FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Could Wal-Mart Revive the Labor Movement?

“I may have lots of faults, but being wrong ain’t one of them.”

–Jimmy Hoffa

Referring to Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. as a “successful business” is like calling the Pacific Ocean a “large body of water.” Since its founding in 1962, Wal-Mart has come to be recognized as a marketing phenomenon, a retailing juggernaut, an icon, a household word around the globe.

Wal-Mart has 60 stores in Communist China. It sells more records, more groceries and more toys than any chain in the U.S. It’s not only the largest private employer in the United States, Mexico and Canada, it’s the largest private employer in the world, and the fourth largest employer of any kind, behind the Chinese Army, British National Health Service, and Indian Railways.

Tangentially, it’s also become a symbolic thorn in the side of organized labor. Actually, it’s more than a thorn; it’s a metaphorical dagger in labor’s heart.

Back when Wal-Mart had a “mere” 3,600 stores in the U.S. (there are 4,000 today), the AFL-CIO launched an aggressive organizing drive against the company, looking to crack its imperious, enamel-like shell. Yet, despite bringing all of its formidable resources to bear, the House of Labor could not convince the employees of a single store to join the union, further solidifying the giant retailer’s worldwide reputation as being more or less “union proof.”

In truth, the overall record, while calamitous, hasn’t been a total goose egg. Over the years there have, in fact, been a handful of Canadian Wal-Mart stores that voted to join a union-no small accomplishment considering the opposition they faced. We can’t count the “unionized” Wal-Mart stores in China, because Chinese unions are State-owned entities serving as little more than political tools.

Alas, the only Wal-Marters in the U.S. to have voted in favor of a union were a group of meat-cutters in Texas, who, in 2000, voted to join the UFCW (United Food and Commercial Workers). The company responded by instantly shutting down its meat-cutting operation and going to pre-packaged meats at over 150 stores in Texas and the southwest (an indication of just how vehemently anti-union their management is).

But let’s give Wal-Mart employees some credit. They aren’t stupid. It’s not that they can’t see the advantages of joining a labor union, or don’t care about improving their wages, benefits and working conditions. For the most part, what prevents these people from signing union cards isn’t ignorance, but fear-the fear of losing their jobs, the fear that the company will close up shop and move to another location if they go union, or fire people who are caught circulating union literature.

At Wal-Mart it’s understood that if the bosses catch you passing out union pamphlets, you’re history; they fire you. Employees are routinely warned of the evils of union representation, and cautioned to report any union organizers lurking about. It’s a gestapo-like atmosphere. Which raises the question: Isn’t it illegal to threaten or discharge an employee for disseminating union literature? Of course it is. It’s a clear violation of federal labor law, and Wal-Mart knows it.

The problem is, not only are unfair labor practice charges (ULPs) difficult to prove in court, but a company with Wal-Mart’s muscle isn’t going to worry about something as petty as an obscure labor statute. Even if they get nailed a few times (which they have), they’re willing to risk it. Wal-Mart has found that the public relations backlash to getting hit with the occasional ULP is miniscule.

However, as grim as the future appears, it isn’t hopeless. Indeed, there’s a scenario by which Wal-Mart’s employees not only organize themselves, but rise up and lead a renaissance-a Great Revival-of union activism and influence.

And no, it’s not a fairy tale.

First, a quick look at what happened to the movement. Arguably, there were two crushing blows that put organized labor on the ropes: one was an increase in aggressive, anti-union tactics by American corporations, traceable to President Reagan’s sudden firing of 11,000 air traffic controllers, in 1981; the other was the loss of, literally, millions of well-paid, richly-benefited jobs in the manufacturing sector.

These jobs-in the auto industry, in steel, rubber, timber, furniture, heavy equipment, pulp and paper mills, etc.-generated considerable purchasing power. They were jobs that afforded employees new homes and new cars, jobs into which sons and daughters proudly followed their parents. It’s no exaggeration to say that it was these jobs that were responsible for “inventing” the middle-class.

Today, however, the mantra you keep hearing is that the United States has shifted from a manufacturing economy to a “service economy.” Accordingly, the unions that have continued to prosper are the “service” unions, those whose workers are immune to having their jobs co-opted or sent overseas: teachers, nurses, pilots, actors, screenwriters, longshoremen, police and firemen, truckers, railroad workers, carpenters and the like.

Although we still build cars in this country, the combination of foreign brands cutting into the U.S. market and manufacturing plants moving to the anti-union Southern states has decimated the UAW (United Auto Workers). Overall union membership in the U.S. has dropped from a high of 35% (during the 1950s) to about 12% today, and no group has taken a more dramatic hit than the UAW.

But there’s another, generally overlooked classification of “service” job that is also immune to having its work shipped off to a foreign country. It’s the retail clerks. They’re the people who man the checkout stands, deal with the customers, stock the shelves, and generally keep the store running. They’re the people who work at Wal-Mart.

Consider: If America’s prestigious “big boy” unions (autos, steel, heavy equipment) have been laid low by the effects of globalization, is it not unreasonable to suggest that labor’s less glamorous but more secure “little brothers” step in and fill the void?

After all, a union’s success is the product of two factors: leverage and a willingness to fight. Being willing to fight, but having little leverage, means, game as you are, you’re destined to go down in flames. Conversely, having considerable leverage, but being unwilling to fight, means you’re destined to tread water, and deserve no more than you get.

So what would happen if Wal-Mart employees across the county were to simultaneously throw down the gauntlet? What would happen if they announced, en masse, that they were going to seek union affiliation-either by joining an existing union or forming one of their own-and dared the company to try and stop them?

Wouldn’t such a splashy public declaration (via full-page ads in major newspapers, TV and radio) put Wal-Mart on the defensive? Wouldn’t all the national attention prevent the company from resorting to its usual tactics of illegal threats and intimidation? Without the fear of being fired, employees would be free to vote as they pleased. The floodgates would open.

Moreover, with so many of its 4,000 stores involved, Wal-Mart wouldn’t have the tactical option of shutting down those units that voted to go union. There simply would be too many of them.

Think about it. If Wal-Mart workers announced-in front of God, Pete Seeger, and the Department of Labor-their intention to unionize, what could Wal-Mart management legally do to prevent them? With so much sunshine let in, any move they made would be subject to intense scrutiny. The employees’ declaration would carry the moral authority of Ronald Reagan’s famous, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

This is where the AFL-CIO and its money enter the equation. In addition to paying for the newspaper and other media spots, the AFL-CIO could be counted on to provide free legal representation to anyone who was fired for his or her union involvement. If there’s one thing the House of Labor has plenty of, it’s money. The AFL-CIO’s legal defense team lives for moments like this.

The fact that America’s retail clerks can’t be swallowed up or outsourced needs to be seen as more than just a lucky break. It’s a circumstance which, if played right, can be converted into an enormous leverage. Wal-Mart’s magnitude, high profile, and dependence upon a mega-sized workforce are the very components which, ironically, make it vulnerable to a well-orchestrated uprising.

And it’s not only Wal-Marters who have this opportunity laid before them. With the luxury of knowing that their jobs can’t be pulled out from under them, the retail clerks at Target, Starbucks, Home Depot, et al, would also have the power to drop the hammer. Audacious as it sounds, retail clerks, if mobilized, could be the ones to reinvigorate the labor movement. Crazier things have happened.

DAVID MACARAY, a Los Angeles playwright and writer, was president and chief contract negotiator of the Assn. of Western Pulp and Paper Workers, Local 672, from 1989 to 2000. He can be reached at: dmacaray@earthlink.net

 

 

 

 

 

More articles by:

David Macaray is a playwright and author. His newest book is How To Win Friends and Avoid Sacred Cows.  He can be reached at dmacaray@gmail.com

April 25, 2018
Mel Gurtov
Will Abe Shinzo “Make Japan Great Again”?
Dean Baker
Bad Projections: the Federal Reserve, the IMF and Unemployment
David Schultz
Why Donald Trump Should Not be Allowed to Pardon Michael Cohen, His Friends, or Family Members
Mel Gurtov
Will Abe Shinzo “Make Japan Great Again”?
Binoy Kampmark
Enoch Powell: Blood Speeches and Anniversaries
Frank Scott
Weapons and Walls
April 24, 2018
Carl Boggs
Russia and the War Party
William A. Cohn
Carnage Unleashed: the Pentagon and the AUMF
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
The Racist Culture of Canadian Hockey
María Julia Bertomeu
On Angers, Disgusts and Nauseas
Nick Pemberton
How To Buy A Seat In Congress 101
Ron Jacobs
Resisting the Military-Now More Than Ever
Paul Bentley
A Velvet Revolution Turns Bloody? Ten Dead in Toronto
Sonali Kolhatkar
The Left, Syria and Fake News
Manuel E. Yepe
The Confirmation of Democracy in Cuba
Peter Montgomery
Christian Nationalism: Good for Politicians, Bad for America and the World
Ted Rall
Bad Drones
Jill Richardson
The Latest Attack on Food Stamps
Andrew Stewart
What Kind of Unionism is This?
Ellen Brown
Fox in the Hen House: Why Interest Rates Are Rising
April 23, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
In Middle East Wars It Pays to be Skeptical
Thomas Knapp
Just When You Thought “Russiagate” Couldn’t Get Any Sillier …
Gregory Barrett
The Moral Mask
Robert Hunziker
Chemical Madness!
David Swanson
Senator Tim Kaine’s Brief Run-In With the Law
Dave Lindorff
Starbucks Has a Racism Problem
Uri Avnery
The Great Day
Nyla Ali Khan
Girls Reduced to Being Repositories of Communal and Religious Identities in Kashmir
Ted Rall
Stop Letting Trump Distract You From Your Wants and Needs
Steve Klinger
The Cautionary Tale of Donald J. Trump
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Conflict Over the Future of the Planet
Cesar Chelala
Gideon Levy: A Voice of Sanity from Israel
Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
William Blum
Anti-Empire Report: Unseen Persons
Lawrence Davidson
Missiles Over Damascus
Patrick Cockburn
The Plight of the Yazidi of Afrin
Pete Dolack
Fooled Again? Trump Trade Policy Elevates Corporate Power
Stan Cox
For Climate Mobilization, Look to 1960s Vietnam Before Turning to 1940s America
William Hawes
Global Weirding
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail