FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

How Far We’ve Fallen

How many stockbrokers, lawyers, bankers, accountants, aluminum siding salesmen, rodeo clowns, etc, would turn down a big, fat pay raise if it came with strings attached?  What if accepting that pay raise was contingent upon all future new-hires being denied the opportunity to earn those same wages?  Would they make a personal sacrifice for these future employees—reject a pay raise as a matter of principle—or would they take the money and never give it a second thought?  My guess is that most would accept the money.

And yet we hear the pejorative term “sell-out” applied to union negotiators who agree to two-tier structures.  Under a two-tier wage/benefit schedule, new-hires can never receive the same compensation as those employees already on the payroll.  We hear “sell-out” applied to the UAW.  And, unfortunately, we hear it applied with little or no understanding of how ferociously the union resisted it, or how forcefully the two-tier configuration was crammed down their throats.

Look at the record.  First of all, no one but organized labor categorically opposes the two-tier system.  That’s because no one but organized labor has the ideological and institutional solidarity to generate that opposition.  Second, the record will show that many union locals have risked their own economic well-being by designating the two-tier as a “strike issue.”  And third, even a cursory look at the history of collective bargaining will show that those unions who’ve accepted two-tier arrangements have been dragged to that decision, pissing and moaning, kicking and screaming.

I’ve sat at the bargaining table when the two-tier was broached.  It’s an insidious negotiating device.  To begin with, the company comes at you with a steamroller.  They paint a dreadful economic picture, one colored with dire scenarios of massive takeaways, lay-offs, even plant closures.  In the case of the UAW, the companies’ woes were already public knowledge.  Everyone knew Detroit was getting creamed by Japan, and that the UAW had lost over a million members, reducing it to a shell of its former self.

Management tells you that they’re sinking, that they need help, that they need a lifeline.  It’s terrible news.  The picture is dark; prospects are dark; the meeting room itself seems to grow palpably darker.  Then, suddenly, a ray of light….when they announce that there’s a way out of this mess, a way that won’t require paycuts, or furloughs, or layoffs, or increased medical premiums.

If the union will allow the company to low-ball all future employees, the company will promise not to penalize any existing employees.  Simple as that.  Everyone not only gets to keep all the goodies they currently have, but there might even be a modest pay raise in the piece.  All they have to do is allow the company to change the way they compensate new-hires.  But the company also somberly warns the union:  If we reject this two-tier proposal, those necessary cost savings will have to come out of our own hide.

When we present our standard objections—that these draconian steps aren’t necessary, that they aren’t fair, that they’re un-American, that they’ll be resented and despised, etc.—the company reminds us that no one presently on the payroll, not one single person, will be affected by this arrangement, that it only applies to hypothetical workers, to fictional workers, to workers who don’t technically even “exist.”

They make it sound eminently reasonable.  For example, if any potential new-hire examines the contract and doesn’t like what he sees in the two-tier arrangement, he’s free to walk away and find work elsewhere.  No one’s going to be forced to do anything that doesn’t make absolute sense to them.  In other words, it’s your classic win-win situation.

But make no mistake.  By acknowledging that the beleaguered UAW had its back against the wall, we’re not suggesting the two-tier is defensible, because it’s not.  Indeed, it’s unfair, it’s extortionate, it kills morale, it erodes solidarity, and, ultimately, it betrays you, because even after you agree to it (against your better judgment), the company continues to chip away at your wages and benefits—as if you never agreed to anything.

The two-tier is an abomination.  The problem isn’t how to identify it;  the problem is how to stop it from finding its way into a union contract.

The job declension that exists today resembles something like this (listed in declining order):

Full-time, fully paid and fully benefited workers

Two-tier workers (lesser pay, lesser benefits)

Perma-temps (sufficient hours, no benefits)

Temps (spotty work, no benefits)

Undocumented workers (less than federal min. wage, no benefits, victimization)

Part-time workers (supplemental income, no bennies)

Day-laborers (low pay, no bennies, no guaranteed work)

Panhandlers

Clearly, those who have it best are the men and women employed in full-time jobs at decent pay with good benefits (e.g., union workers in a big-time manufacturing plant).  Correspondingly, those who have it the worst are the guys, usually Spanish-speakers, who hang out at Home Depot looking for pick-up jobs.

That top category, where people make decent wages and enjoyed good benefits, used to be considered standard procedure in America.  No one really felt it was that big a deal.  After all, good jobs were what this country was supposed to be all about.  Today those “regular” jobs are considered a luxury.  That’s how far we’ve fallen.

David Macaray, a Los Angeles playwright and author (“It’s Never Been Easy:  Essays on Modern Labor”), was a former labor union rep.  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

September 18, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Britain: the Anti-Semitism Debate
Tamara Pearson
Why Mexico’s Next President is No Friend of Migrants
Richard Moser
Both the Commune and Revolution
Nick Pemberton
Serena 15, Tennis Love
Binoy Kampmark
Inconvenient Realities: Climate Change and the South Pacific
Martin Billheimer
La Grand’Route: Waiting for the Bus
John Kendall Hawkins
Seymour Hersh: a Life of Adversarial Democracy at Work
Faisal Khan
Is Israel a Democracy?
John Feffer
The GOP Wants Trumpism…Without Trump
Kim Ives
The Roots of Haiti’s Movement for PetroCaribe Transparency
Dave Lindorff
We Already Have a Fake Billionaire President; Why Would We want a Real One Running in 2020?
Gerry Brown
Is China Springing Debt Traps or Throwing a Lifeline to Countries in Distress?
Pete Tucker
The Washington Post Really Wants to Stop Ben Jealous
Dean Baker
Getting It Wrong Again: Consumer Spending and the Great Recession
September 17, 2018
Melvin Goodman
What is to be Done?
Rob Urie
American Fascism
Patrick Cockburn
The Adults in the White House Trying to Save the US From Trump Are Just as Dangerous as He Is
Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn
The Long Fall of Bob Woodward: From Nixon’s Nemesis to Cheney’s Savior
Mairead Maguire
Demonization of Russia in a New Cold War Era
Dean Baker
The Bank Bailout of 2008 was Unnecessary
Wim Laven
Hurricane Trump, Season 2
Yves Engler
Smearing Dimitri Lascaris
Ron Jacobs
From ROTC to Revolution and Beyond
Clark T. Scott
The Cannibals of Horsepower
Binoy Kampmark
A Traditional Right: Jimmie Åkesson and the Sweden Democrats
Laura Flanders
History Markers
Weekend Edition
September 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Carl Boggs
Obama’s Imperial Presidency
Joshua Frank
From CO2 to Methane, Trump’s Hurricane of Destruction
Jeffrey St. Clair
Maria’s Missing Dead
Andrew Levine
A Bulwark Against the Idiocy of Conservatives Like Brett Kavanaugh
T.J. Coles
Neil deGrasse Tyson: A Celebrity Salesman for the Military-Industrial-Complex
Jeff Ballinger
Nike and Colin Kaepernick: Fronting the Bigots’ Team
David Rosen
Why Stop at Roe? How “Settled Law” Can be Overturned
Gary Olson
Pope Francis and the Battle Over Cultural Terrain
Nick Pemberton
Donald The Victim: A Product of Post-9/11 America
Ramzy Baroud
The Veiled Danger of the ‘Dead’ Oslo Accords
Kevin Martin
U.S. Support for the Bombing of Yemen to Continue
Robert Fisk
A Murder in Aleppo
Robert Hunziker
The Elite World Order in Jitters
Ben Dangl
After 9/11: The Staggering Economic and Human Cost of the War on Terror
Charles Pierson
Invade The Hague! Bolton vs. the ICC
Robert Fantina
Trump and Palestine
Daniel Warner
Hubris on and Off the Court
John Kendall Hawkins
Boning Up on Eternal Recurrence, Kubrick-style: “2001,” Revisited
Haydar Khan
Set Theory of the Left
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail