I think it's time unions change their political spending. Any money they are donating to politicians is a complete waste at this point. I think they should take all political donations and redirect it to advertising to the public. Inform the voters and we may be able to save the unions.

Worth catching later on the video if one can't watch now.

<a href="http://imgur.com/wVlag"><img src="" title="Hosted by imgur.com" alt="" /></a>

Just be aware that corporatists look at it this way: take the union membership line from the graph in the OP and the productivity line from this graph and plot them on the same axes. Voila! An argument in favor of union-busting!

But I do think it makes sense to hammer a "fairness" argument about productivity - even conservatives (leaving aside perhaps the most fanatical social darwinists) will agree that productive work deserves to be rewarded, and this kind of graph shows that workers are receiving less and less fair compensation for their labor.

In other words productivity increases mean union labor decreases. Please don't be duped.

They only see to get the dollars, not the work done. Thus with sleigh of hand and paperwork tricks, they 'produce' fortunes that have nothing to do with what a working person calls producing anything.

They've destroyed the 'work ethic' and the concept of 'the value of honest work.' If they can make money by manipulating the system like Bain did by leverages and taking short term profits, stealing pensions, wages, facilities to get those dollars, they call that production.

All the while growth as most people were taught to understand, making things of value, does not exist in their model of productivity. Workers are closer to the actual creation of things, but no longer have power to be paid for doing it, as the labor market has been extended so far internationally that with the different cultures and countries, the LCD is slave labor.

I don't think fairness appeals to them, nor morals, not keeping society or the environment healthy. That's what I think, is that correct?

There is an old adage the productivity gains lead to increased wages, and I have for years been dismissing that as false. Collective bargaining leads to higher wages, and productivity is one of the levers that it used to achieve those higher wages. It says to management, "we will concede the things that lead to higher output per hour in exchange for a higher wage per hour."

What we are proving right now is that productivity in the absence of collective bargaining does not lead to higher wages, and is not the friend of working men and women.

Breaking the Air Traffic Controller union really soured worker relations. That is also about the time that pay for performance came into being. Only problem, there was no correlation between performance and pay -- only what the boss said it was so the money all went to senior management. The chart needs a 3rd line showing CEO compensation over that same period.

starting getting pissed off about how they're getting ripped off...

to rule them all !

rec'd this post.

That's one way to build unity!

I for one did!

When I was looking for a new car because my old American car broke down and I was out of a job...the only car company that would even consider giving me a loan was Mazda!

Thanks for playing.

and possibly has as much American labor as it's Ford equivalent.

I'm always amused by Ford Ranger Pickup owners who are so proud of their American Mazda B2xxx pickup.

Glad you found someone to sell you a brand new car when you were out of work and struggling. I can't imagine taking on such debt in that situation but that's for another post, isn't it?

But yes, proudly proclaim your foreign car purchase while claiming to support American labor! If anyone tells you that's hypocritical you just tell 'em "thanks for playing!1!" and you'll win!

Julie

I drive a Honda, built in America using American parts and labor. In fact it has a greater amount of American parts and labor involved in it's construction than most "American" cars.

Instead of attacking people, maybe you can suggest ways we can encourage the formation of unions and educating the voter so they vote for politicians that support that goal.

Sadly the foreign auto makers tend to build in right to work states and I'm unaware of them being unionized?

But yeah, Go Labor!1! or whatever.

Julie

Prison labor is considered, "Made In America", by the way.

Don

GM is using a Saab power train on many of it's models. Doesn't that bother you?

We can all throw stones in glass houses, but that's not going to fix a damn thing. Buying "American" doesn't necessarily mean your supporting unions.

I think we need to greatly expand the influence of unions and I think the best way start that process is to get unions to stop giving politicians (or lobbyists) money and spend that money advertising to the American people the value of unions instead.

Ideas, not attacks. DU needs a lot more of that.

and the difference between that and "unionism." The latter includes the former, but it also includes a whole panoply of add-ons, some of which are okay, and some of which are really destructive. Take this from a long time member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and a guy who is so much a supporter of collective bargaining that I believe it should be a requirement of incorporation.

For instance, it came to be very common that the people who were negotiating the contracts were not full time workers in the plants they were representing, but were "suits" hired by those workers to do the negotiating for them. That was part of the downfall of the unions, because those suits had an interest in making the negotiations as contentious as possible, and dragging them out as long as possible, to make themselves look good and "justify" their pay to the workers. They communicated inaccurately to the workers, misrepresented management offers, and fomented discord to their own benefit.

Contrast that with the recent non-strike by grocery workers in San Diego recently. The workers in the store remained on the job, cheerfully and efficiently serving customers during four months of difficult negotiations after they voted the authorization to strike if needed. The negotiations persevered and were successful in preventing a strike because the union negotiators were people who were current full time grocery workers taking time out from their jobs to negotiate in behalf of their coworkers. There was trust on both sides.

That is the way unionism should work, focused upon and preserving the collective bargaining process. Yes, management has been hostile to unions, but big unions sowed some of the seeds of their own destructions as well.

suits had an interest in making the negotiations as contentious as possible, and dragging them out as long as possible, to make themselves look good and "justify" their pay to the workers. They communicated inaccurately to the workers, misrepresented management offers, and fomented discord to their own benefit.

union negotiators were people who were current full time grocery workers

recent non-strike by grocery workers in San Diego recently. The workers in the store remained on the job, cheerfully and efficiently serving customers during four months of difficult negotiations after they voted the authorization to strike if needed. The negotiations persevered and were successful in preventing a strike because the union negotiators were people who were current full time grocery workers taking time out from their jobs to negotiate in behalf of their coworkers. There was trust on both sides.

That's why the suits were brought in.

I am not a Math nor statistical analyst major but:
What constitutes middle class and/or are all Union Members in the middle class?
The graph does not explain why union membership went down.
Did factories close? Were jobs shipped overseas? Was the union disbanded? Did Union workers go out and get non-union jobs? Did that industry go out of business?

Also I really don't understand what the "Middle Class Share of the National Income means? Is that public or private sector or both? Is that comparison correlated to include taxpayers or likely taxpayers or actual taxpayers? Where is that income Level started at and/ or capped at?
Is that income compared dollar for dollar to union members pay, who may or may not be middle class, making more or less money?

The last thing i would question is interchanging the term middle class with workers or even working class. What is the distinction and what constitutes these differences?
Someone said there are ""Lies, damned lies, and statistics",
I am not sure this graph illustrates what it claims as the lack of clear methodology is just not there.

It's pointless if it's not qualified. It's just because a meaningless phrase to keep the poor divided against themselves. This helps nothing.

Move in, get rid of the unions, squeeze payrolls down, turn employees against each other with attempts to save jobs they intend to get rid of anyway, sell off as much as we can. Make a huge profit and slowly drain it dry. Presto chango, America is a third world country populated by extreme poverty and obnoxious wealth.

Somehow, I don't think this is going to work here, but they're giving it a serious shot. When folks realize what's really happening to them, they'll wake up and put up a fight rich folks might not be ready for. You don't dog out the police and military and think you've got back up. Somehow, the rich don't concern themselves with that kind of thing. They need to know Americans love a fight, and fight they will.