SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
afl cio
Unions Say Building Worker Power Is Only Way to Defeat Trump's Fascist Right
"No one—not Donald Trump or JD Vance, nor any one CEO—can stop solidarity," said AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler. "Organized labor is the path forward."
Nov 07, 2024
The largest labor unions in the United States are ready for a fight.
That much was made clear within hours of Donald Trump's victory over Vice President Kamala Harris in Tuesday's election, an outcome that will soon bring to power a former president who aggressively pursued anti-worker policies during his first four years in the White House despite posturing as an ally of rank-and-file union members.
For Shawn Fain, the fiery president of the United Auto Workers, the struggle for the nation's working class in the wake of Trump's victory is identical to the one it faced prior to the election: "unchecked corporate greed destroying our lives, our families, and our communities."
"It's the threat of companies like Stellantis, Mack Truck, and John Deere shipping jobs overseas to boost shareholder profits. It's the threat of corporate America telling the working class to sit down and shut up," said Fain, who led the UAW through a six-week strike last year that yielded historic contracts with the nation's three largest car manufacturers.
"We've said all along that no matter who is in the White House, our fight remains the same," Fain added. "The fight for a living wage, affordable healthcare, and time for our families continues. It's time for Washington, D.C. to put up or shut up, no matter the party, no matter the candidate. Will our government stand with the working class, or keep doing the bidding of the billionaires? That's the question we face today. And that's the question we'll face tomorrow. The answer lies with us. No matter who's in office."
"We've seen assaults on our fundamental rights before. In the days, months, and years ahead, labor's task will be to defend working people when it happens again."
While energized by recent victories, the U.S. labor movement is broadly in disrepair, battered by a decades-long corporate assault. Last year, according to the latest figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the country's union membership rate was just 10%, down from 20.1% in 1983.
And union members were hardly unified behind one candidate in Tuesday's election:
Exit polling shows that members of union households backed Harris by a relatively narrow margin of 53% to Trump's 45%.
But organized labor, weakened and divided as it is, still represents "the most promising and powerful tool to turn this all around," journalist Hamilton Nolan wrote for In These Times on Wednesday.
In a separate piece ahead of Tuesday's election, Nolan argued that "unions are inherently progressive."
"Not because they endorse a particular political party, but because the nature of the work they do is about empowering the working class and increasing equality and enabling regular people to stand up effectively to the power of capital, of the rich, of corporations, of unrestrained capitalism," he wrote. "When you win a union and sign a union contract it is not just an act of improving your own life and the lives of your coworkers; it is a battle won in the class war. And the political war that you are stressed about right now is, at its heart, a class war."
Claude Cummings, president of the Communications Workers of America, affirmed that message in a statement following Tuesday's election, saying that "corporate CEOs are intent on dividing us against each other so they can drive down wages and cut corners on safety to boost profits for big investors."
"Now it is time to reunite around our shared values," said Cummings. "No matter who is in office, our goals are always the same—to use our collective power to protect our rights, to improve our working conditions, and to give everyone an opportunity to have a union voice on the job."
Want to build worker power against the billionaires and corporate CEOs? Form a union. https://t.co/OfgO2NOTVk
— CWA (@CWAUnion) November 7, 2024
In the second Trump administration, unions are likely to face a billionaire-shaped government hostile to organized labor's rights and aspirations for a more just and equitable society.
While no final decisions have been made, The Washington Postreported earlier this month that Trump sees former fast-food executive Andrew Puzder—an enemy of unions and opponent of raising the minimum wage—as a top contender for the labor secretary post. Trump selected Puzder for the role in his first White House term, but Puzder withdrew his nomination in the face of bipartisan backlash.
The Post also reported that Trump intends to fire National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo—a champion of workers—on day one and "reverse wins for unions under Biden," including "a 2023 landmark ruling that forces employers found using illegal tactics to fight labor organizing to recognize unions." The NLRB ruling has provided a boost to unionization efforts.
Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, said in a statement Wednesday that the Project 2025 agenda crafted by Trump allies and members of his first administration "promises to dismantle labor unions because we are a pillar of democracy and a check on power."
Acknowledging that Trump's win represents "a blow for every worker who depends on our elected leaders to fight for our jobs, our unions, and our contracts," Shuler said that "we stand for solidarity—the kind that is built when working people stand together to take on the biggest, richest bosses and the most powerful extremist politicians."
"Most importantly, we know how to fight back when anyone comes after our freedoms," said Shuler. "No one—not Donald Trump or JD Vance, nor any one CEO—can stop solidarity. Organized labor is the path forward."
Service Employees International Union (SEIU) president April Verrett echoed that sentiment.
"We are putting corporations, billionaires, and extremist politicians on notice—we see you, we know just what you're trying to do, and we won’t back down. We know what it's like to face down bullies," Verrett added. "We will not allow anyone to take away our fundamental rights and freedoms. Hear us: when you attack just one of us, you're attacking every worker who makes our communities, our economy, and our nation strong."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Starbucks Workers Win Union at 500th US Shop
"This milestone is a testament to workers building power from the ground up," said Lynne Fox, president of Workers United.
Oct 01, 2024
Working-class allies including labor groups celebrated on Tuesday after Starbucks Workers United announced that employees of the coffee giant had made their Washington state shop the 500th U.S. location to unionize since late 2021.
"CONGRATS to Starbucks partners at Old Fairhaven Parkway and 30th in Bellingham... who make history as the 500th location to organize with Starbucks Workers United!" the organization said on social media.
The post featured a photo of three people holding "500" balloons and a video of one partner—as company employees are called—saying, "I'm excited to be part of the union."
"I'm excited to work with all the other stores, and sit across [from] Starbucks at the bargaining table, and to hopefully make a better future for all the partners, and to be just a part of something much bigger," the worker explained.
Groups including the AFL-CIO, Chicago Federation of Labor, New York City Central Labor Council, Service Employees International Union Local 721, 1199SEIU, and Strategic Organizing Center congratulated the Starbucks workers on the milestone.
In a video posted on social media on Tuesday, SEIU president April Verrett also congratulated "all of the amazing leaders at Starbucks Workers United who have stood together" and are now celebrating a victory at the 500th store in the nation.
"What started as a feisty little movement in Buffalo is now 10,000 baristas strong—and that's not an accident," she continued, citing the first win in New York state. "That is because of your hard work, your tenacity, your resilience, and your can-do spirit. Now that we're at 500, let's get on to 1,000."
"At the same time, your co-workers are at the table banging out what's gonna be a historic agreement that's gonna be the framework for all 500 stores and counting," she added. "I am so incredibly proud to stand in solidarity with all of you all. Onward to the next 500 stores. Let's go get it."
Workers United president Lynne Fox said Tuesday that "this milestone is a testament to workers building power from the ground up."
"Starbucks partners have boldly demanded a voice on the job and with it, strong contracts that ensure respect, living wages, racial and gender equity, fair scheduling, and more," Fox said in a statement to CNBC.
While Starbucks has repeatedly been accused of violating workers' rights—and its new CEO, Brian Niccol, has a history of union-busting—a company spokesperson told CNBC that "we respect our partners' rights to have a choice on the topic of unions," and "we are proud of the progress we have made on bargaining and are committed to continuing to work together to achieve our shared goals."
Organizers' ongoing progress at Starbucks comes amid soaring public support for unions. As Common Dreamsreported in August, an annual Gallup Labor Day poll revealed that 70% of Americans approve of labor unions, versus just 23% who disapprove.
As Verrett said in response to the polling this summer, "Together, we are strong."
Keep ReadingShow Less
AFL-CIO Warns House GOP Not to Interfere With Longshoremen's Labor Battle
"Instead of calling for government intervention, a far more productive tact would be to press the companies to meet the workers' very reasonable demands," the AFL-CIO president said.
Sep 27, 2024
The president of the AFL-CIO sent a letter to House Republicans on Thursday asking them not to intervene in contract negotiations between the International Longshoremen's Association and the U.S. Maritime Alliance, which could lead to the first East Coast port strike since 1977 if a deal is not struck by October 1.
The letter came in response to another letter sent by Republican lawmakers to U.S. President Joe Biden on September 19, urging him to "find a reasonable resolution to these contract disputes" and to "utilize every authority at its disposal to ensure the continuing flow of goods" if a strike does occur.
"Averting a strike is the responsibility of the employers who refuse to offer ILA members a contract that reflects the dignity and value of their labor," AFL-CIO president Elizabeth H. Shuler wrote in response to the GOP representatives. "The fight for a fair contract for longshoremen is the entire labor movement's fight."
"The public strongly supports these front-line workers and their just demand for economic security."
A potential strike would see between 25,000 and 50,000 workers walk off the job on Tuesday at 36 locations along 14 East and Gulf Coast port authorities, including 10 of the busiest in North America.
The union wants substantial raises to cover the cost of inflation. While West Coast port workers make a base wage of $54.85, their East and Gulf Coast counterparts make only $39.
The ILA is also demanding better healthcare, and a promise not to install automated or semi-automated terminals at the ports. However, negotiations between the union and the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX) broke down in June when the ILA said that USMX had begun using an automated gate to allow trucks into ports, in violation of the current contract.
The union has since contacted USMX to discuss wage increases, but the company has not upped its offer.
"My ILA members are not going to accept these insulting offers that are a joke considering the work my ILA longshore workers perform, and the billion-dollar profits the companies make off the backs of their labor," ILA president and lead negotiator Harold J. Daggett said in a statement on Monday.
"The blame for a coast wide strike in a week that will shut down all ports on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts falls squarely on the shoulders of USMX," Daggett continued.
In their letter, the Republican representatives warned about how the strike "would result in delays and dire impacts to our supply chains, our economy, and the American consumer." They evoked the "supply-chain crisis" during the Covid-19 pandemic that was a major driver of inflation, saying that a one-week strike would cause a one-and-a-half month backlog.
However, Shuler said that the GOP letter made a strike—and its economic consequences—more likely, not less. That's because the leaning on Biden to use his authority to "ensure the continuing flow of goods," suggested Shuler, could reasonably be interpreted as a request for him to file a judicial injunction under the Taft-Hartely Act to stop a strike from taking place.
"History tells us that when companies can count on an injunction against a strike, they do not negotiate in good faith to reach an agreement. By even suggesting a possible injunction, your letter makes a deal less likely and a strike all the more likely," Shuler said.
This is especially the case because the Biden administration toldReuters earlier this month that it had "never invoked Taft-Hartley to break a strike and are not considering doing so now."
"Yet," Shuler told the representatives, "your letter tries to suggest otherwise, giving the companies reason to dig in their heels. Instead of calling for government intervention, a far more productive tact would be to press the companies to meet the workers' very reasonable demands."
Shuler defended the workers' rights to wages that keep pace with living costs as well as job security in a changing technological landscape.
"Like workers in many other industries—from hospitality to healthcare to film and television—they need fair contract provisions that protect their jobs from being eliminated by automation," Shuler said.
She also noted that the port workers had made significant sacrifices to keep the ports moving during the early years of Covid-19.
"Throughout the pandemic, longshore workers never took a day off, risking their health and lives to make sure shelves were stocked and the supply chain remained strong," Shuler wrote. "The public strongly supports these front-line workers and their just demand for economic security."
She continued: "It adds insult to injury to encourage USMX to provoke a strike rather than agree to a fair contract for the workers who kept food on the table and our economy running through the darkest days of the Covid-19 crisis."
The Transportation Trades Department (TTD) of the AFL-CIO also spoke out against government intervention in the negotiations.
"Relying on Taft-Hartley is not a winning strategy and should not be USMX's expected path to resolution," TTD president and scretary Greg Regan and Shari Semelsberger said in a statement. "The Biden-Harris administration has already stated, in their own words, 'We've never invoked Taft-Hartley to break a strike and are not considering doing so now.'"
Regan and Semelsberg added that USMX was to blame for the risk of a strike.
"Let us be clear: The employers, not the workers, have shirked their responsibility and punted labor negotiations to the 11th hour, when the damage to the public and the national supply chain would be most detrimental," they said. "While USMX seeks to cast blame on the frontline workers who move our supply chain, they are at fault."
"Remember this as they seek shelter from the disaster that they created," Regan and Semelsberg concluded.
This piece has been updated with a statement from the Transportation Trades Department of the AFL-CIO.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular