After nearly a half-century of steady decline, American unions are showing
unmistakable signs that they’re finally reversing direction.
The clearest evidence of that comes in a survey by the federal Bureau of
Labor Statistics showing that the percentage of workers belonging to unions
grew last year for the second consecutive year– from 12.1 to 12.4 percent of
the workforce.
Although that might seem insignificant, the percentage increase meant union
ranks grew by more than 425,000 in 2008 to a very healthy figure of more
than 16 million. That indicated to economists that union growth is likely to
continue at that rate – or perhaps an even greater rate – in the years
ahead.
Last year’s growth came despite the steady decline in job growth and
increase in unemployment. Unions also had to cope with the fierce
anti-union pressures of the Bush administration.
Significantly, two-thirds of the new union members were public employees,
who generally are not subjected to the employer intimidation that workers in
private employment often face when trying to join or form unions. Overall,
about one-third of all government employees are now union members. Only
about 8 percent of non-government workers are in unions.
Given a truly free choice, most workers undoubtedly would choose
unionization. The advantages are obvious. Last year, unionized workers
earned a median weekly salary of $886, non-union workers $691 – more than 25
percent less.
Pay is only part of it. Union members are usually guaranteed
employer-financed health insurance and retirement plans financed wholly or
in large part by their employers, whereas fewer than half of non-union
workers have such coverage.
As AFL-CIO President John Sweeney notes, “In today’s economy, that’s the
difference between sinking and swimming.”
Beyond better pay and benefits, union members also have the advantage of a
greater voice in political affairs and community activities.
Surveys show that more than 60 million workers who want to join unions and
reap those advantages won’t even try because they fear employer retaliation.
Their fear is real: Every year, more than 60,000 workers who do try are
punished, half of them fired.
Employers faced with unionization drives commonly use such tactics as
ordering supervisors to spy on union organizers and threatening pro-union
workers with firing, demotion or other penalties. They order workers to
attend meetings at which employers rail against unions and falsely claim
that unionization will force workers to pay exorbitant dues and lead to pay
cuts and layoffs or even force the employers out of business. They hire
high-priced “union avoidance” consultants to help them with their dirty
work.
Although such tactics violate the National Labor Relations Act, employers
have had little reason to fear government action. The penalties for
violations are slight, if even imposed -- at most small fines or small
back-pay settlements for workers who are fired. Workers, at any rate, fear
complaining about violations because it usually takes months – if not years
– for the government to act, and they meanwhile risk being fired or
otherwise disciplined.
In nearly a third of the relatively rare instances in which workers are able
to vote for union representation, the employers refuse to agree to a
contract with the winning union. Workers who strike to try to force them to
reach an agreement or otherwise follow the law may be permanently replaced.
Think of how much more unions would grow if those obstacles were removed.
Thanks to the election of President Obama and labor-friendly congressional
Democrats, that could happen. For Obama and a congressional majority are
backing the Employee Free Choice Act, a measure that would subject employers
who violate the Labor Relations Act to much stiffer fines and make further
revisions aimed at returning the law to its stated purpose of encouraging
unionization.
The key to that is a provision that could grant union recognition on the
showing of union membership cards by a majority of an employer’s workers,
rather than holding an election.
Employer groups have mounted a major campaign against the proposed act.
They’re asserting that it would deny workers the democratic right to vote on
unionization. But that’s simply not so.
The proposed act says workers may choose to have recognition determined by
election rather than a check of union membership cards. Under the current
law, they have no say. Employers alone have the right to choose between
voting and card checks.
Almost invariably, employers have chosen elections, which are anything but
democratic. Union supporters are not allowed to enter the employer’s
property to campaign among workers, and the voting is held on the property
with voters escorted to the polls by employer supervisors.
It’s a wonder that unions have grown at all under those circumstances. But
it now seems certain they will continue growing. The only real question is,
by how much?
---
Dick Meister, a San Francisco-based journalist, has covered labor and
political issues for a half-century. Contact him through his website,
www.dickmeister.com.
