Press "Enter" to skip to content

Obama encourages Big Labor to unite

Reposted at
http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=833

by David Bacon
TruthOut.com

Unions Need Unity

Oakland, California – Twelve unions met in Washington, DC, last week and announced they’re considering rejoining the two labor federations, the American Federation of Labor/Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) and Change to Win (CTW), which split apart five years ago. The initiative came from the incoming Obama administration, which told union leaders it didn’t relish the idea of dealing with competing union agendas.

Many progressive labor activists greeted the idea with a sigh of relief. “Dividing the labor movement was never a good idea to begin with,” said Bill Fletcher, former education director for the AFL-CIO and now director of field services for the American Federation of Government Employees. Fletcher and many others believe that, while US unions have big problems, they can’t be cured by division, competing federations or simply changes in structure. Instead, they call for a re-examination of labor’s political direction.

Unions are at their lowest point in membership since the 1920s, representing less than 10 percent of the workforce. Obama’s election, which they pulled out all the stops to achieve, promises some degree of change from federal policies that have accelerated that decline. The president-elect has appointed potentially the most pro-union labor secretary since the 1930s – Congresswoman Hilda Solis. A potential Congressional majority could pass the Employee Free Choice Act, which would make union organizing much easier and protect workers from retaliatory firings while they unionize. Obama has promised to sign the bill if Congress passes it.

In industry after industry, the impact of revived unions and growing membership could be enormous. For the first time in US history, for example, unions have gained the strength to organize the rest of the hospital and nursing home industries. That would radically read more

Posted to IPR by Paulie

8 Comments

  1. paulie cannoli Post author | January 16, 2009

    If it’s really free trade, yes.

  2. Steven R Linnabary January 16, 2009

    We do need fair trade not necessarily free trade.

    Citizen: Free trade, by definitionIS Fair trade.

    PEACE

  3. paulie cannoli Post author | January 16, 2009

    No, because it was posted on the front page of the Constitution Party national website.

    See start of entry.

  4. sunshinebatman January 16, 2009

    What does this news item have to do with independent politics? Is it because Barry-elect Obama was/is affiliated with the Chicago-based pinko New Party?

  5. Catholic Trotskyist January 15, 2009

    The unions endorse the Democrats because left-wing third parties or anti-freetrade parties can’t win until the Fringe Alliance strategy, instant runoff voting, or classic runoff voting is implemented.

  6. citizen1 January 15, 2009

    I do not know what the unions really represent. I am a union steward with the Teamsters. I have found that even when I have run against “free trade” candidate they will only endorse the Democrat no matter what his stance on this most important issue to American workers. Supporting wage an benefit increases while allowing jobs to leave the country so that lower wages and benefits can be paid does not make sense. We do need fair trade not necessarily free trade.

  7. Catholic Trotskyist January 15, 2009

    Good job Obama. Big labor has saved the economy and helped make America great. The Catholic Church is giving more and more support to labor, helping to fulfill the world destiny of Catholic Trotskyism.

    God bless the state, God bless the church, God bless labor, God bless Claiborne Pell, God bless Richard John Neuhauss, god bless the pope, and God bless Barack Obama, amen.

  8. Libertarian Joseph January 15, 2009

    Fuck you, Obama. Big labor has already worked to clusterfuck the economy.

Comments are closed.