What's Wrong With Unions

The Second Continental Congress was formed in 1775 as a united effort to present grievances to King George. The delegates were land-owning, white men from the thirteen colonies. They formed the first bargaining unit. After years of boycotts, riots and demonstrations, the colonists had reached their height of frustration when a series of laws, known as the Coercive Acts, were imposed by the British government.

They negotiated for months to reach an agreement. Some delegates wanted to continue their appeal to King George while others wanted to break from the crown. Some delegates refused to agree to form a new union if slavery was abolished and some would not agree unless it was. Obviously, they reached an agreement, although just barely. With the reading of the Declaration of Independence, the first union in this country was formed on July 4, 1776. As far as King George was concerned, it was a walk-out and he sent the militia to quell the unrest. So began the American Revolution.

Our new nation excluded many citizens. The Declaration states “All men are created equal that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights…” In reality these unalienable rights only extended to white, landowning men and not to slaves, women, natives or indentured servants. The founding fathers had built their wealth on the slave trade so America was born into labor unrest from the beginning.

In response to Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation the southern states formed a new Union, the Confederate States of America. Regarded as a “walk-out”, Abraham Lincoln ordered more troops to restore the Union. The Civil War lasted four years and 625,000 people died. They had renegotiated the conditions of the Constitution.

With the expansion of the West, industry thrived. Pioneers traveled in droves to settle the west and the Captains of Industry (or Robber Barons depending on your perspective) saw an opportunity to build wealth. Men like J.P. Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, J.D. Rockefeller and Cornelius Vanderbilt cornered the market on steel, railroads and shipping.

Although these men came from humble beginnings and eventually became famous philanthropists, their capital was less than virtuously acquired. There are libraries, universities, hospitals and music halls named after them yet they exploited their workforces, colluded with the government and each other, and monopolized markets.

Then as now, law enforcement and government often favor the wealthy. The wealthy can afford better lawyers, have powerful friends and fund campaigns. In the past, juries were comprised of white, land-owning men and they were the only ones who could vote or hold office. They inherently held more power.

By the mid-nineteen century, unions were formed to negotiate the rights of workers. They were formed as a response to long work weeks, low wages, and unsafe working conditions. When workers complained they were locked out. When they tried to strike companies called in strikebreakers to end it. Workers were killed, arrested and blacklisted.

Unions became strong because they created a mechanism to air grievances. They gained power in numbers and hired mobsters to counter the strikebreakers. Mobsters, formerly used by companies, now gained control of the unions. They too gained influence over law enforcement and government until both the corporation and the union became vehicles of power and manipulation

Today unions have evolved into non-profit corporations. In many ways they are like the corporations they negotiate with. They often represent many job classes and various bargaining units, often selling out one group for another. Some coerce workers to join just as the corporation coerces them not to. We have come to a stalemate in labor relations. Many corporations have shifted jobs oversees where the union has no authority. “The Corporation” has thus far prevailed. Unions represent only nine percent of the private workforce while forty-three percent of the workers are represented in the public sector, administrators included.
Even with the progress made with legislation, little has changed for the worker. The richest ten percent of Americans own seventy percent of the assets just as they did in the 19th century. The distribution of wealth has not shifted even with the organization of labor.

Even with the progress made with legislation, little has changed for the worker. The richest ten percent of Americans own seventy percent of the assets just as they did in the 19th century. The distribution of wealth has not shifted even with the organization of labor.

Love, Constance