FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Organized Labor and the Dreaded Two-Tier Contract

From the vantage of organized labor, the worst statutory event ever to occur was passage (over President Truman’s veto) of the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act.  Besides outlawing a union’s ability to conduct secondary strikes and boycotts (in other words, prohibiting workers from freely engaging in a meaningful display of union “solidarity”), Taft-Hartley ushered in the toxic era of the so-called “right-to-work” state.

A right-to-work state is one that allows employees to hire into a union facility—a facility that routinely offers better wages and benefits than a comparable non-union facility—but, preposterously, does not require these employees to join the very union that made those economic advantages possible.  At first blush, such a sleazy, “backdoor” arrangement seems grossly unfair if not downright illegal.

But right-to-work provisions aren’t illegal.  Indeed, they are not only legal, a whopping 28 states (including Michigan and Wisconsin, their illustrious labor histories notwithstanding) have adopted them.  So what has Taft-Hartley wrought?  It has given sharp-eyed pilgrims the right to publicly rejoice in the hard-earned benefits of union membership—including being able to cite the union contract when filing a grievance—without having to become union members.

Not to stretch the analogy, but isn’t this bullshit a bit like the soldier who spent all his time in the motor pool, having never once seen actual battle, and then insisting on being awarded a combat ribbon because a lot of the other guys got one?  While U.S. companies smugly refer to this union-busting device as “freedom of choice,” organized labor calls it “freeloading,” which it clearly is.

As crippling as the Taft-Hartley Act was, one can argue that implementation of the “two-tier wage and benefit configuration” has been equally debilitating.  Unlike the post-war Taft-Hartley, the two-tier didn’t raise its ugly head until the late 1970s, when the UAW (United Auto Workers) was first exposed to it, but since then—in the wake of hundreds and hundreds of corporations having jumped on the bandwagon—it’s done incalculable damage to the labor movement.

Basically, the two-tier arrangement is exactly what it implies.  One pay scale is transformed into two.  Under a two-tier, instead of everyone in a union shop receiving—as was historically always the case—identical pay and identical benefits for doing identical jobs, the company is allowed to create a secondary progression ladder.

And under the provisions of this secondary ladder, all future employees are locked into not only what wages they can make, but what benefits they can receive, including vacation time, pensions, and in some cases, health coverage.  Why on earth would a union agree to such contract language?  Because they had a gun to their heads.  The mighty UAW once had more than a million members.  Today, they’re a shell of their former selves.  Membership stands at 390,000.

Understandably, these two-tier configurations—particularly the most radical versions—didn’t emerge fully formed.  For one thing, in the beginning, most companies weren’t sure where the plans would lead (or how best to sell the idea to the union), and for another, if the union were given the slightest hint at what the most ambitious versions would be, they would have risen en masse, and run away screaming from the bargaining table.

Which is why the first two-tiers were presented as “hiring rates.”  For example, in the West Coast paper industry, local unions agreed to having their new hires paid less than seasoned employees doing the same job, so long as the differential adhered to a graduated index.

During their first three months a new hire would receive 80% of the full rate.  The next three months it would be 85%.  Then 90%.  Then 95%.  Only after one year would they receive the full rate.  No one really objected to this, including the new hires themselves, who thought it was a “fair” system.

But all of this quickly morphed into what we find today:  A permanent and disaffected collection of “haves and have-nots.”  Under a strict two-tier arrangement, today’s new hires can never earn what a senior person earns doing the same job, no matter how long they remain on the payroll.  One can readily imagine what effect this has on union solidarity.  It’s been devastating.

 

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

Weekend Edition
January 18, 2019
Friday - Sunday
David Rovics
Of Triggers and Bullets
Elliot Sperber
Eddie Spaghetti’s Alphabet
January 17, 2019
Stan Cox
That Green Growth at the Heart of the Green New Deal? It’s Malignant
David Schultz
Trump vs the Constitution: Why He Cannot Invoke the Emergencies Act to Build a Wall
Paul Cochrane
Europe’s Strategic Humanitarian Aid: Yemen vs. Syria
Tom Clifford
China: An Ancient Country, Getting Older
Greg Grandin
How Not to Build a “Great, Great Wall”
Ted Rall
Our Pointless, Very American Culture of Shame
John G. Russell
Just Another Brick in the Wall of Lies
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers Strike: Black Smoke Pouring Out of LAUSD Headquarters
Patrick Walker
Referendum 2020: A Green New Deal vs. Racist, Classist Climate Genocide
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Uniting for a Green New Deal
Matt Johnson
The Wall Already Exists — In Our Hearts and Minds
Jesse Jackson
Trump’s Flailing will get More Desperate and More Dangerous
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party: Part Three
January 16, 2019
Patrick Bond
Jim Yong Kim’s Mixed Messages to the World Bank and the World
John Grant
Joe Biden, Crime Fighter from Hell
Alvaro Huerta
Brief History Notes on Mexican Immigration to the U.S.
Kenneth Surin
A Great Speaker of the UK’s House of Commons
Elizabeth Henderson
Why Sustainable Agriculture Should Support a Green New Deal
Binoy Kampmark
Trump, Bolton and the Syrian Confusion
Jeff Mackler
Trump’s Syria Exit Tweet Provokes Washington Panic
Barbara Nimri Aziz
How Long Can Nepal Blame Others for Its Woes?
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers’ Strike: When Just One Man Says, “No”
Cesar Chelala
Violence Against Women: A Pandemic No Longer Hidden
Kim C. Domenico
To Make a Vineyard of the Curse: Fate, Fatalism and Freedom
Dave Lindorff
Criminalizing BDS Trashes Free Speech & Association
Thomas Knapp
Now More Than Ever, It’s Clear the FBI Must Go
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: The Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party: Part Two
Edward Curtin
A Gentrified Little Town Goes to Pot
January 15, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
Refugees Are in the English Channel Because of Western Interventions in the Middle East
Howard Lisnoff
The Faux Political System by the Numbers
Lawrence Davidson
Amos Oz and the Real Israel
John W. Whitehead
Beware the Emergency State
John Laforge
Loudmouths against Nuclear Lawlessness
Myles Hoenig
Labor in the Age of Trump
Jeff Cohen
Mainstream Media Bias on 2020 Democratic Race Already in High Gear
Dean Baker
Will Paying for Kidneys Reduce the Transplant Wait List?
George Ochenski
Trump’s Wall and the Montana Senate’s Theater of the Absurd
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: the Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Glenn Sacks
On the Picket Lines: Los Angeles Teachers Go On Strike for First Time in 30 Years
Jonah Raskin
Love in a Cold War Climate
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party
January 14, 2019
Kenn Orphan
The Tears of Justin Trudeau
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail