Subscribe via RSS Feed

Author Page for Erik Loomis

rss feed

Visit Erik Loomis's Website

The Dysfunctional NLRB

[ 23 ] March 19, 2014 |

The NLRB simply does not work for private sector labor. The long appeals and lack of meaningful punishment for corporate violations means that employers can engage in open intimidation of union organizing, knowing that even if they get busted, it can be years before a case is decided and by that time the union leaders are long gone since they’ll have been canned long before. Josh Eidelson has a piece on the now slightly less ridiculous Target anti-union video it shows employees. But the real kicker in the article in this:

The Target video, “Think Hard: Protect Your Signature,” was shown to Valley Stream, N.Y., Target employees in the lead-up to a 2011 unionization vote, according to the United Food & Commercial Workers union. Target was compelled to turn over the video as part of the National Labor Relations Board’s investigation of alleged illegal union-busting prior to that election, in which employees voted against becoming Target’s first unionized employees. In a 3-0 decision last year, the NLRB found sufficient wrongdoing by Target to throw out that election result, paving the way for a new unionization vote. However, citing intimations of lost jobs (including in that now-hipper video) and an alleged purge of union activists (whom the NLRB has not ordered Target to reinstate), the UFCW union last week told Salon that it now plans not to pursue another vote there.

“The system failed the workers, as it’s going to continue to fail the workers,” said UFCW Local 1500 organizing director Aly Waddy. Before the election, she alleged, Target used a mix of legal and illegal tactics to scare and spy on workers; after the union was defeated in the vote, she charged, the company rewarded or punished employees based on their stance toward the union, and used a four-month store shutdown for renovations as a pretext to transfer or terminate 20-some pro-union activists. “None of the workers that started the campaign are there …” Waddy told Salon, “Workers have seen a company that’s gotten away with doing whatever it is that they wanted to do.”

While the UFCW filed charges with the NLRB alleging union activists were illegally targeted for termination, the union was unable to secure any rulings to that effect from the Labor Board. Instead, the NLRB decision throwing out the 2011 election results cited a company solicitation policy, which it found illegally interfered with workers’ organizing rights, as well as “a coercive interrogation, a threat of unspecified reprisals, and the distribution to employees of a leaflet that unlawfully implied a threat to close the store if employees selected the Union …”

There are ongoing serious discussions within organized labor’s inner circles over whether the NLRB is even worth salvaging and while I do generally do think it can be made useful again, right now it is not.

America, March 19, 2014

[ 174 ] March 19, 2014 |

Ever since the 1820s, Americans have used the founding fathers as a mirror to themselves. This is what we see in that mirror today.

Until I see James Madison posting up Mao, I don’t believe this country has reached its potential.

The Underemployed Generation

[ 94 ] March 19, 2014 |

Andrew Sum, et al have a powerful report on the underemployed generation that is today’s youth. Here’s the whole report in PDF form.

For young people with low levels of education, the employment situation is bad indeed and they have little hope of significant improvement going forward. It’s not that they can find no work necessarily, but it is a generation of underemployed people working low-wage jobs:

This report shows that America’s youth have faced a much more difficult time finding jobs throughout the 2000’s than official unemployment rates have indicated. In 2011, 43 percent of teens and 30 percent of young adults were struggling to find their place in the labor market, while the official unemployment rates were much lower at 25 percent and 15 percent respectively for these groups.

Here’s their fact sheet:

Employment rates showed a ‘Great Age Twist’ between 2000 and 2011. Individuals under age 54 were less likely to be working in 2011 than in 2000, while those 55 and over were more likely be working in 2011.

Employment rates among teens declined dramatically, from 44 percent in 2000 to 24 percent in 2011, but showed variation by educational attainment and household income.

‘Labor force underutilization’ reveals a bigger problem among teens than reflected in the official unemployment rate, and varies by race/ethnicity and educational attainment.

The share of teens with any paid employment throughout the year dropped from 55 percent in 2000 to 28 percent in 2011.

Teens with more work experience in the previous year are much more likely to find employment in the current year.

Teen employment rates vary widely among metropolitan areas.

The employment rate among young adults ages 20-24, fell from 72 percent in 2000 to 60 percent in 2011.

As with teens, labor force underutilization rates are much higher than the official unemployment rate, and vary by race/ethnicity and educational attainment.

The share of young adults with any paid employment in a given year dropped from 82 percent in 2000 to 69 percent in 2011.

Young adults with work experience in the previous year and higher levels of education are much more likely find employment.

Young adult employment rates vary widely among metropolitan areas, although not as much as teen employment rates.

As always, you should read the whole thing, etc.

World Cup Labor Standards

[ 29 ] March 19, 2014 |

We hardly need to cover the incredible corruption of FIFA. It’s only a matter of finding out how much money the Qatar sheiks and Russian oligarchs put in the pockets of FIFA executives to get the World Cup placed in those two nations. I love that Qatar said that “oh sure we’ll use space age cooling techniques in the stadiums so we can totally hold it in the summer” until the moment got the cup and now it’s going to have to be played in the winter. But perhaps the greatest scandal is the lack of labor standards in international sporting events. Despite the involvement of so many nations in a sporting event like this, the actual construction of the stadiums is left entirely up to the home country. If thousands of people die, who cares:

A report from the International Trade Union Confederation says 1,200 migrant workers from India and Nepal have died in Qatar since the country was awarded the 2022 World Cup.

The ITUC estimates that 4,000 migrant workers will die by the time the first game is played in 2022.

Workers at the Lusail City construction site told the Guardian that their bosses have withheld pay, forced them to work in 122-degree heat with no rest for food, and confiscated their passports to make sure they don’t leave the country.

Combine those complaints with squalid living conditions, and some are calling the situation in Qatar “modern day slavery.”

I’m sure FIFA is very, very concerned about this….

Living on $10 or Less

[ 6 ] March 19, 2014 |

Ben Casselman usefully tries to figure out just how many people are trying to survive and support themselves on less than President Obama’s proposed $10.10 minimum wage. While solid numbers are hard to nail down, it’s certainly not a bunch of teenagers working part time jobs here. Especially when you get to the $9 and $10 range, there are a lot of people trying to support themselves or even families, which is insane.

So this is useful stuff. However, I will say that if the foxes at 538 provide this much methodology in every post, it’s going to get more tiresome than those cultural anthropology methodology chapters about the author’s positionality as an observer in the community really really fast.

Federal Historic Tax Credit

[ 78 ] March 18, 2014 |

I’m generally skeptical of tax credits to businesses and I’d like to see them all eliminated were the government and everyday citizens to be empowered to fill in the gaps that these credits sometimes cover when do well. But since my utopian world is far away, it’s important to separate the useful tax credits from the corporate welfare. The Federal Historic Tax Credit is one of the former, allowing redevelopment of dying downtowns and reshaping urban cores in ways that draw back residents and businesses and reducing urban sprawl. Of course Republicans don’t like those things and so it is under attack in the House. Whether it has enough political and lobbying support to survive, I don’t know. Michael Allen provides the compelling reason to keep it, using downtown Rockford as an example of its use:

Something is visibly afoot in downtown Rockford, Ill. For years in this smaller city with a 13.4 percent unemployment rate, businesses fled to the outskirts and left the downtown quiet and neglected. Yet vacant commercial buildings have sprung back to life with street-level retail and new apartments. The historic Peacock Brewery is set to serve beer once again, its imposing redbrick exterior cleaned and tuckpointed.

Downtown Rockford is changing quickly, with some $40 million in renovations underway and $15 million in the works. All of this work involves historic buildings, and all of it uses the federal historic rehabilitation tax credit, which returns 20 percent of the cost of building restoration to developers.

“Rockford would never have had a chance without it,” says local architect Gary Anderson. “The appetite of banks is not to take a risk here, and the tax credits are a motivator to get them to lend.”

“The program is so easy,” Anderson continues. “It’s the least amount of bureaucracy for the greatest gain.” When he first started working to bring economic activity back to downtown Rockford, Anderson examined many incentive programs, including New Markets Tax Credits. Few, however, put so much of their cost back into the buildings themselves, so Anderson and his partners turned to the federal historic tax credit.

The Voluntarism Fantasy

[ 154 ] March 18, 2014 |

“Helping the Poor–Gratuitous Distribution of Coal by the City–Cherry Street,” New York City, 1877

Konczal’s essay on the voluntarism fantasy of conservatives who argue that private charity used to operate as a functional charity distributor before the big bad state destroyed individualism is pretty definitive. Konczal correctly destroys this myth and spits out its remains, showing how the state has always been involved in any meaningful welfare work in this country and that the problem with the pre-New Deal welfare programs is that the state wasn’t nearly involved enough. I’d only add to this essay that federally subsidized westward expansion was also part of this welfare state, as Republicans especially explicitly saw the frontier as a social safety net that would alleviate poverty without directly giving charity to people.

Really, the Hooverism of Paul Ryan and other Republican granny starvers isn’t just wanting to destroy the federal welfare state, it’s also that they, like Hoover, hold onto myths of an individualistic past that never existed.

James Kwak has more commentary.

Franchising and Wage Theft in Fast Food

[ 89 ] March 18, 2014 |

Timothy Noah has a good run-down of wage theft in fast food and the role franchising plays in it:

What’s unusual here aren’t the claims of labor law violations, which are common enough, but rather, who’s being blamed. The wall that fast food workers hope to blast through with these class-action suits is the franchise system. All of the lawsuits name McDonald’s itself as a defendant, even though most of the targeted restaurants are owned not by McDonald’s but by McDonald’s franchisees.

Starting with Howard Johnson’s in the 1930s, franchising enabled fast-food companies largely to get out of the food business. Owning and operating the restaurants was mostly left to franchisees – usually mom and pop businesses that paid McDonald’s or Burger King or Dominos for the right to brandish their corporate trademark and prepare food according to their specifications. Today, most fast-food workers don’t work for McDonald’s or Burger King or Dominos; they work for franchisees licensed to sell their products.

Practically speaking, franchising makes it very difficult to hold fast-food corporations accountable for most labor violations that occur in restaurants bearing their name. Those aren’t our employees, the corporations can say; you got a problem with how burger-flippers are treated, take it up with their franchisee bosses. In franchise agreements – the contracts prospective franchisees must sign on a take-it-or-leave-it basis – franchisors explicitly disavow such responsibility. The McDonald’s contract, for instance, stipulates that “Franchisee and McDonald’s are not and do not intend to be partners, associates, or joint employers in any way.”

Like the subcontracting and outsourcing, franchising exists to increase profit for corporations while protecting them from liability. There is no reason at all why McDonald’s should not be held legally accountable for the actions of its franchisees, much as Wal-Mart and Gap and other apparel companies should be held legally accountable for the deaths at Rana Plaza in Bangladesh last year. In the recent past, judges have thrown these class-action suits out but as Noah points out, this one gathered a lot of evidence of McDonald’s direct involvement with its franchises that might suggest direct involvement in labor practices too that rip off workers.

Bouie on America’s Racist Housing Policy

[ 130 ] March 18, 2014 |

Paul Ryan, unfortunately the latest Irish-American politician to forget the roots of his people and become a right-winger, has had a very racist week. Blaming black people for inner-city conditions is another in a long history of rich people blaming the poor for their own poverty. Maybe like howthe English blamed the Irish during the potato famine as the English were forcing Ireland to grow crops for its neighbor to the east. Anyway, if you aren’t familiar with why inner-city conditions became so bad in the late 20th century, Jamelle Bouie provides an excellent run-down of America’s racist housing policy and the pernicious effects of residential segregation.

This Day in Labor History: March 18, 1970

[ 17 ] March 18, 2014 |

On March 18, 1970, postal workers around the nation went on strike. This illegal but pioneering strike of public sector workers not only forced the Nixon Administration to cave but ushered in a decade of working class restlessness against their own staid union officials and a decade of public sector activism that would spur an enormous growth in union organizing among public employees.

Postal workers were deeply frustrated by the late 1960s. They had a union but lacked collective bargaining rights. They had not seen a pay raise since 1967. Many worked second jobs to survive. In 1968, the Kappel Commission recommended postal workers be granted collective bargaining rights, but Congress rejected it. Working conditions were not very good–many of the post offices were old, overheated or freezing cold depending on the season, dusty and dank. Leaders of the National Association of Letter Carriers (James Rademacher was the president of the NALC) were not particularly responsive to the bubbling frustration coming from the rank and file that would mark the 1970s in strikes like Lordstown. When Congress voted itself a raise of 50 percent while refusing to do anything for postal workers and then Nixon did nothing for them in his 1970 budget, this lit the switch of fury at their employers.

The postal workers were poor and they were angry. Over the desire of their union leaders, rank and file activists in New York called for a strike. When Congress suggested a 5.4 percent pay raise, the rank and file flatly rejected it. Union leaders did not want a strike, but they could not control the membership. The president of a New York City local was chased off a podium by his own members when he opposed the strike. Rademacher said on national television that the strikers were members of Students for a Democratic Society and did not represent the good Americans of the postal workers.

When postal workers went on strike on March 18, 1970, it was illegal because they did not have the right to strike. Writing to AFL-CIO president George Meany, Brooklyn postal clerk Steve Parise argued that the illegality of a strike was irrelevant: “Our union and our rank and file feel that the government has forfeited its immunity to a strike, not only because its open disdain for these men, but also the humility of financial hardships they have forced upon our families, such as seeking welfare to survive.” Said another postal worker to the New York Times, “Everybody else strikes and gets a big pay increase. The teachers, the sanitation and transit workers all struck [in violation of the law]. Why shouldn’t we? We’ve been nice far too long.”

President Richard Nixon called for postal workers to immediately return to work and said the government would not negotiate so long as the strike continued. Nixon said, “What is at issue is the survival of a government based upon law,” a statement we also know he applied to his own actions. Yet for the next week, the strike continued to expand, eventually leading to 210,000 postal workers off the job. He directed his Secretary of Labor George Schultz to agree to negotiate with the NALC as soon as the postal workers returned to work. This actually empowered Rademacher, who saw the rank and file rebellion as a direct attack upon his leadership. A wildcat strike that led to a massive victory would hurt him as much as Nixon. The rank and file totally rejected this offer, seeing it for what it was.

By March 25, the nation’s entire postal system had ground to a halt. This was as serious as the railroad strikes of the late 19th century because of the necessity of the USPS for communications in a way hard to imagine today. Like with the railroad strikes, Nixon ordered Operation Graphic Hand, sending the military to operate as scabs and deliver the mail. However, they were incompetent at this task. Moreover, this angered the workers who feared violence. In New York, some of the postal workers were actually National Guard members then called up, and they convinced their fellow troops to not do anything to move the mail. In less militant parts of the country though, the arrival of the military did bolster a back to work movement and some began trickling back.

Nixon was forced to negotiate despite his earlier pledge. What finally did get the rank and file to give up the strike was some dissent within the workers–the New York locals were far more militant than the rest of the country’s unions and many of those returned to work after the military became involved. So when Nixon and Rademacher announced the outline of a final agreement, militants wanted to continue striking but the rank and file generally approved and returned to work. The final agreement gave the postal workers an 14% pay increase (6% retroactive to 1969 and 8% for the next year) and collective bargaining rights on wages and working conditions, although not the right to strike. The workers were not punished for having engaged in an illegal walkout. This was a landmark moment in the history of public sector unionism, ushering in a decade of enormous advances for these workers, until Reagan kneecapped them with the PATCO strike.

The strike led to the Postal Reorganization Act, creating the United States Postal Service out of the old Post Office and guaranteeing collective bargaining rights for postal workers, albeit not the right to strike. The collective bargaining rights led to the creation of the American Postal Workers Union in 1971 from five preexisting unions. Continued rank and file activism against Rademacher’s leadership forced major reforms in the postal union, creating a more democratic organization. Vincent Sombrotto, who was a key leader of the postal workers movement, finally won the union’s presidency as a reformer after Rademacher retired in 1978. Before the 1970s strike, Sombrotto had to work a second job as a truck driver to feed his six children. Rank and file militancy continued in New York and New Jersey locals, led by civil rights activists and Vietnam veterans until 1978 when a wildcat strike led to the firing of 200 workers.

In the 21st century, Congress has undertaken a project to destroy the USPS entirely. The APWU has taken a lead role in fighting for the institution but it is probably doomed thanks to Republican evil.

This is the 99th post in this series. Previous posts are archived here.

Water in the West

[ 63 ] March 17, 2014 |

As I have said for many years now, agriculture is going to lose out in the water wars of the West. With continued urban growth and the political weight behind water-guzzling energy production, there just isn’t the water and despite agribusiness’ power, the don’t have the political weight because they can’t mobilize the votes (the decentralized nature of agricultural production also matters here since it’s left to these local farmers who are forced to work with Monsanto or Cargill or whoever left to do a lot of the local political work). Of course, short of meaningful water planning that sharply rethinks western water law, there won’t be enough water to go around anyway. And no politician wants to touch this problem.

Rat Counting

[ 38 ] March 17, 2014 |

Well, the revamped 538 site is up and if it’s going to feature articles about attempting to count the number of rats in New York, I’m on board.

Page 98 of 304« First...102030...96979899100...110120130...Last »