I hope we see more of it. Broadening out to community groups seems to be the trend. And who says that this can't lead to further unionism?

The unions are so limited in what they can do so this kind of organizing is vital. It goes back to the issue of repealing Taft-Hartley to cut the hand cuffs off and give the unions more of a fighting chance. It also ties in with that recent People's World article you posted talking about 'big picture unionism'. How to make a sense of common purpose and class solidarity across all the various smaller organizations that are springing up. And from there more coordination between the groups to really push forward on class issues, like repealing Taft-Hartley, real universal health care, debt reform, and stuff like that.

Another speaker at the talk I went to in LA said that short-term alliances used to be all the unions would do, but now there is a push for permanent relationships. Community councils with union leaders, church leaders, worker coalitions that are non-union putting leaders on there, are starting to be more common.

There was just a big project that happened with the rehab of the Port of Oakland with the old military base. It went from a top-down plan from the politicians that included some tone-deaf proposals like an amusement park, to a community-driven partnership that is bringing a new shipping distribution center to the area.

Building trade unions worked with the community and together they banned the requirement that workers with felonies on their record have to report that status on job applications, a demand that jobs in the site are all living wage jobs, and an apprenticeship program for young people in the neighborhoods. Most of the jobs are required to be nearly all priority local hire too. There was more, but those are the biggies. Oh, and an oversight council that will make sure these things are honored, with people from all the groups who worked together.

More unions are taking this project as a model for how to do sustained permanent projects in communities. It's really amazing! </labor nerd>

That's always effective. We build what we can under capitalism as workers, to resist the complete takeover by fascism, which is a danger in the phase we are in with acute crisis all over the globe.

I'm in the labor movement. It's slow, it requires patience and a willingness to keep slogging away.

The labor leaders of today are far more progressive than Gompers. The programs unions are working on now are not only for union members at all, but issues like immigration and voting rights.

If one is looking for overnight changes, then no, that isn't going to happen. The development of capitalism in every state has a different trajectory and stage of development. Different sectors of workers have different needs at this time.

People are becoming more aware of the nature of their exploitation. It is our job to struggle with them to get what they need to keep strong and keep fighting, and to put the struggle into context.

Otherwise, what are we here for?

If they felt it was insignificant they wouldn't bother.

I can't answer your questions. The only way to know how it works is to be in there in the struggle.

We all might want something else. Like workers control of the means of production, or however one phrases it. But we have no power. In order to get there people would first need to organize to build the kind of workers power and community power that would make it possible for people to picture other alternatives. So that's how I read the article. It's just people getting organized.

But there does seem to be a danger of getting caught in some kind reformist trap. Just try not to get stuck in that I guess. I don't think there's any way of really getting around step of organizing around work issues like getting sick days and overtime pay, more money, stuff like that. But to avoid getting stuck on just that stuff, people have to do the additional steps of also trying to put the effort in a more big-picture perspective, building class awareness, and stitching the various local groups together somehow.

In other words, think globally, act locally.

ymmv, I'm just saying it as one idea.

and labor was willing to take a little bit more than the meager share they got in the past century, unions could survive from the largesse. So business, the government they bought, and their friends at the "business unions" like the AF of L killed off or ruined most of those who threatened to actually teach the workers something other than doing what they were told, including a few communists. And here we are, with a huge surplus of labor here for which there are no jobs, and forecasts showing this extending to at least 2020, with wage depression continuing for millions of people. Organizing into that as opposed to a manufactured prosperity is likely to be fruitless over the long term.

I was talking with someone who said they were picketing a factory which was likely to close down, losing their jobs. I asked what their plan was, they said if this closes they will go to the next one until it closes. Etc.

Sad. Seems like at least trying to pool their resources and see if they can figure out some kind of cooperative effort might be a better way? Similar to a Mondragon Cooperative, perhaps, but a version that works in the U.S..

Unless workers get equal with people who own the assets, which won't happen until workers own assets as well, this is little more than a merry-go-round. I guess one could keep thinking they can vote their way to success, pound themselves on the back for a successful campaign. But while they are doing that the wealthy are walking away with the bank, even today.

So I was just trying to learn what different people's goals are in organizing.

I do wonder if unions could create math, biology, engineering colleges (something that would help in our future) all over, free or really low cost, train up all their members in the R&D that might bring them some real competitiveness. Maybe even open little community manufacturing facilities where a business plan shows it's feasible. Their competition, (everyone's competition) is now global. Regardless of what they do, there is a better option than the several unions who had to turn out their lights.

Thanks.

people should take over ownership and managing their workplaces. Without that we're always going to be stuck. How to get there is the tricky part I guess.

Business courses, future stuff, robotics, hydraulics, communication, finance - aka "how to steal from working people 101", STEM kinds of things, learning labs, loose, freely in the community. Figure out some kind of funding mechanism free from the financiers and they could open like free roaming intact cats breed. Oh, and start a credit union that agrees with your philosophy, unless you can get a fair voice in one that already exists.

We have money to fund it with. Instead of our Administration and Congress paying wealthy people $40 billion a month so their mortgage-backed assets won't fail while we yank 50,000 families out of their homes each month, and giving banks interest-free loans so they make money by finding ways to take it from those who really earned it while the number of working poor and those on food stamps increase, we could finance something like that with those funds, eh?

Put people ahead of the dollar like Lincoln suggested.