The Future of Unions in the Trump Era



Comments (2)

Comment Feed

Perfect example.

Perfect example, of why labor is in decline. The positions you as leaders take, directly caused Friedrics v. California. Unions are groups of workers, standing together enforcing fairness and dignity in the workplace. When leadership picks sides on non labor issues, or tell us to fight for those that will not join us as brothers and sisters. You divide us, with nonsense. All the while the ACA cut Medicare reimbursement rates, increased our insurance rates, adds taxes to medical equipment, and caused employers to hire part-time. What is that doing for your members at the bargaining table? The fight for 15, rekindled a fire, for increased automation that is already killing jobs it was meant to help in fast food chains. If the labor movement is going to survive, Unions need to get back to the basics, and regain the trust of members first. Monthly meetings would be a start.

Dave Zalocha 53 days ago

Re: Mr. Gresham's op-ed on Labor's future

Mr. Gresham's piece lays out many of the challenges facing labor from without but does not focus on the challenges that lie within. To this end, I offer a couple of thoughts:

1. A union needs to practice what it preaches. Staff at Gresham's 1199, for example, are not members of their own union. As a result, many work 50-60+ hour weeks and have little recourse to challenge the union's leadership. The union may claim that the staff enjoys excellent benefits with no copays for insurance. But, in fact, the staff is paying for those benefits with paycheck deductions that the union calls membership "dues". If Mr. Gresham truly wants to talk about work empowerment, he should start in house with a neutrality agreement and a card check for a staff union.
2. While it is difficult, especially with such small memberships to identify, train and develop union leaders, there is little reason why a union cannot have more competitive in house elections. For example, Mr. Gresham has been in office 10+ yrs. Is there no one among his 300K+ membership that can fill his office as well as he can? This should be a test of a union's vibrancy...not only in how much members it has but how competitive its in house elections are. Perhaps, because of the lack of competitive elections, we have union leaders stuck in their ways and unwilling to think outside the box to rebuild labor.

mitch 55 days ago

Built with Metro Publisher™