May Day : Born in the U.S.A,

May Day.  Born in the U.S.A.  by Michael Hirsch

For generations, May Day, the International Workers Day celebrated by working people in more than 200 countries, was ignored in the United States, the country of its origin. In fact, the annual holiday is as American as cherry pie, commemorating as it does the 1886 nationwide general strike in which U.S. trade unionists — largely foreign-born — walked off the job in support of an eight-hour workday.

This year’s observance marks the 125th anniversary of that campaign to humanize the workday — and of the tragedy at Chicago’s Haymarket Square that followed three days later. New Yorkers will mark the day in a rally in support of labor and immigrant rights in lower Manhattan’s Foley Square. < editor. in New York City>

Back in 1886, when the typical work day was 10, 12 or even 14 hours long and joblessness was rife, the demand for a work day limited to eight hours at decent wages was viewed as dangerously radical. The eight-hour-day movement was spearheaded by two organizations, the craft-dominated Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions (the forerunner of the American Federation of Labor) and the Knights of Labor.

An 1884 proclamation from the Federation pledged that "eight hours shall constitute a legal day's labor from and after May 1, 1886." A circular of the time calling for a massive work stoppage on that date read, “Lay down your tools, cease your labor, close the factories, mills and mines” and demand “eight hours of work, eight hours for rest, eight hours for what you will.” Nationwide, anywhere from 150,000 to 500,000 workers — the number is in dispute — answered the call, though the epicenter of the strike effort was indisputably Chicago.

Today’s May 1 observance is also associated with Chicago’s infamous May 4 Haymarket Square tragedy that same year. Thousands of labor activists had gathered in the square that evening to protest law-enforcement attacks on the strikers. When the peaceful rally was winding down, riot police marched into the crowd, demanding that everyone disperse. An unknown assailant tossed a homemade bomb at the line of police, killing one. In the chaos that ensued, at least a dozen people were killed, including six more police officers, all from gunshot-related wounds. Eight of the movement’s leaders, two of whom were not even present at the rally, were charged with murder and conspiracy.

The prejudicial trial took place in a hothouse atmosphere. Typical was the Chicago Tribune’s demand for the deportation of immigrants it labeled “ungrateful hyenas” and “foreign savages who might come to America with their dynamite bombs and anarchic purposes.” The prosecution offered no evidence for its contention that the defendants plotted to target police at the demonstration; it argued simply that the remarks of the rally speakers constituted incitement to violence. All eight were found guilty of murder and four of the eight were eventually hanged. Authorities used the incident to launch a massive witch hunt and arrest hundreds of labor leaders, which put a halt to the eight-hour campaign for years.

The eight-hour day finally became a reality only in 1938, when the New Deal's Fair Labor Standards Act made it a legal day's work throughout the nation.

May 1 was adopted as a holiday internationally in 1890. In 1921, following a postwar Red Scare and the forced deportation of thousands of foreign-born workers — virtually all Southern and Eastern Europeans — May Day was named "Americanization Day" as a slap at foreign-born workers, then seen as dangerous radicals. During the Cold War, Congress sought to reclaim May 1 from “red sympathizers” by proclaiming it Loyalty Day, a day to reaffirm loyalty to the United States. The association of May 1 with communism was abetted by the Soviet Union, which used the date for parading military hardware and rattling sabers.

May 1 was revived as a day to mark worker rights in the United States in 2006, when immigrant workers participated in giant demonstrations on that day in New York and Los Angeles in their fight for immigration reform and a path to citizenship. For a second year, city unions including the UFT together with dozens of ethnic and community organizations will rally on May 1 at Manhattan’s Foley Square.

Uniting the twin fights for worker and immigrant rights that trace back to the birth of May Day, the rally participants will protest attacks on public-service workers, long-term unemployment, outsourcing and the shift of jobs overseas, and anti-immigrant attacks and mass deportations.

Reprinted from the UFT.  www.uft.org

Photos from May Day events 2011 welcome.

DAY of Action for California Education - April 13

Capitol Rally to Support Wisconsin Workers

Spreading the Wisconsin Struggle

Lessons for Wisconsin From the Flint Sit Down Strikes of 1936-37
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
 
   With the state legislature in Wisconsion occupied and surrounded by thousands of state workers and their supporters, and with schools closed throughout the state because of teachers calling in sick, I cannot help but think of the greatest strike and building occupation in the history of the American labor movement- the Flint Sit Down Strikes of 1936-37.  Though the Wisconsin struggle is being led by government workers, and the Flint Strikes involved workers involved in automobile production, both movements took place during the worst economic crisis of their era and were fighting for the same goal- collective bargaining rights for working people through a union of their own choosing- and were much more about dignity and respect than about income.   
 
      The Flint Strike, which involved the occupation of 9 General Motors automobile plants over a  six week period, transformed the history of the industrial labor movement.  During December of 1936, when the first GM plant was seized and occupied, the entire automobile and steel industries in the United States were union free. When the strike was finally settled, both General Motors and United States Steel agreed to bargain collectively with the CIO ( Congress of Industrial Organizations) unions seeking to organize their industries.   
 
      The Flint Strike , though it was precipitated by local conditions- a fierce unrelenting speed up on the GM assembly line , the involvement of a Ku Klux Klan like organization called the Black Legion in suppressing labor unrest in GM plants- was part of a national movement to win bargaining rights for industrial workers. As a result, the Flint workers were supported by the national leadership of the CIO-led by the formidable John L Lewis- as well as their own national union, and numerous leftwing organizations including the Communist Party.  Though only GM workers actually occupied the factories, at key points in the strike, thousands of union workers  were mobilized to come down from other cities to make sure that right wing Citizens Committees were unable to storm the plants, and that food and medical supplies were delivered to the striking workers.  There were also doctors, nurses, lawyers, and journalists who came from all over the country to help the strikers.    By the second week of the sit-down strikes, it was clear to everyone involved that this had become a truly national movement
 
    The same dynamic must operate if the Wisconsin movement is to achieve its main goal- removal from the governor’s legislative program of any effort to weaken the bargaining rights of public workers in the state.  Unions around the nation who face similar initiatives ( in Ohio, Tennessee and New Jersey) must send delegations to join the occupation and the protests and give whatever financial and legal support is necessary to teachers who are keeping the local schools closed.  National union leaders who have a high public profile, people like Richard Trumka and Randy Weingarten, must not only come to Madison to offer their support of the movement, they must head straight to the White House to demand that President Obama and Democratic Congressional leaders come out aggressively in support of the Madison movement. Student social justice organizations must send delegations to Madison to join the thousands of students at the state’s public universities who have been a central part of this movement from the beginning.

 
  This movement has to be approached as the single most important labor struggle in the United States in the 21st Century. If the governor destroys collective bargaining for public workers in Wisconsin, you can be sure that similar initiatives will succeed in other states. If he
Is forced to take attacks on collective bargaining off the table by the strength of the protest,  it will reinvigorate not only the entire labor movement in the United States, but the movement  to prevent Congress and state legislatures from destroying what little of a safety net we have in the United States of America
 
 The stakes could not be higher. So if you are in a union or part of a progressive  organization, press your leadership to send people to Wisconsin. Insist your elected representatives pass resolutions in support of the Wisconsin movement.  And get ready to fight the same battle in your own state when the time comes
 
Solidarity Foreover!
 
Mark Naison
February 18, 2011

Mark Naison is a labor historian

Class War in Wisconsin

by Don Taylor

Don Taylor

As I write this, we are in our fourth day of demonstrations against Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s “budget repair” bill and its’ provisions to effectively eliminate public sector collective bargaining. Today, the Democrats in the senate have fled the state, leaving the Republicans one vote short of a quorum to pass the bill. The Democrats say they will not return until the anti-union provisions are off the table.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edt3rjqghg4&feature=player_embedded]
Disguised as a bill to fix a shortfall in the current budget, this bill would:

• Abolish public sector collective bargaining on all topics except wages. There would be no more negotiating leaves of absence, health and safety, discipline for just cause, or anything else. Negotiated wage increases would be capped at CPI; in other words, no real negotiation could occur.
• Prohibit public employers from deducting union dues via payroll deduction. This measure is one of several that demonstrate the bill’s true intent, because it represents no savings whatsoever for the taxpayer.
• Require all unionized units to hold annual decertification elections. Again, this relates to the budget in no way whatsoever, and is the most blatant example of the ideological agenda behind this bill.
• Impose higher employee costs for health care and pensions for state employees.
• Institute “right to work” for public employees.

In other words, an existing unionized unit would have to collect hand dues, would be unable to collect payment from free riders, and would be prohibited from negotiating anything except wages at some level below the rate of inflation. Then, as employee discontent grows over a perception that “the union can’t do anything,” along would come the state-mandated annual decertification vote.


The basis for this clearly is not the budget, although that’s the spin put on it by the GOP and the media. “We have to do this,” they cry, “the state is broke!” Just last month, Walker and the Republicans spent $140 million on the establishment of Health Savings Accounts and other special interest expenditures. Now, they say the state is broke, by a coincidental amount of $137 million.
Clearly, the backlash from working families has been enormous. Madison has not seen demonstrations of this size since the Vietnam War. Schools are closed. The University of Wisconsin-Madison is effectively shut down. Every day this week, thousands have converged on Madison, and have held demonstrations around the state. Firefighters and law enforcement officers, although exempt from the bill, have come in massive numbers.
There is no question that this is a coordinated frontal attack; the class war in action. With private sector union density squashed by technological change, globalization, and a rigged legal system, we’ve been warning for years that soon, they’d be coming after the public sector. The day of reckoning has come. Using the economic crisis as a pretext, they are seeking to eradicate the final barrier to the evisceration of the middle class.
The economic impact of passing this bill will be serious. Thousands of public employees across the state (all of whom are willing to “share the pain” in a fair manner) will see immediate reductions in their compensation (which, according to the Economic Policy Institute, is already 8.2% lower than in the private sector). Permanently eliminating employees’ ability to negotiate – even for a future time when the economy is doing well – will permanently reduce the pay of hundreds of thousands of Wisconsin working families.  These people will spend less money in their communities as a result – they won’t buy new cars at the local dealership, they won’t take their families out to local restaurants, and they won’t have work done on their homes by local handymen. The economic impact of this bill will be massive, and it will hurt businesses and communities statewide.  More than just a “nuclear option” for public sector unions, this bill is a bomb for the Wisconsin economy.
Much more than dealing with our current economic situation, this dismantles employees’ rightsforever.  It is a permanent, far-reaching attack in response to a temporary – and overstated – problem.
But alas, facts and reality take a back seat to ideology and eliminating political enemies. If Walker and his friends get their way, more than fifty years of stable public sector collective bargaining will be undone in just five days.
If the law passes, what comes next? Will resignation and despair set in? I don’t think so. People on the ground in Madison are living through something transformative right now; this is a struggle and a fight-back unlike anything most folks have ever seen. Transformational learning takes place in lived experience. By being in the streets every day and sleeping in the capitol building every night, people in Wisconsin are re-learning that we have power.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fX2_aoBkt2o]
Don Taylor is an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin’s School for Workers.

California labor and the fall elections

Labor's campaign in California has been an ambitious mix of trying to persuade swing voters while at the same time trying to mobilize those Democrats who don't often vote in nonpresidential elections.

Harold Meyerson

August 31, 2010

Just how blue will California be this November? Will this Democratic state return Barbara Boxer to the Senate and Jerry Brown to the statehouse, or will their mega-funded GOP opponents ride the red tide of what's looking to be a strong Republican year into office?

Let's start with the governor's race. Brown has been no more than intermittently visible this year, husbanding his limited funds for an autumnal media blitz. Meg Whitman, by contrast, has bought into every media market known to humankind. By the normal rules of politics, she should have opened a lead on the late-starting Brown. But by the measure of almost every poll, she hasn't.

Part of the reason for that is California's union movement, which has put up ads and begun its field program earlier than ever this year to counter Whitman's spending advantage. As Seema Mehta reported in Monday's Times, labor has already spent $14 million on advertising and getting its ground game in place.

"In 2006, [Democratic gubernatorial nominee] Phil Angelides was in a 15-point hole by Labor Day," said Courtni Pugh, who heads up some state political programs for the Service Employees International Union, recalling how Anglides' inability to go on the air that summer gave the far-better-funded Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger a decisive advantage before labor had even begun its efforts on Angelides' behalf. "This time," she continued, "we knew we had to go on the air the day after the primary, not the day after Labor Day."

Labor's campaign in California has been an ambitious mix of trying to persuade swing voters while at the same time trying to mobilize those Democrats who don't often vote in nonpresidential elections. Much of labor's strategy to sway swing voters is modeled on the national AFL-CIO's Working America project, which targets white, blue-collar workers with economically populist messages. The larger piece of the program, though — dictated by California's demographics — targets African American and, most especially, Latino voters, who will vote Democratic provided they are motivated to vote at all.

In California, such voters present a huge opportunity. Steve Rosenthal, a Washington-based political consultant who is generally regarded as one of the Democrats' preeminent strategists, has calculated that the number of Latino, African American and young California voters who voted in November 2008 — but not in some or all of the previous elections going back to 2004 — is a mind-boggling 3,585,000. The total number of Californians expected to vote this November is in the 9 million to 10 million range, so getting a large share of those sometime voters to the polls is the central challenge facing California Democrats.

The conventional wisdom on midterm elections is that turnout is always going to be low. State Democrats, however, are confident they can change that, chiefly because California is home to the most politically potent labor movement in the nation, with a strong record of turning out Latino voters for Democratic candidates and causes. Since the mid-'90s, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor and the SEIUhave excelled at getting Latino voters to the polls. This year, they are funding ads in the Spanish-language media assailing what they term Whitman's "two-faced" position on immigration — her hard-line position during the Republican primary and her more sunny rhetoric since. On this key issue, they assert, she cannot be trusted. They are carrying that message door to door in Latino neighborhoods throughout the state.

This summer's outburst of Republican nativism has provided the unions with ample talking points, as a union-sponsored poll of Los Angeles-area Latino voters made abundantly clear. Fully 83% of respondents opposed Arizona's suspicious-looking-Latino law, while 72% believed such a law could be passed in California. "Our message is that voting for Jerry is voting against the Arizona law and the prospect of its enactment here," said one of labor's leading California operatives.

"We know we're not going to be able to get back to the November '08 levels of turnout," the operative continued. "But just raising turnout to the level of the '08 primary would be a good goal." If younger voters and Latino and African American voters turned out at the level of that primary, Brown would probably be assured of victory.

Across most of the nation this fall, Democrats are resigned to having to face a reduced, disproportionately Republican electorate. In California, almost entirely because a more vibrant than usual labor movement has built deep ties to minority communities, this grim picture is one they can alter a bit — perhaps, just enough — to their advantage. Were labor as strong nationally as it is in California, Democrats might not be quite so panic-stricken about what the fall portends.

Harold Meyerson is editor at large of the American Prospect and a columnist for the Washington Post. He is doing a guest columnist stint on our Tuesday Op-Ed page.

Trumka describes issues of working people- and a vision for change

Trumka  Presents  VISION FOR LABOR'S FUTURE

Newly elected AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka discussed the state of the economy and its impact on families, as well as some of the proposed legislation that could impact the labor movement. Speaking at the Nat'l Press Club, the leader of the nation’s largest labor union will join other labor leaders to discuss health reform with Pres. Obama later today.

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/program/291173-1

Labor's Vote

Working Californians Pound the Pavement for Change

By Art Pulaski
Executive Secretary-Treasurer
California Labor Federation

This campaign season has drawn high enthusiasm among union activists. In my travels around the state, I found more union volunteers than I’ve seen in years. That level of union member commitment is key, because our research shows that nothing is more persuasive than workers talking to their co-workers about the issues: the economy, health care, retirement security and job security.

This election season, union members are hearing about pro-worker issues and candidates at the worksite, on the phone, in the mail and at their doors. Through our 2.1 million members, we’ve reached nearly four million California voters. We’ve distributed over 150,000 flyers on key legislative races at worksites across the state, and dropped nearly 2 million pieces of mail. 12,500 union volunteers have made hundreds of thousands of phone calls and knocked on thousands of union members’ doors.

We are riding the tsunami of change that Barack Obama is creating at the top of the ticket. Obama is talking about the economic issues that workers care about, and that energy and enthusiasm is boiling over into hot legislative races up and down the state.

Union members have put incredible effort into these competitive races, where we have the chance to replace anti-worker legislators with those who will stand with working families.

In Assembly District 10, new voter registration numbers show Democrats have made significant gains and are almost equal to Republicans. These new numbers help put Alyson Huber within striking distance of pulling off a big upset over Jack Sieglock (R). Unions have launched a massive campaign to educate voters about Sieglock's bad record as a career politician.

Joan Buchanan (D) is leading her opponent, Abram Wilson (R), in Assembly District 15, thanks to union volunteers who made almost 15,000 calls to union households in that district. That’s almost exactly the same as the margin of victory in this district during the last competitive election.

In Assembly District 26, momentum is building for John Eisenhut. This is an extremely tight race, but a big push from the Democratic Party, along with over 26,000 calls and door visits by union volunteers, could push Eisenhut over the top.

Fran Florez scored big in the court of public opinion in Assembly District 30, with key endorsements from the Fresno Bee and the Bakersfield Californian – the two biggest papers in the district. We’ve moved more than 100 union volunteers into AD 30 for the final four days.

In Assembly District 78, retired union member Marty Block has been making major strides in the polls. His popularity among workers was clear last weekend, when nearly 400 union members and supporters came out to walk precincts to support Block.

Manuel Perez has run a strong campaign in Assembly District 80, and has easily withstood ineffective attacks by the opposition.

In Senate District 5, Lois Wolk has a modest lead in the polls, and over 300 union members walked the precinct this weekend to keep support growing for her.

Thanks in large part to union volunteers, tracking polls show a dead heat between Hannah-Beth Jackson (D) and her opponent, Tony Strickland (R) in Senate District 19. A win in this district would leave Democrats only one seat away from a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Our labor council leader dispatched 152 union volunteers from her home on Saturday.

With a record turnout expected and a surge in voter registrations, more seats are coming into play every day, including AD 36 (Lancaster), AD 37 (Simi Valley), CD 3 (Sacramento), CD 45 (Palm Springs), CD 46 (Orange County) and CD 50 (San Diego).

Labor Councils throughout the state have gone above and beyond to get out the worker vote. The L.A. County Federation of Labor has vowed to make 500,000 by the end of the campaign, and they’re on pace to make it happen. In San Joaquin County, we’ve reached our goal of contacting over 5,000 union voters. In San Diego, Alameda, and Orange counties, volunteers have come out in record numbers, and in Sacramento, the phone banks and the precinct walks are packed every day.

Working families understand that we cannot afford more of the same in Sacramento and Washington. We need a new direction, one that promises things like job security, retirement protection and affordable health care. That’s why we are putting our all into this election.

For more election resources or to find a labor-sponsored campaign event in your area, visit www.calaborfed.org/political/

Art Pulaski is Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO, which represents 2.1 million members of 1,200 manufacturing, service, construction, and public sector unions. For more information, visit http://www.workingcalifornia.org/

From California Progress Report

Labor's plan for the new administration

This was also posted at Steve's request on TalkingUnion at http://talkingunion.wordpress.com/2008/10/13/efca-the-economy-obama-and-labor/

Labor Day, Bill Moyers

BILL MOYERS: In past decades, the voices of the labor movement swelled the Democratic chorus. Then, Democratic presidential candidates officially opened their campaigns in the city that was the symbolic heart of union country - Detroit, then the engine of the booming auto industry. Standing in Cadillac Square on Labor Day was a Democrat's way of saying our hearts are one.
JOHN F. KENNEDY: I have come here today on a day that belongs to the working men and women of America...
BILL MOYERS: John Kennedy kicked of his campaign for president in Cadillac Square in 1960, praising unions that fought for education, for better health care, even for family farms. Kennedy declared that as unions go, so goes America.
JOHN F. KENNEDY: We share a common, deep-seated belief in the workings of free collective bargaining and in the growth of free, responsible unions, and, unlike our opponents, we don't just believe that on Labor Day.
BILL MOYERS: These were the golden years for organized labor. Union bargaining power helped lift other worker's boats - and the yachts of their employers - in a rising tide of prosperity that moved millions of families into the middle class.
But that seems now another age, another world. Union membership has plummeted from Kennedy's day - down to less than 8% of the private sector workforce. Millions of union jobs have been lost to cheap labor abroad, and to consumers who demand cheaper prices. Corporations have warred relentlessly on unions, in league with a conservative movement that regards business as its own ATM machine. Collusion between government and corporations in the global economy has left workers to fend for themselves. The results have been disastrous.
Job security - slashed. Pensions - slashed. Healthcare benefits - slashed. In a golden age of profit-taking and extravagant wealth for CEOs, compensation for employees, as a share of the total economy, has reached a new low.
And even with the Democratic party, labor's place at the table can not be taken for granted. President Bill Clinton after all championed NAFTA, the trade deal that sent manufacturing jobs overseas. Barack Obama has wavered on his opposition to reopening NAFTA. Democrats in Congress are being inundated with money from corporations. And in Denver this week, those same corporations were hosting lavish parties - captured here by ABC News' Investigative Unit shelling out millions to wine and dine Democratic officials.
BRIAN ROSS: "Lobbyists gone wild!"
BILL MOYERS: A house divided can hardly be called the home of working people.
So for all the rhetoric and cheer in Denver, workers have little to celebrate this Labor Day -- they've been falling farther behind for years now. But across the country, there are growing signs of defiance:
You see it as California nurses pushed for universal health care... you see it as workers march in Los Angeles for a living wage...you see it in immigrants fighting back against a system that hires them to pick and prepare our food, yet pays them pitiful wages and treats them as criminals.
It just might be that that same spirit of anger roused by injustice...that old and enduring hunger of working men and women for a better deal...it just might be the spark that catches fire, lighting the way once again for politicians returning to Cadillac Square on Labor Day.
That's it for the JOURNAL. We'll see you again next week. I'm Bill Moyers.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08292008/transcript4.html
Watch the Bill Moyers Journal this week

Labor Day: Cesar Chavez

Cesar Chavez: One man, one cause: Chavez and the UFW

By Cesar Chavez -
Published 12:00 am PDT Monday, September 3, 2007

Cesar Chavez (1927-1993) was the cofounder and president of what became the United Farm Workers. He delivered this address, excerpted here, to the Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco on Nov. 9, 1984:

All my life, I have been driven by one dream, one goal, one vision: to overthrow a farm labor system in this nation which treats farm workers as if they were not important human beings.

Farm workers are not agricultural implements. They are not beasts of burden -- to be used and discarded.

That dream was born in my youth. It was nurtured in my early days of organizing. It has flourished. It has been attacked.

I'm not very different from anyone else who has ever tried to accomplish something with his life. My motivation comes from my personal life -- from watching what my mother and father went through when I was growing up, from what we experienced as migrant farmworkers in California.

That dream, that vision grew from my own experience with racism, with hope, with the desire to be treated fairly and to see my people treated as human beings and not as chattel. It grew from anger and rage -- emotions I felt 40 years ago when people of my color were denied the right to see a movie or eat at a restaurant in many parts of California. It grew from the frustration and humiliation I felt as a boy who couldn't understand how the growers could abuse and exploit farmworkers when there were so many of us and so few of them.

Later, in the 1950s, I experienced a different kind of exploitation. In San Jose, in Los Angeles and in other urban communities, we -- the Mexican American people -- were dominated by a majority that was Anglo.

I began to realize what other minority people had discovered: that the only answer -- the only hope -- was in organizing. More of us had to become citizens. We had to register to vote. And people like me had to develop the skills it would take to organize, to educate, to help empower the Chicano people.

We experienced some successes in voter registration, in politics, in battling racial discrimination -- successes in an era when black Americans were just beginning to assert their civil rights and when political awareness among Hispanics was almost nonexistent. Deep in my heart, I knew I could never be happy unless I tried organizing the farmworkers. I didn't know if I would succeed. But I had to try.

All Hispanics -- urban and rural, young and old -- are connected to the farmworkers' experience. We had all lived through the fields -- or our parents had. We shared that common humiliation.

How could we progress as a people, even if we lived in the cities, while the farmworkers -- men and women of our color -- were condemned to a life without pride?

How could we progress as a people while the farmworkers -- who symbolized our history in this land -- were denied self-respect?

How could our people believe that their children could become lawyers and doctors and judges and business people while this shame, this injustice was permitted to continue?

Those who attack our union often say, "It's not really a union. It's something else: a social movement, a civil rights movement. It's something dangerous." They're half-right. The United Farm Workers is first and foremost a union. A union like any other. A union that either produces for its members on the bread and butter issues or doesn't survive.

But the UFW has always been something more than a union -- although it's never been dangerous if you believe in the Bill of Rights.

The UFW was the beginning! We attacked that historical source of shame and infamy that our people in this country lived with. We attacked that injustice, not by complaining, not by seeking handouts. We organized.

Farmworkers acknowledged we had allowed ourselves to become victims in a democratic society -- a society where majority rule and collective bargaining are supposed to be more than academic theories or political rhetoric. And by addressing this historical problem, we created confidence and pride and hope in an entire people's ability to create the future.

The UFW's survival -- its existence -- was not in doubt in my mind when the time began to come -- after the union became visible, when Chicanos started entering college in greater numbers, when Hispanics began running for public office in greater numbers, when our people started asserting their rights on a broad range of issues and in many communities across the country.

The union's survival -- its very existence -- sent out a signal to all Hispanics that we were fighting for our dignity, that we were challenging and overcoming injustice, that we were empowering the least educated among us, the poorest among us. The message was clear: If it could happen in the fields, it could happen anywhere -- in the cities, in the courts, in the city councils, in the state legislatures.

I didn't really appreciate it at the time, but the coming of our union signaled the start of great changes among Hispanics that are only now beginning to be seen.

LAT Devolves: Labor and Economic Justice Go Uncovered

LAT Devolves: Labor and Economic Justice Go Uncovered

posted by Julia Rosen | 05.29.07
The LA Times is buying out 56 reporters contracts, including that of Nancy Cleeland, the paper's labor writer. She is leaving in "frustration with the paper's coverage of working people and organized labor, and a sad realization that the situation won't change anytime soon." Thankfully, the Huffington Post provided a platform for her to explain her decision and the massive failure of the LA Times to address issues of great concern to regional residents, their target market.

It's awkward to criticize an old friend, which I still consider the Times to be, but I think the question of how mainstream journalists deal with the working class is important and deserves debate. There may be no better setting in which to examine the issue: The Los Angeles region is defined by gaping income disparities and an enormous pool of low-wage immigrant workers, many of whom are pulled north by lousy, unstable jobs. It's also home to one of the most active and creative labor federations in the country. But you wouldn't know any of that from reading a typical issue of the L.A. Times, in print or online. Increasingly anti-union in its editorial policy, and celebrity -- and crime-focused in its news coverage, it ignores the economic discontent that is clearly reflected in ethnic publications such as La Opinion.

The city deserves and needs coverage of these issues, the vibrant LA County Labor Federation, and the impact of public policy on labor. The focus on crime and celebrities marks a shift away from real journalism. They are seeking quick profitability, not a quality product.

The editorial room has taken a hard rightward shift in recent years. This has had a profound impact on the op-ed columns they publish and their ability to retain writers like Cleeland. Too often the editorial page is in direct conflict with the items published in other sections of the newspaper.

Of course, I realize that revenues are plummeting and newsroom staffs are being cut across the country. But even in these tough financial times, it's possible to shift priorities to make Southern California's largest newspaper more relevant to the bulk of people who live here. Here's one idea: Instead of hiring a "celebrity justice reporter," now being sought for the Times website, why not develop a beat on economic justice? It might interest some of the millions of workers who draw hourly wages and are being squeezed by soaring rents, health care costs and debt loads.

In Los Angeles, the underground economy is growing faster than the legitimate one, which means more exploited workers, greater economic polarization, and a diminishing quality of life for everyone who lives here. True, it's harder to capture those kinds of stories than to scan divorce files and lawsuits. But over time, solid reporting on the economic life of Los Angeles could bring distinction and credibility to the Times. It also holds tremendous potential for interacting with readers. And, above all, it's important.

The answer to Cleeland's question is yes: writing on economic justice would be of great interest to tens of thousands of local residents, but they are not the current target demographic for the LAT right now. That is abundantly clear in these moves. The Times is eliminating hard journalism positions and hiring people for "celebrity justice". What a joke. What the heck does that mean anyways? One hopes that the reference to justice merely indicates coverage of legal proceeding rather than any advocacy angle.

There is and there will be a market for the type of journalism that Cleeland knows and loves, but it will not be with the LAT. The paper will sponsor less investigatory journalism of the type that brings Pulitzer Prizes and move towards blog style breaking news and celebrity fluff pieces. All major newspapers are dealing with declining subscription rates and the impact of the Internet. The LAT is taking a decidedly low-brow approach to solving their profitability problems.

For Cleeland's part, she has found another outlet for her writings.

I couldn't stop seeing them. I remembered the workers who killed chickens, made bagged salads, packed frozen seafood, installed closet organizers, picked through recycled garbage, and manufactured foam cups and containers. They were injured from working too fast, fired for speaking up, powerless, invisible. I saw that their impact on all of us who live in the region is huge.

Now, like hundreds of other mid-career journalists who are walking away from media institutions across the country, I'm looking for other ways to tell the stories I care about. At the same time, the world of online news is maturing, looking for depth and context. I think the timing couldn't be better.

With the Los Angeles Economic Roundtable, a source of economic research for 15 years, I'm exploring the development of a nonprofit online site to chronicle the regional economy from a full range of perspectives. We want to tap into the wealth of economic research being generated by academic institutions, business groups, labor unions and others, as well as the vast experience of ordinary Angelenos. After all, the economy is nothing more than how we live, work and consume, all drawn together.

I look forward to the development of such a website. It will be extraordinarily useful for my writings here at Working Californians. The blogs should be a natural outlet for the work being produced by the Roundtable. Hopefully, Cleeland will continue to write at HuffPo and other blogs. The story needs to be told and I glad the LAT's devolution will not silence her voice, for she speaks for millions without a voice in the public sphere.

Democrats sell out labor on trade deal?

things look bad.
This press release just came out from the office of Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), one of the leading fair traders in Congress and the author of the book “The Myths of Free Trade”:
“Yesterday’s announcement by Chairman Rangel, Chairman Levin, Chairman Baucus and Ambassador Schwab is the result of millions of voters speaking out in November against a fundamentally-flawed trade policy. It is the result of the largest ever bipartisan coalition formed against the NAFTA-model trade pact. It is the result of tireless efforts by fair trade advocates in the U.S. and across the globe fighting every day for a new direction in trade. The proposed changes recognize the inherent flaws in the current approach to trade and signal some willingness to address long- held concerns over labor and environmental standards. However, I have significant concerns about the enforceability of the changes. Given the administration’s failure to act against on known violations in Jordan and China, among other nations, those concerns are well founded. Time will tell whether yesterday is the beginning of efforts toward a better trade model or just a brief tactical retreat on the part of the administration. I look forward to reviewing the changes in these agreements in their entirety, and working with my colleagues on a trade policy that is acceptable to the millions of voters who sent us to Congress.”
Still no word on the full details of the trade deal.

For more see
http://davidsirota.com/
I don't know about you, but I did not help elect Democrats to advance Bush policies on trade.

Labor Leaders support CFA Strike preparation

NATIONAL LABOR LEADERS SPEAK OUT FOR CSU FACULTY


As you have seen reported in the news and as we have been saying for months, faculty in the CSU are making history. We are making history as a higher education union and as an issue around which the larger labor movement has rallied.


On March 21 we announced the stunning results of a system-wide strike vote in which 81% of our members participated and in which 94% voted YES in support of job actions. Now, although we don’t want to strike, if the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees do not come to their senses, we will move forward to historic two day rolling strike actions.


What we are doing is momentous in other ways as well. As many of you know, in recent years the labor unions like SEIU, UNITE HERE and others split from the AFL-CIO to form another umbrella organization, Change to Win.


Today, we are making history because CFA’s struggle with the Chancellor and our fight for quality higher education for the working people of California has become an issue around which all parts of the labor movement have coalesced.


On our website are posted two documents. The first is a letter signed by the presidents of some of the largest and most important unions and academic organizations in the nation NEA, SEIU, CTA and AAUP (click here to view: http://www.calfac.org/allpdf/bargaining/resolutions%20of%20support/Ldrs_Mar07.pdf ).


The second is signed by John Sweeney, President of the AFL-CIO. All of them indicate that the fight we are involved in is critical to working people all over the country (click here to view: http://www.calfac.org/allpdf/bargaining/resolutions%20of%20support/AFL-CIO_032007.pdf ).


Although we always hope for a settlement, we should move forward toward job actions with the confidence that the nation’s largest labor organizations stand ready to support our fight.


* * *