If we had a strong union movement ?

But it is damn near impossible because many people survive from one paycheck ot the next. They cannot afford to take time off from work. It is not by accident. Corporations and employers know they have their employees captive, either by the wages or by their healthcare benefits. Few can stand to lose either for any amount of time. There is a "crisis' in American labor.

Imagine if call centers and the service industries could unionize? It would so focus the companies on their own bottom line that they might change their present tactics of exploitation and wage slavery. CEOs would not be able to make the big bucks they now make. Some of their salaries would have to be distributed to the employees that deserve it more than they.

But, realistically, I do not see the possibilities of anything like that happening in the near future. The American worker is operating under the burden of a heavy yoke. And if they complain, their company will simply move their jobs to Indonesia or someplace else.

brutally honest. We don't have time for sentiment these days. If union movement want to stop Wal-mart then they need to work with government that ends up subsidizing Wal-Mart employees for how horridly they are paid. Unions need to adapt & find that third way. Part of it is employees buying their business (if it is a good one). All sorts of newer tools need to happen too.

Would that be perhaps more of a "political" strategy than one of "organizing" new workers? Perhaps utilize their present power in more effective way politically?

the future. Who is to say that labour unionist, who represent the worker who do not always vote democrat, cannot turn into banks for start up of small business, or turn into buying groups for health care and drug buying across the world. The world is changing and Unions need to find how to fight inequality in new ways.

That is all i am saying.

Central Pennsylvania is chock full of "Teamsters" who vote their guns and don't get it that they are voting against their own family's financial security. I've had countless arguments with many of my brothers regarding this and they simply spew the latest rhetoric they heard from right-wing radio land.

similar to the Thirties. Immediately after WW I, Big Business assisted by government, essentially destroyed the militant labor movement (IWW) and pretty well terrorized the mainstream labor movement (AFL) into a defensive (and losing) position. (The independent Railroad Brotherhoods don't play a major part in this simplification). By the Thirties, the AFL was pretty well irrelevant to most working people. From that, evolved the higly successful CIO. The AFL survived (and even prospered) By imitating the CIO.

I'm not sure we're at the point where such a fissure is needed. Sweeney appears to be planning on stepping down, and his successor will most likely be Trumka. I see much hope in Trumka, but have much DOUBT as to the motives, sincerity, and integrity of some of his challengers --- PARTICULARLY Hoffa Junior.

pnorman

In the 70's the AFT represented many city districts leading them in strikes, those actually resulted in better pay, and in Kansas City kept the nurses and P.E. teachers in the buildings. NEA wasn't into that at the time, I believe.

Now, however, the unions tend to protect the teachers, which is fine, but the other piece of that is to fight for better teacher preparation and support, and better classroom conditions for teachers and students. We don't see enough of that. Education is doing fine by 1950's standards, but those days are so long gone they are back there with the McGuffey Reader days.

Drastically different approaches are needed for struggling communities and their schools. The unions need to step up to the bat and make this a real ball game.

In the Denver Post last week was an article about how the police union was pressing for better equipment and training for one of the local forces. That was a breath of fresh air. They were actually discussing the things that local law enforcement need to address "homeland" security issues. Better communication between entities, training and equipment are things that support security but also make general police work more efficient. The recent fiasco in Aurora in the Brent J.Brents case underscores the importance of this effort.

If the unions can step back and gain a broader view of the problems facing their members, they will be the better for it. Also, health care, affordable housing, child care, and access to a good education system are things that all workers need. Just focusing on the employer to provide these probably isn't the best way to advocate for the members. IMHO :-)

they are also losing some of their old allies such as environmental groups. Increasingly in the hopes of adding temporary jobs unions have been sending representatives to show up at public and technical hearings and testify in favor of coal-fired plants and other anti-environmental projects. A few years back I think they still officially came out opposed to drilling in the Artic but this issue is soon to surface again.