Article View: bit.listserv.devmedia
Article #1495Re: UPPNET
From: Tom Freeman
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1994 14:46
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1994 14:46
85 lines
5504 bytes
5504 bytes
Amy Echo-Hawk's question about the concerns of the American worker got me thinking. There is a problem with the framing of the question that I am struggling with. To ask what are the concerns of the American worker would be similar to asking what are *the* concerns of any other group or even ethnicity. The problem is, there is no one answer to that question. For each working class person, the issues are different bringing in the plethora of personal life experiences and needs. Generally, since the end of World War II, Labor as a formalized entity, recognized and regulated by government, has focused on a narrow agenda of three specific issues: hours, wages and working conditions. In exchange for official legalization of unions and recognition, radicals, communists - in fact anybody who wanted to discuss redefining the entire social makeup of our country - were purged from union ranks. One of my professors, Dan Leahy, director of the Evergreen State College Labor Education and Research Center, argues that the Cold War was, in reality, a Cold War against Labor. To unify interests at home, the capitalists created a world monster in the Soviet Union. People who proscribed alternative economic orthodoxies were considered "agents" of this evil empire. The "deal" I talked about where the government recognized unions in exchange for limiting discussion to hours wages and working conditions, worked as long as we were able to continue our expansionist activities abroad with the support (and most often) intervention of our U.S. Military. Unions found themselves on the defensive after we lost the war in Vietnam. A national organization of CEO's from the largest corporations in the U.S. (many multi-nationals) formed the Business Roundtable. Capital freaked. As long as we could expand through conquest, we could offer higher benefits and wages to workers. ONce it became clear that the U.S. lacked the ability to intervene in the manner it had before, capitalists realized that resources would not expand as previously counted on. Thus, the organized in the late 70's to break the deal and to actively oppose union activities and demands. They were inadvertently helped by the Carter Administration who set a blueprint for givebacks and worker concessions in the deal to save the Chrysler Corporation. Since then, unions have been on the defensive. Part of the problem, IMHO, is that unions have not been actively organizing not only members, but working to build coalitions with communities of color, Gays and Lesbians, and workers internationally. Not to mention, working to bring the local church and community on board, like the Pittston Coal Miners Union did in Virginia. They organized *before* their contract expired, and had the whole community *including* small businesses professing support for the unionized work force which, after all, is vital for their local community. I know I haven't answered Amy's question. It's just too big. I recommend reading books like 'The Cold War Against Labor.' and 'Rank and File.' I also encourage you to consider looking at books like "American, What Went Wrong?" and "The Politics of Rich and Poor." Just one person's take on this. BTW: To get a great article called "The Deal is Dead" contact Dan Leahy or Helen Lee at the Labor Center (206) 866-6000 ext. 6525. I think you can email them at peacenet@laborcenter (though that may be a bit off). Take care, Tom Freeman Phone: (206) 866-6000 ext. 6894 Development Director Fax: (206) 866-6797 KAOS Olympia Public Radio The Evergreen State College - CAB 301 Olympia, WA 98505 <freemant@elwha.evergreen.edu> Unless otherwise stated, the opinions here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff or management of K.A.O.S. or The Evergreen State College. On Tue, 21 Jun 1994, Amy EchoHawk wrote: > > > I'm not trying to be facetious, I'm just unclear, what are the > lives & concerns of the American worker? Who defines them & how > are they defined? > > -- > Amy Echo-Hawk. Oregon Public Broadcasting aechohaw@ednet1.osl.or.gob > Yakama/Pawnee >
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<Pine.3.89.9406220736.B14546-0100000@elwha.evergreen.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!panix!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!paladin.american.edu!auvm!elwha.evergreen.edu!freemantShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 105940,e4fd836417fe2289 X-Google-Attributes: gid105940,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-06-22 08:03:04 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!panix!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!paladin.american.edu!auvm!elwha.evergreen.edu!freemant Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU Newsgroups: bit.listserv.devmedia Comments: ******************************************************** Comments: * The following "Approved" statement verifies header * Comments: * information for gateway passage. No approval of the * Comments: * content is implied. * Approved: NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU * Comments: ******************************************************** Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1994 10:46:26 -0400 Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9406220736.B14546-0100000@elwha.evergreen.edu> Errors-To: kwakely@uoguelph.ca Reply-To: devmedia@uoguelph.ca Originator: devmedia@uoguelph.ca Sender: devmedia@uoguelph.ca Precedence: bulk From: Tom Freeman <freemant@elwha.evergreen.edu> Subject: Re: UPPNET X-Listserver-Version: 6.0 -- UNIX ListServer by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Media for Development in Democracy Lines: 84