The progressive Institute for America’s Future has created “A Main Street Recovery Program” to restore economic growth in our country. In their Executive Summary they are proposing our spending “three percent of GDP–about $450 billion each year for two years, a total of $900 billion–(that in their opinion) should define the floor, not the ceiling, of what needs to be done.” The Summary goes on to state that “the plan must be strategic, focused on public investment in areas vital to strengthening America’s long-term competitiveness.”
In their report they point out what most of us already recognize by stating that “we now face the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The collapse of the housing bubble, followed by a credit freeze and stock market collapse, has erased over $10 trillion in paper value in the U.S. alone.”
While I agree with this statement I disagree with their recommendations which promote “raising the minimum wage and reviving the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively, so that workers may once again capture a fair share of the productivity and wealth they help generate.”
How will raising the minimum wage on the backs of the employers help U.S. industry be more competitive in the global marketplace? I respectfully disagree with that comment.
I also disagree with their support of the pending “card act” by making allegations that employees are unable to organize. That remark is simply false. We are no longer in the 1930’s where we heard of intimidation of trade unions such as this episode when “on 26 May, 1937, United Automobile Workers (UAW) organisers stood on the overpass that led to the main gate of Ford’s Dearborn, Michigan, factory. Their weapons were leaflets. Their target was the appalling working conditions of the workers at Ford. Confronting them were members of Ford’s “Service Department” — ex-boxers, former wrestlers and thugs from Detroit’s criminal underworld — armed with brass knuckles, knives, guns and blackjacks. Their target was trade unionism. The “Battle of the Overpass” resulted in dozens of UAW organisers and activists being beaten and kicked unconscious, their limbs, skulls and backs broken. The Dearborn police — the chief of police was an ex-Ford “serviceman” appointed by the town’s mayor, Clyde (cousin of Henry) Ford — stood by and watched.” While that Ford Motor story may have been the theme of a Hollywood movie it does not represent 21st Century reality.
To read the entire 22 page report simply go to:
http://www.ourfuture.org/mainstreetrecovery
There is something so frustrating about people who cite a ‘crisis’ as the new rationale for doing what they suggested doing all along, even without a crisis. And the logic here is bizarre. The government sapping $400 billion plus from capital markets to finance a deficit is one of the worst factors at work in the capital crisis, so how is more government spending supposed to be a solution? Its like noticing a fire that was aggravated by gasoline, and then throwing on more gasoline.
The pro-union reforms are equally untenable. The most heavily unionized industry in our country is the one bleeding the most red ink and the one that has seen the biggest downturn in global competitiveness. So how is giving unions more power supposed to help?
So Larry, we don’t need the card act because people aren’t being beaten senseless? Really? Does that mean that employers no longer hire companies to counter unionization rumors? Or does that mean that the employees considering such a choice aren’t subject to intimidation and hostility fostered and fomented by the employers or the employers’ union busting contractors?
I think you are either naieve or trying to mislead.
Ron you use a common anti-union tactic of blaming the union for the failures of the company. Didnt the union negotiate a lowered salary structure in response to the employer’s economic needs? These union members aren’t operating in a vacuum and are just as ready as the employer to make changes that make sense. It is not the union’s job to manage the company its the unions job to get the fairest deal possible for their members.
The Banking industry and financial markets are mostly non-union, how’s that industry working out for you?
Anonymous.
No I am not naive. Of course both sides engage in the spin cycle promoting the pro’s and con’s of unions. However, during my working years I have seen many firms that take good care of their employees so that they have chosen not to join labor unions.
There is no question that private sector unions, not just the UAW in the auto industry, which have experienced a major decline in their membership for a number of years due in part to outsourcing of manufacturing. The following text, from the web, is a snapshot of where we are today:
“With union membership sliding to 7.5 percent of the private-sector work force, one-third the rate in 1983, unions see enactment of the bill as the single most important step toward reversing their loss of membership and power. Some labor leaders predict that if the bill is passed, unions, which have 16 million members nationwide, would add at least five million workers to their rolls over the next few years.”
I know lots of companies and industries that have rosy predictions the bottom line is that companies that treat their employees right will never have to worry about a union or fear the passage of a card check system.
But are companies worried? You bet they are because many have been mistreating their employees for years. They worry that by now allowing the employee to fill out a card indicating his choice in privacy instead at a polling place under the watchful glare of their supervisor and his hired “consultants” there will be many more groups of employees voting for a union. Well, duh!
I know, tell all the good employers to call the Chamber of Commerce (the main force campaigning against the card check bill) that they don’t speak for you.
I know lots of companies and industries that have rosy predictions just like the ones mentioned in your post, Larry. The bottom line is that companies that treat their employees right will never have to worry about a union or fear the passage of a card check system. That’s why they are predicting only a few percentage points in membership growth among working Americans.
But are companies worried? You bet they are because many have been mistreating their employees for years. They worry that by now allowing the employee to fill out a card indicating his choice in private instead at a polling place under the watchful glare of their supervisor and his hired “consultants” there will be many more groups of employees choosing a union. Well, duh!
Larry, tell all the good employers to call the Chamber of Commerce (the main force campaigning against the card check bill) and tell the Chamber that they don’t speak for you. You treat your employees right and dont fear unions.