They will not be getting a union for Christmas.
Last night, I finished season three of The Office, and in doing, got my life back. I started the series late last week, and found myself compulsively watching eight or ten episodes a day, even when, in the middle of season three, I realized I'd stopped enjoying myself. But I needed some gratification on the whole Jim/Pam issue. My week with Dundler-Mifflin was not, I hasten to say, the result of a search for labor policy insights. But a couple came along the way. In one episode, the warehouse employees decide to unionize, and are quickly greeted with a visit from Janet, the corporate rep. Her speech is about as honest and clear a distillation of the the realities of union organizing that it's worth reproducing in full:"I am told that there has been some interest in forming a union and that Michael supported it. Obviously, he is not a friend of yours because he didn't tell you the facts; so let me. If there is even a whiff of unionizing in this branch, I can guarantee you that the branch will be shut down like that. They unionized in Pittsfield, and we all know what happened in Pittsfield. It will cost each of you a fortune in legal fees and union dues and that will be nothing compared to the cost of losing your jobs, so I would think long and hard before sacrificing your savings and your future just to send a message."Man, fiction sure is brutal, huh? Actually, no. About 49 percent of employers openly threaten to close down a worksite when faced with a unionization drive. Untold more tell individual workers, in captive meetings, that jobs will be lost. 30 percent make good on the threat in real time, firing workers who engage in union activities. 82 percent hire unionbusting consulting firms which teach them how to most effectively shutter a union drive while either technically staying in the limits of the law, or breaking it in such a way that the gains will outweigh the eventual fines. (These numbers, and many more, in this pdf report.)You hear a fair amount of talk about card check -- also known as the Employee Free Choice Act -- and you hear a lot of folks on the Right earnestly wring their hands over the idea that if workers sign cards in order to unionize, they will be intimidated! Pressured! The sanctity of the secret vote will be shattered! Which would all be fair enough, if these same folks evinced even an ounce of concern that workers are currently being threatened, intimidated, and even fired if they dare try and organize. There are a lot of halfway points between card check elections and the current system, but the space we're currently occupying is brutal, and makes an utter mockery of the idea of elections. Hearing the status quo defended as free and fair is like imagining a presidential election where you can vote however you'd like, but anyone who votes against the incumbent party is informed they will lose all access to Social Security, Medicare, and the protection of their local police and fire departments. Also, they'll be audited. But nevertheless: Folks can vote however they want.Image used under a Creative Commons license from Doobybrain.
