36 Reasons Why You Should Thank a Union
- Weekends
- All Breaks at Work, including your Lunch Breaks
- Paid Vacation
- FMLA
- Sick Leave
- Social Security
- Minimum Wage
- Civil Rights Act/Title VII (Prohibits Employer Discrimination)
- 8-Hour Work Day
- Overtime Pay
- Child Labor Laws
- Occupational Safety & Health Act (OSHA)
- 40 Hour Work Week
- Worker’s Compensation (Worker’s Comp)
- Unemployment Insurance
- Pensions
- Workplace Safety Standards and Regulations
- Employer Health Care Insurance
- Collective Bargaining Rights for Employees
- Wrongful Termination Laws
- Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
- Whistleblower Protection Laws
- Employee Polygraph Protect Act (Prohibits Employer from using a lie detector test on an employee)
- Veteran’s Employment and Training Services (VETS)
- Compensation increases and Evaluations (Raises)
- Sexual Harassment Laws
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- Holiday Pay
- Employer Dental, Life, and Vision Insurance
- Privacy Rights
- Pregnancy and Parental Leave
- Military Leave
- The Right to Strike
- Public Education for Children
- Equal Pay Acts of 1963 & 2011 (Requires employers pay men and women equally for the same amount of work)
- Laws Ending Sweatshops in the United States
As a the wife of a self employed person, we haven’t had access to many of these items. But we sure have paid LOTS and LOTS in taxes. The people my husband has worked for in the past would only use his expertise as an independent contractor, because it was too expensive to make him an employee. Something to ponder…
Renee, as the husband (looking to be employed again… or self-employed…) of a self-employed person, the problems you’re pointing to are *in large measure* the fault of a badly (or partly) implemented system. Some of those things *ought* to be national or state plans that make those things available to all. (Oh, but that would be “soshulizm” — which is untrue, but a convenient scary word.)
If you have children, or were a child, you had access to free education (perfect? No. Nothing is. And yet, go check history to see what was available to the vast majority when there wasn’t free education).
We need not to take these things away. That won’t make your life better, nor other people’s. We need to make such things more universal.
Free education? I wish, what do I pay taxes for? It’s not free, some one has to pay for it. And what is the outcome of all this free education? More and more of our children are failing!
BTW, I am not trying to be antagonistic here. I just hate that so much of this discussion (not with YOU, Daniel, but in general), turns into an US vs. THEM, and it isn’t helping this country get anywhere. I don’t even know any answers. But having never had any of the benefits of employment, and not being wealthy as to have any tax breaks (or very few), we have really been in some tight, tight spots, and see no relief in sight. We have been too successful to get gov’t assistance, and too poor to get the “rich” tax breaks. We have had to drain our retirement account twice just to live, and don’t ever see the ability to build it back up. We have to pay our own social security, and won’t probably get to use any of it. We pay for our own insurance, get no vacation time, paternity leave or sick days. I am not complaining here, just pointing out the situation fellow Catholics can be in, that makes the union issues less urgent to us, not unimportant, maybe less relevant? My husband tried to be an employee for a while, but because of the benefits, the salary wasn’t enough for us to live. Thanks for letting me vent. It is frustrating sometimes!
You said, “My husband tried to be an employee for a while, but because of the benefits, the salary wasn’t enough for us to live.” In other words, you are doing better in business than as an employee?
Sadly it IS us Vs them. We are in an all-out war, with the richest doing their utmost to further screw the Working folks. I’d think most people would have been hip to this by now.
I never felt that I was being “screwed by the rich” I have entered every job I have ever had knowing full well what was expected of me and what I would receive in return. If you want to join a union that’s fine with me. Just don’t force me to join one and we will not have any problems. And please don’t ever think that all workers need to unite, they did that once in Russia around 1917, didn’t turn out so well.
I work as many hours as I choose to work a week, which I can tell you is way more than 40 hours a week. If I were a member of a union, I would have to turn over my freedom to a group of people who only care about what the group can get from an employer. I will not give up one once of freedom to a government, a union, or any other individual. Slaves are made this way. I will not be made a slave.
Well, Renee, if you had retirement accounts to drain you are doing better than most working class people, even union ones. A union job may be a lot better than a non-union one, but a single union paycheck with a lot of kids makes it tough (trust me). And for the vast majority, with non-union jobs? Two paychecks is a basic necessity. THAT is how “profamily” capitalism is.
And it is hard not to see some sort of “us vs them” dynamic when we see an increasing gulf between the affluent and the workers, who are more and more slipping into poverty. These days, unlike the recent past, most homeless are not mentally ill or drug-addled. Some 200 people control 50% of economic resources in the US. CEO salaries are at an all time high in relation to worker wages, real wages are declining among workers, even as productivity increases. I have been documenting this stuff pretty regularly here, and it feels more and more like a concerted attack by wealth and power on the rest of us.
Yes, Virginia, there is a class war, and no, we the workers did not start it.
Which is not to say that I am unsympathetic to your woes; my father in law had heart problems, was having symptoms, but as (a mostly failed) entrepreneur he could not afford insurance yet made too much for public aid. He died of a heart attack at 51.
Much of this injustice comes from the free market fundamentalism that has ruled the land for so long,and to which many- including Republicatholics- continue to adhere, even after it led to economic collapse. Adherence to the Catholic social tradition would resemble something more on the line of a decentralist social democracy than libertarianism…
Maybe I misunderstand how it works, but I thought union members had pensions. Public sector employees have pensions paid for by taxpayers. Again, maybe I misunderstand this, but for us to have a retirement account, self funded, doesn’t seem to be above people with pensions, whether they are funded by themselves or the taxpayer. Lest I exaggerate, these weren’t large retirement accounts, just what we managed to set aside, and thank God we did, because we needed it, just didn’t make it to retirement.
Having always self insured puts us squarely out of either union insurance plans or employer insurance plans. The only way to afford it is to have high deductibles and pay out of pocket for anything less than a catastrophe. Of course we pay way more than the insurance companies for the same treatments, and each time we have to use the medical system we have to negotiate like it is a street bazaar or something.
My beef isn’t with unions, but it seems Catholic social teaching shouldn’t only apply to organized labor. What are we lonely little independent contractors supposed to do?
I do not understand economics, admittedly. I would agree that Catholic economic principles would resemble a decentralist social democracy, as you say. Of course it assumes people of good will and good intention would be running said system. For what it is worth, any system would work with more justice if people of good will were in charge.
Anyway, I am not arguing with you. I am only pointing out that my husband’s career path has taken him to places that unions can not help, the government certainly doesn’t help, and because he is a man of principle he doesn’t “screw the system” like so many of the people in the financial world. Right now we just feel blessed he has work, frankly, and hope that the future will take care of itself. So far, God has always made sure we had a roof and food and clothes. For that I am grateful. Most of the time, we have much more than, and we do our best to share.
You said, “And it is hard not to see some sort of “us vs them” dynamic when we see an increasing gulf between the affluent and the workers, who are more and more slipping into poverty.” I agree, but there are lots of people like me, not affluent (we might be if we didn’t have 9 children, but I digress), not in poverty, treading water, and frequently getting accused of not paying our fair share (again, not by you, but by the political operatives who are getting ahead by pitting people against each other).
I so appreciate your reply. It makes sense to me, what you said, and I would very much like to understand what is happening better. As a Catholic, I have tried to apply her teaching to my life in every way I can. This current economic situation is a little more confusing to me, regarding how we are to respond as good citizens, parents, and Catholics.
I am an electrical apprentice, but I come from a family centered in small business ownership. It is us verses them, but I don’t consider the small business as part of them. I’ve been given the opportunity to achieve a college education while working and without needing a penny in student loan debt because of my union. There is a lot of good that these organizations never get credit for.
Yes, these are confusing times. But I think we are somewhat entrapped by our American/Calvinist heritage; it isn’t “screwing the system” to accept whatever that system offers as help. But I understand; we. as a family of 9 with a modest (though, thankfully, union) income, qualify for all sorts of assistance that we eschew. Though at least I acknowledge that this is the result of my Calvinist ancestry (every one of the ancestors I can find in the 18th century and earlier was Calvinist, either Irish Presbyterian, English Puritan, Dutch Calvinist, or Huguenot)….
And if you have 9 kiddos, don’t you get 10 IRS exemptions ? I, at any rate, have not paid any Federal Income Tax for years, though of course the state, the city, and the sales taxes get their share….
And yes, I have a pension, though it is modest. Maybe that makes up for the lack of savings, maybe not. I will let you know in four years, when I may possibly be able to retire. I only recently learned that my many minor children are not a liability, that they can in fact collect SS themselves. However, I fear that in four years they will have changed the rules….
I was(am) a union member.Who has a nice pension but surprise I paid for it.We negotiate a pay raise, after the new contract is signed, “WE” decide on benefits or pay increase.So in affect it and all my benefits come out of my pocket.After 40 years of employment in the building trades I believe I’ve EARNED my pension.Thank God they did not mess with social security,Just look at your 401 K
I’m not in a union. I never have been and, in fact, I’ve actually been in positions dealing with the negative impacts of unions several times throughout my career. (Issues related to power problems inherent in any large organization, nothing union-specific.) However, I couldn’t agree with you more regarding pensions. I’m sick and tired of the manipulation of facts to make it appear that anyone with a pension is getting a “free ride.” Pensions are non-payroll benefits that were part of your compensation package all your life. You earned every penny of that pension and no one should be able to take that away. It would be no different than someone coming to me years from now and saying, “We decided we paid you 5% more than we should have your whole life and we’d like that money back.”
The reason pensions have become such a target for employers and governments is two-fold. First, they are highly visible buckets of money seen as potential big coffers to raid. Second, proper funding and managing of them is seen as a cost to cut. After years of misuse as slush funds, many pensions are unable to sustain the workers they’re intended to pay. That’s not the fault of the worker – that’s the fault of employers and governments who abused the pension funds and now want to default on the “contracts” they had with their employees.
Both my 401k and my IRA gained 17% this year so far. My wife’s 401K gained 20%. Better than SS and most structured pensions. I wish I could opt out of SS and put that 15% in my own plans, I would be a lot further ahead and not feeling like my SS contributions are going for nothing!
Interesting …
Mind sharing your portfolio?
alex
I have both my 401k and IRA diversified in a mixture of stocks 25% precious metals 25% and emerging foreign markets 50% all are mutual funds
Included this link on my webpage. Thanks.
http://psalmboxkey.wordpress.com/political-philosophy/
As tough as the workplace is with unions Imagine how bad the workplace would be without the things labor unions have accomplished. Labor unions have gained a sustainable working class wage where they exist. And many others who dont have the advantage of belonging to a union wish they did But they still reap many of the benefits listed in this article. But for labor unions these benefits would not exist in America today.
And for those who complain they are not wealthy and rich in $$. Unions have brought about a working class wage that is far and above what non-unionized companies pay their employees.
And for those who think your tax dollars support unions. You’re incorrect. Unions are supported by dues paying members.
There is also a move across this country by republican backed government to union bust through legislation. If unions go away it’s only a matter of time until working class in America will be under the horrible working conditions and without the gains listed in this article.
OPEN YOUR EYES AMERICA.
UNION UNION UNION !!!!!
An arbitrarily high wage that consumers have to foot the bill for. When you work out side of the free markets system, everything gets skewed and prices rise and everyone pays more.
When there is a choice between what will make a situation better freedom or control by another, I choose freedom every time!
Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, “What is to be thought of the action of those Catholic employers who in one place succeeded in preventing the reading of Our Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno in their local churches? Or of those Catholic industrialists who even to this day have shown themselves hostile to a labor movement that We Ourselves recommended? Is it not deplorable that the right of private property defended by the Church should so often have been used as a weapon to defraud the workingman of his just salary and his social rights?”
Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate. “The repeated calls issued within the Church’s social doctrine, beginning with Rerum Novarum, for the promotion of workers’ associations that can defend their rights must therefore be honoured today even more than in the past, as a prompt and far-sighted response to the urgent need for new forms of cooperation at the international level, as well as the local level.”
As a dues-paying union member, I’m glad for my union. We make a good working wage, we get regular raises, and we work hard because of it.
I used to drive truck full time and all the shippers and receivers that I went to that were union were the worst places to go. I never seen so much time wasted! They only had to load so many truck in an hour, if something happened on the dock the attitude was it’s not my job to fix.
Unions have added to the cost of all sorts of products, that’s the reason I go out of my way to try not to buy union made products.
My dad worked at a Chrysler stamping plant years ago. He worked as a press operator. You set all the metal raw material and dyes in place and then pushed a button and the press came down and you hoped everything was lined up right so that shrapnel didn’t fly through the metal cage you were in killing you. Anyway, dad gets in there and after a few weeks of getting the hang of it he could do about 20 stamps on the press an hour. The guys around him were doing about 12. This went on for a few more weeks and then one day, at the bar across from the plant where dad had his Cutty after work, a few big goons walked up to dad and told him that from now on he would only do 12 presses an hour. End of discussion.
Was the union wrong to keep production down at that plant? Hell no it wasn’t. My dad was in his 20s and in decent health. There were guys who had worked 30 years in that plant who were heart attack survivors. There were guys who had worked there before the unions got the safety ropes attached to the arms which automatically pulled the arms away when the press came down, and those guys were all missing fingers if not arms, and it took them longer to set up a press before stamping, there were guys there who had gone years on forced overtime, some of them averaging nearly 3000 hours a year for a decade or longer. 12 stamps an hour is what you could reasonably expect from those guys. If the young hires came in and all started doing 20 stamps an hour, management would notice it, and that would become a negotiating tool for them with the union – they would push for higher production levels which might make the work impossible for men who that union was meant to protect.
In late capitalist industrialized Western nations, this notion that we can each go our own Jeffersonian ways, pull ourselves up by our bootstraps, and make it is absolute bullshit. Perhaps a lucky few can. In the low skill trades, unions have acted as a necessary restraint upon productivity expectations of capitalists who would have us all working 14 hour days for no more income than would keep us at a basic level of subsistence if they could get away with it (which they can overseas, hence the departure of manufacturing jobs from America). Union restrictions upon productivity per hour in low skill trades are a safety measure which mitigates the wage slavery imposed by the master classes. Some unthinking people have a problem with a guy in a warehouse having a 15 minute break every hour. Why? The CEO at that company makes a handsome salary for doing very little (oh sure, 70 hour weeks, with a lot of golf and cocktail parties and and social networking and such counting as “work”). The investors in that company reap profits sitting in their fat cat offices doing very little. Why should we expect low skill workers to work exponentially harder than the capitalists who lord over them? Those capitalists should be thankful for another week of life not having their throats slit.
In the higher skilled trades, the matter is a bit different, there productivity per worker is often higher than non-union workers in high skill jobs, and even when it isn’t, quality is much higher as the unions have strict standards for their skilled workers. Those unions which I deal with at work, the Sheet Metal Workers union, the Boilermakers union, and the Ironworkers union, all require a test to get into their apprenticeship programs and then a test to be vested in the union and then continuing education once in the union. When a contractor wants to cut corners in a manner that would effect public safety or code or just what is considered normal standards of quality by the union, the union worker goes to his union and the union puts an end to that contractor trying to cut corners. We all benefit from that commitment to quality.
[...] [...]
“When a contractor wants to cut corners in a manner that would effect public safety or code or just what is considered normal standards of quality by the union, the union worker goes to his union and the union puts an end to that contractor trying to cut corners. We all benefit from that commitment to quality.”
Those few contractors you are talking about should not be in business in the first place. I have friends who own contracting businesses and they would never think to cut corners because if they put out shoddy work, their reputations suffer and then they loose work. Their are other incentives to keep quality up with out union coercion.
I have friends who own contracting businesses and they would never think to cut corners because if they put out shoddy work, their reputations suffer and then they loose work.
Your fantasy world must be a nice place to live. Contractors cut corners all the time, and there is in our happy clappy “free market” a myriad of ways for them to do so and not suffer the consequences that free market theories assure us will happen. My own piece of shit ranch house had a shoddy not-to-code addition put on in the 80s because the contractor who did the work (on my house and a number in this neighborhood) was in the same Masonic lodge as the city building inspector. That sort of thing happens all the time, and when its a Haliburton or an Enron, it happens on a massive scale, routinely.
Owen it sound’s like you didn’t do your homework when choosing a contractor. I have known some shoddy contractors over my lifetime (I’m 49) and they are no longer in business. One of them was a major home builder in out area (Sunbury PA) in the 70′s and 80′s, but has gone bankrupt because of all the law suits that were filed. He built my aunt and uncles house and I warned them not to use him, but they did, and they ended up paying out a lot of money to fix the problems.
Don’t blame the free market for your mistakes. there are websites (and by the way the web is a good example of the free market which you don’t mind using, figure that one out) to check out all sorts of professionals. Plus before the web and still to this day the BBB has done a fantastic job of warning people about bad business. I used them before the web was popular.
Dan,
I didn’t hire the contractor – the work was done before I bought the house. And that story could be told a million times over where I live (Memphis, TN). I always find it rich when people from states that both have more regulation, and routinely enforce regulation more vigorously, talk about the glories of an unregulated free market. Try living in a state with a heavy majority of free market believers and see how your utopian free market ideals work out for you.
I tried complaining to the BBB about a home insurance company that was supposed to cover my air conditioning unit. I caught the company’s inspector cutting wires on my outside unit. I called the police and they did an investigation and found multiple other complaints on the guy. Company denied any problem, of course. So I went to the BBB, sent them the police report, pictures, etc. BBB sided with the company and told me about the great relationship that company had with the BBB. I later learned that this company had been a major contributor to the BBB in the past.
As an ex-union member, I do still believe that unions have a place in the PRIVATE sector. All of the benefits mentioned above are true. I have my disagreements with some of the things the unions do and stand for, but I cannot argue with the fact that the very presence of the unions serves to buoy even non union wages. They act as ballast across the board. Further, union wages and market share are controlled by market forces. They get greedy, contractors don’t win bids. That’s just the way it works. I earned a good living as a union carpenter, and I now earn a good living in the non-union sector. I never had to sign the book and my BAs never found me a job. I did all that myself, and still do. But, my lone voice can never have the impact of thousands like the unions provide. For what you provide, my thanks to the unions across the nation. I will say this, however, my opinion of unions in the public sector are
VERY different.
The last 40 years has been a concerted effort to erode the things on this list. It has worked so well that now that no one can afford the things we are selling to each other. Our whole consumer based middleman, shill, loan shark, collector and enforcer economic social structure is breaking down. As long as we keep voting Republipukes and teabaggers (the Democroks haven’t been much better- but better) into office we will continue to get more of the same. After all the company motto’s before labor organized in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was “The flogging will continue until morale improves” .
The landed gentry has played the divide and conquer card on us, and it worked. Their media keeps us numb, distracted, and covetous of lifestyles few achieve. While we bicker among ourselves a.bout the reported tragedies and outrages brought to us by Wall Street, the chosen few have been crying class warfare all the war to the bank.
Oh and lest we forget, Consumers create jobs, nobody else. If capital can not sell it for a profit, capital will not pay someone to make it, shill it, distribute, install it, fix it,, or count it. We the people are the job creators.
“The boss needs you, you don’t need him”
Where are you getting your economic information from? The equation is not one sided as you state. All parts of capitalism need to work together, but consumers don’t create jobs per say, they buy the products that a entrepreneur creates. Jobs are created in advance of consumption, if they didn’t there would not be nothing to consume.
Entrepreneurs seek out possible markets to go into that they think might make them money, ever hear of Ron Popeil? Ron saw a possible market and capitalized on it.
If there is nobody buying it, or can afford to buy it, all they have created is more junk. Speaking of Ron Popeil. I get my information by opening my eyes, not from Faux News, or whatever propaganda source you use judging by the twaddle you have shared in your many and predictable responses.
I get my info from places like Foundation for Economic Education, Mises, Milton Freedman, I don’t get Fox Business, but i download John Stossel’s pod casts.
I don’t know about you but I have not stop buying the bear essentials sense the recession started. If you quit spending I would like to know how you have survived all this time?
Cut taxes for everyone, deeply cut government spending, let people freely decide for themselves what they want to buy (healthcare for one thing) get the government back to it’s Constitutional constraints and watch the economy grow.
Although some of the things in this list are truly beneficial, most of these added cost to the employer with no real benefit to the business. This led to an increase in the price that needed to be charged to maintain the business. The business who buys that product or service now has to pay more, so he now has to increase his prices to maintain. Slowly everything starts to increase in price. Then unions then bargain for an increase in wages due to a higher cost of living, so the business owner must again raise the price of his products or services to maintain. As an alternative, they can outsource work and/or manufacturing to lower cost labor pool which reduces the number of jobs in this country. Kind of a vicious circle.
America seems to have gotten to the point where we only look 5 inches past our noses. When we get a benefit, we don’t really think about the true cost of that benefit, where it came from and who takes a loss as a result. “I don’t care as long as I am getting my benefit”. This would be where most people blame the rich but I will tell you, I am not rich and I am feeling the pinch every time I go to buy something. As a nation, we have promised too many things to too many people and it is simply not sustainable.
I am not pro-union but I am not anti-union either. I have many friends who are pro-union and they constantly get on me about it. They have yet to provide me with a 21st century reason for having them that does not negatively impact a business owner solely for the benefit of what an employee feels the business owner owes them. I am not saying there are no benefits to a union; I am just saying that the biggest supporters I know can’t really give me any good examples. I feel, in general, the concept of unions has mutated from its original intent.
With the economy the way it is today, it is unrealistic that everyone except for unionized workers should take the hit. The concept of shared sacrifice is ok, “as long as it does not impact me”. There are businesses and governments across the United States trying to make decisions that will maintain solvency but meet with strong, and sometimes violent (or at least un-professional) resistance from union representatives.
I work in the healthcare industry and there is currently a push right now for all healthcare workers to unionize. It seems the primary benefit is politically motivated. There is nothing stopping hospital workers from unionizing but there is a nationwide push to get us all under one union. Why? Good question.
If we can find a way to get unions back to what they were originally intended to do, I think a lot more people would be supportive of them. Some unions (clearly not all) just come across like a legal way to extort money from an employer. And with some of the larger ones (UAW, SEIU), they seem like huge bureaucracies whose primary goal is to drive politics to give them more sway over employers and to make unions larger for no other reason other than to increase membership.
I am an average person working in a right to work state. Most people I know across the country feel the same way; even several relatives who were union members in the UAW and saw how unions worked in the auto industry. If you want to win people like me over to your side, you will need to find ways to improve the image of unions. The most visible representations of unions appear to be corrupt, politically motivated monstrosities.
There are significant tax benefits for employers who provide employee benefits.
Even if there were not tax benefits, employers would still have to provide benefits because of competition. Some wise cracker out there would offer more benefits to try to keep a good employee.
It is true that some general improvements in the lives of working people have had support from the labor union movement. However, that list works better to facilitate the us-vs-them mindset than any accuracy. If just one in that list can be shown to have had nothing to do with unions — Social Security was social engineering to save a bankrupt nation, the first child labor laws were passed before unions existed, just to mention two — then the entire list should be questioned.
Why not just take six or so prominent examples and expand on them? Show why unions are important. That would be much more valuable than a disingenuous list.
Philadelphia printers conducted the first recorded strike for higher wages in 1786, opposing a wage cut and demanding a minimum wage of $6 per week. By the 1820s there were well established unions in the U.S. The first child labor law was passed in 1836, after pressure from The New England Association of Farmers, Mechanics and Other Workingmen, a union, beginning in 1832.
Try again.
They forgot to thank the unions for…..
Made in Japan
Made in China
The unions don’t move the production jobs to China, COEs and BoDs do. As to Japan, the unions didn’t ruin the US auto industry. All those Japanese cars (and other products) are made by unions also. It is interesting to note that as Union Membership shrank, and US wages became stagnant, more and more US consumers turned to less expensive goods produced overseas and typically in Asian manufacturing. Since wages today are lower than they were in the 1970′s in “real” buying power, their rise is not surprising. Remember when Wal-Mart “promised” to only sale goods “Made in the USA”? Today it is full of Made in China and Korea. That is not the unions fault
Wages are stagnant because they are finding their balance because of artificially high union wages. It will all work out.
Pay yer dues or we break yer head.
Johnny Friendly
I just find it interesting that most of the negative blogs talk about money, not people and their welfare. Just saying.
In “Laborem Excercens” Blessed Pope John Paul II says that, “…in the light of the fact that, in the final analysis, labour and capital are indispensable components of the process of production in any social system-it is clear that, even if it is because of their work needs that people unite to secure their rights, their union remains a constructive factor of social order and solidarity, and it is impossible to ignore it.” This value has been reaffirmed by his successor. He goes on to point out that too close an association between unions and the political process and its parties can easily divert them from their primary purpose of securing the just rights of workers within the context of the common good of society, an error into which most of the modern labor movement has unfortunately fallen.
He also states that “…worker solidarity, together with a clearer and more committed realization by others of workers’ rights, has in many cases brought about profound changes….Workers can often share in running businesses and in controlling their productivity, and in fact do so.” This latter state of workers collectively running and controlling their own productivity through voluntary association would seem to be the one most congenial to the concept of man as the subject of work and of work being “for man” and not man “for work” that the Holy Father presents in this encyclical, certainly much more so than the current system of state/corporate “capitalism”, while at the same time not violating the doctrine of subsidiarity and avoiding the tendency to violate the dignity and rights of the individual that have been characteristic of state “socialism” and “communism.”
Unions would be much better served if they worked together through the solidarity of workers, all workers and not just their limited craft or trade as in the current system that all too often ends up pitting worker against worker which is an insult and injury to the solidarity they should be promoting, worked together to secure the just rights of workers and greater worker control of their own productivity to the end that “human dignity, brotherhood and freedom” might increase.
Unions would be much better served if they worked together through the solidarity of workers, all workers and not just their limited craft or trade as in the current system that all too often ends up pitting worker against worker
This is exactly the position of some of the more radical unions, particularly the IWW:
http://www.iww.org/
You’re right, Owen. I suppose my Wobblie leanings are showing a bit. I have definitely been very much influenced by the perspective of the great Catholic anarchist and Wooblies like Father Thomas Hagerty, Ammon Hennacy, and the Servant of God Dorothy Day.
Workers Comp is not a friend of labor, nor did unions start it. the business owners wanted it and implemented it to reduce the payouts to the workers they maimed and killed on the job.
Please get your history facts straight.
The Employer Liability Acts, passed state by state, which permitted injured employees to sue the employer and then prove a negligent act or omission, were very much brought about because of union agitation. The Workers Comp insurance programs grew as a result of the new legal liabilities employers faced because of those Acts. Further, those laws which prohibit employer discrimination against employees who have filed a Workman’s Comp claim were brought about because of union agitation.
Early Workers Comp laws were voluntary (it was believed that to make them mandatory would violate the 14th amendment), and it is true that some businesses were behind the effort to make them mandatory for employers (which eventually happened in the 1917 New York Central Railway Co. v. White Supreme Court decision). That is in part because a high concentration of industries in the Northeast and upper Midwest were pressed by unions to participate, and those businesses pressured to participate wanted other businesses (especially competitors) who were not under such pressure to also have to participate. It is true that some unions were leery of switching to a uniform process of compensation across all industries and required of every employer. This is because some unions in some industries believed their workers could do better in suits under the then current state of affairs. However, other unions, notably those in the textile industry, heavily advocated in the other direction, as in the textile industry capitalists were notorious for getting away with little to nothing in payouts to injured workers. Remember that up into the early 20th century you still had some industries that “paid” workers who lived in company housing with company script that could only be used in company stores – and even when company script and company store was ceased, those industries still controlled all local commerce such that they could control a worker’s options in a manner akin to a master-slave dynamic. Those industries (coal, textiles, early oil and chem processing, some lumber, some railroad, etc.) routinely got away with paying next to nothing to injured workers, and hence unions in those industries tended to support the expansion of Workers Comp laws and regulation.
But the point is, had there not been the initial pressure to hold employers liable for worker injuries, injured workers today would be up a creek without a paddle just as workers were prior to those legal mechanisms which introduced employer liability for employee injury. That pressure was applied by unions and the threat of an even more rapid unionization/radicalization of workers.
Those who fail to learn their history, are doomed to repeat it.