******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
The same just happened here in Brazil this year. The government stroke down a law that required workers from any sector (public or private) to pay union fees. My union, for example, had to fire a lot of employees because our budget is much smaller now. Am Do., 28. Juni 2018 um 10:09 Uhr schrieb Louis Proyect via Marxism < marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu>: > ******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > ***************************************************************** > > NY Times, June 28, 2018 > Labor Unions Will Be Smaller After Supreme Court Decision, but Maybe Not > Weaker > By Noam Scheiber > > With the Supreme Court striking down laws that require government > workers to pay union fees, one thing is clear: Most public-sector unions > in more than 20 states with such laws are going to get smaller and > poorer in the coming years. > > Though it is difficult to predict with precision, experts and union > officials say they could lose 10 percent to one-third of their members, > or more, in the states affected, as conservative groups seek to persuade > workers to drop out. > > The court’s decision is the latest evidence that moves to weaken unions > are exacting a major toll. Beyond the dropout campaigns aimed at > members, conservatives are bringing lawsuits to retroactively recover > fees collected by unions from nonmembers. > > Dropping out of a union is a more attractive proposition now that > workers no longer have to pay a so-called agency fee, typically about 80 > percent of union dues, if they choose not to belong to a union. (Those > doing so generally account for a small fraction of the workers whom > public-sector unions represent.) > > In the five years after Michigan passed a law ending mandatory union > fees in 2012, the number of active members of the Michigan Education > Association dropped by about 25 percent, according to government > filings, a much faster attrition rate than before. Its annual receipts > fell by more than 10 percent, adjusting for inflation. > > Still, the more interesting question is whether the unions, whatever the > blow to their ranks and finances, will be substantially weaker. > > Union leaders insist that they won’t — that the crisis posed by the > case, Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal > Employees, has brought more cohesion and energy to their ranks. > > “No one wanted this case,” said Randi Weingarten, president of the > American Federation of Teachers. “But the gestalt around the country has > been to turn an existential threat into an opportunity to engage with > our members like never before.” > > There are reasons to believe that the claim is not merely desperate > bravado. > > One parallel to the current development is a 2014 Supreme Court ruling > known as Harris v. Quinn, which struck down mandatory union fees for > home-based workers who serve private individuals but are paid through > government programs like Medicaid. > > As of late 2013, the Service Employees International Union represented > about 60,000 public-sector home care and child-care workers in Illinois, > about 40 percent of whom were union members. (The rest paid agency fees.) > > Receipts for the service employees union local representing home-based > workers in Illinois dropped significantly in the four years after the > decision. But an aggressive membership campaign largely offset the loss > of members. > > It also built and reinforced personal relationships with members, who > could be summoned to make demands of politicians in nearly every > legislative district. > > “Our members go and meet Sam McCann,” said Keith Kelleher, who until > last year was president of the local representing these home-based > workers, referring to a Republican state senator. “He says yes most of > time because he’s got hundreds of members in his district.” > > Public home-based workers in Illinois, a state with a notably anti-union > Republican governor, continue to notch victories as a result. Last > summer, home care workers won a 48-cent-an-hour wage increase from the > state, up from an average wage of $13, in a budget that the legislature > passed by overriding the governor’s veto. This spring, home child-care > workers won more than a 4 percent raise. > > In anticipation of the Janus ruling, major public-sector unions have > invested heavily in recent years in reaching out to current members — an > effort known as internal organizing — and to prospective members to keep > their numbers from dropping precipitously and to create a more activist > culture. They plan to continue funding these initiatives even if it > requires cutting spending elsewhere. > > Mary Kay Henry, the international president of the service employees > union, said the union used projections derived from its experience after > the Harris decision to cut its budget by 30 percent shortly after Mr. > Trump was elected. She said the union, which represents about two > million workers, roughly half of them in the public sector, was focusing > its spending on recruiting members and mobilizing workers to face down > employers and elect pro-labor politicians. > > “We intend to prioritize the political and organizing work,” she said. > > Government filings show that the union has cut contributions to > organizations that it had traditionally supported, including the > Children’s Defense Fund, People for the American Way, and the National > Immigration Law Center. (The union says it provides nonmonetary support > to some of these groups.) > > At the same time, the union is investing tens of millions of dollars in > a door-to-door canvassing initiative for the midterm elections, intended > to turn out people who don’t normally vote. > > Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County and > Municipal Employees, said that his union’s two highest priorities going > forward would be its internal outreach and helping to organize > nonunionized workplaces, and that the union would probably “have to make > adjustments” to fund these programs. The union spent more than $15 > million during the 2016 campaign cycle supporting political candidates, > parties and committees. > > Mr. Saunders said the union, which represents over 1.2 million workers, > had held one-on-one conversations with nearly 900,000 members since > 2013. Among the goals of these conversations, he said, is to inoculate > members against campaigns by conservative groups to urge them to quit. > > “If someone knocks on their door talking about how you can get out of > the union — ‘it would be so easy, you don’t have to pay union dues’ — > our folks are prepared to tell them to get the hell off their doorstep,” > he said. > > Alexander Hertel-Fernandez, a political scientist at Columbia University > who studies corporate and conservative efforts to weaken labor, said > organized interest groups had traditionally had the greatest impact on > elections by educating members about candidates and through > on-the-ground canvassing rather than large campaign contributions. “It’s > doubly so for unions,” he said, adding that the focus “seems like a wise > decision, but the effectiveness has to be weighed against what happens > to membership and overall revenues.” > > The unions enjoy certain advantages. States like California and New > Jersey have tried to ease the blow from Janus pre-emptively by passing > legislation that, for example, guarantees public-sector unions access to > new hires and their personal contact information to help in recruiting. > > There is also a substantial wind at their back: a rising energy on the > left during the Trump era. Workers in particular appear more willing to > take to the streets and state capitols, including tens of thousands of > teachers who walked off their jobs this year in conservative states to > protest the underfunding of public education. > > When the Supreme Court ruled last month that employment contracts could > prohibit workers from bringing class-action lawsuits, activists in > states like New York, Vermont and Oregon escalated their efforts to pass > so-called private attorneys general legislation, allowing workers to > bring cases on the state’s behalf that could benefit all affected > workers, the same way litigation by an attorney general would. > > “We’ve had many, many folks calling: ‘I heard about this legislation you > helped design. How do we make this happen?’” said Deborah Axt, > co-executive director of Make the Road New York, an advocacy group > pushing the measure. Ms. Axt said the group planned to campaign for the > legislation’s enactment this summer. > > That kind of energy appears to be benefiting unions. A Gallup poll last > summer showed labor’s approval at its highest level since 2003, and > unions in West Virginia and several other states where teachers walked > off the job this year report gains in members. > > “We’ve seen a 13 percent jump in membership because of the walkout,” > said Ed Allen, president of the Oklahoma City American Federation of > Teachers. “We have over 300 people signed up to work in political > campaigns. We’ve never seen those kinds of numbers before.” > > _________________________________________________________ > Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm > Set your options at: > http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/glauberataide%40gmail.com _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
