right to me. It doesn't seem honest. Why do people really need a ORGANIZED union? To me, it is just another layer of bureaucracy. Why would anyone want that? I could see all the workers at a plant having a "organization" within to discuss issues among themselves on fairness issues, and then providing these thoughts to management. But why a NATIONAL organization. As I mentioned, it is just another layer of do-nothings that make big salaries for themselves and their friends and families, and justify it by saying they are helping you. Were unions the reason for the American auto industry going belly-up? ( I think so ) Are unions the reason health care keeps going up? ( I think so. I think this because they insist in their contracts that all their medical and drugs be paid for by the employer. As such, there is NO free enterprise, no competition, no mass complaints about cost increases.) Everyone else now suffers because health care costs keep rising uncontrolled. The worst are the public employee unions......this is why out taxes are so high. And I also wonder why unions support certain politicians? Obviously, they are looking for something. Do these politicians then support legislation that is beneficial to everyone, or just unions? Unions......specifically the union bosses, not the members, should be ashamed of themselves. And this includes James V. Bertolone ( sorry about the rant.....this subject just hits a nerve with me ) Average_Joe Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:57 am While I appreciate all that Mr. Bertolone idealizes and the vision of Samuel Gompers, I remind you that unionized labor in this neck of the woods is not the majority. If you look at the major employers in the Rochester area, they do not subscribe to union backed laborers. We live in an "At-Will" state and I believe this to be a dangerous and archaic law. The genesis of this law dates back to Horace Fay Wood's 1877 treatise on "master-servant " relations. Just the term "master-servant" should terrify any person working in an At-Will state. This rule essentially states that "any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,"... OUCH! What the heck did I get myself into? In the past year I was fired from a position I had held for more than half a decade. A baseless accusation was made by my employer and ZAP...I was fired. I have never been fired from a job before and at age 50, found myself in a bit of a bind having to familiarize myself with Unemployment, which, by the way, does NOT give benefits if you were terminated for something YOU did...real or perceived. So I had to request a hearing...which I won. My former employer appealed...and I won again, with Unemployment finding no justification for my termination. One would think this would put me in a good position to clear my name. Not true! The employer reverts to the "At-Will" law which states that I can be fired for "no cause at all". Please don't tell me to get a lawyer and pursue legal action against my former employer. Remember, I was out of work for a long time...just how am I going to pay for the lawyer? Of more importance, the lawyer (who is much more savvy in labor laws than I) shakes his head and reminds me that I live in an "At-Will" state. So here I am, going to interviews trying to present my best side and then the question arises, "May I ask you why you left your last job.?" Well now, just what do I say? Lying is not my strong suit. I start fidgeting, waves of nausea flood over me, I can feel the perspiration thick like the morning dew on my forehead. "You can do this, you can do this" I tell myself over and over. And then the words spew from my mouth, "I was wrongfully terminated." And there is silence. This prospective employer cannot ask me what exactly happened and unless they are interested in an emotional soliloquy, the silence continues. I can deal with the silence but what I can't deal with is the DOUBT. The doubt in my character, in my professionalism, in my ability to be an upstanding employee. Sometimes this question isn't asked but later, during the subsequest filling out of papers there is a question; "Have you ever been suspended or terminated from a position." or "Describe any lapse in employment greater than 3 months." In any case, I look like a questionable candidate. And for what reason? Because my former employer had some beef with me that I never knew about? Because I was the highest paid medical professional at my job? I still have no idea what the catalyst was for my termination but I do know that I have had to bear the consequences. While "Labor Day" may be in celebration of Unionized workers, I would remind you that there are thousands of us for whom no union exists. We are bound by a law which recognizes us an little more than "servants." I wonder if the hundreds of patients whose lives I have saved or those who have healed from their medical problems view me as a "servant." I certainly hope not. I hope that my patients view me an a kind, compassionate Medical Provider who took the time and had the knowledge to provide them with sound medical treatment. In other words, that I was doing my job. MedPro Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:16 am "We want more schoolhouses and fewer jails." No, you want more of both. And you want them to be as incompetent and expensive as possible. Every employee in a school is a dues-paying union member just like every employee in a jail. Every cop and every fireman. Most EMTs as well. Unions are an anachronism with little to no place in modern America. You know why the private sector labor force represented by unions is declining? All those jobs are going overseas. They were before free trade because the cost of the labor was too great. I'm sure all those Delco people are great that they're jobs and wages are being cut because of the greed of their unionized predecessors. Keep representing workers who demand more to do less. The private sector got smart, now when will our politicians and start demanding accountability from our burdensome unionized public labor force? And the artificially high government salaries don't hold back our region economically...oh wait, they do. That's some legacy, Jim. Most people have some shame when they're responsible for so much decline, particularly given how much of it is recent. Not you, union bosses apparently don't know the concept of shame. Oh, and why do you want to grant Amnesty to illegal immigrants? Won't that deflate the wages of the lower-skilled employees you claim to represent? Informed_Rochestarian Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:19 am From the NY Post - The parade sputtered out entirely for most of the ’70s due to sparse attend- ance, and hasn’t even been held on Labor Day for the past decade. Then again, this hasn’t exactly been a stellar year for the sponsoring organization, the Central Labor Council: Its former head, Brian McLaughlin, is under indictment for racketeering, embezzlement and fraud, to the tune of $2.2 million. As U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia said in announcing the indictment - which includes 44 counts and runs to 186 pages (here’s the PDF): McLaughlin’s alleged larceny “lends new meaning to the term ‘hand in the till.’ ” Besides which, the fact remains that the only real growth in the American labor movement - especially in New York - has been in the public sector: Government workers whose power derives from their unions’ ability to shake down elected officials, particularly during an election year. The labor movement, in other words, really doesn’t have all that much to celebrate. We can’t think of any other reason why the CLC would voluntarily give up an opportunity for politicians to show up and display their fealty to organized labor. Other than the likelihood that no one would have shown up to watch it. Mikey123 Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:07 am Post a Comment   View All Comments