Immigration vs. labor is a false dilemma.

It is time to update the database.

The "immigrants vs. American workers" thing is as bogus as "civil liberties vs. security." Yes, corporations want a guest-worker program because they want to keep their labor costs down. Yes, owners and employers routinely avoid paying a living wage to their workers by exploiting undocumented immigrants who can't afford to protest their dangerous working conditions, long hours, low pay, and lack of benefits. Yes, one of the things that traditionally blocks the progress of labor is the fact that there is always a poorer, more desperate, more exploitable population that can be brought into the country to do the same work for less money. The manufacturing sector has dealt with labor costs by exporting jobs to the third world; the service sector has dealt with them by bringing the third world to the jobs. That's not the immigrants' fault; that's capital's fault.

The solution to this problem is not to turn on the immigrants. People will continue to come into this country, legally or illegally, as long as it's better for them here than it is in their home countries. The more useful and less painful way to approach this problem is to say, sure, go ahead and bring in your guest workers--and we will organize them.

That, at least, is the attitude that now seems to be prevailing in the unions that are organizing in the service sector. It drives me nuts to see people just assuming that immigrants are always going to be scabs when I know from the stories my partner tells me that many of the people who are helping organize the housekeepers, the custodians, the waitresses, and fight for a living wage and fair working conditions for people in jobs which have traditionally exposed them to being treated like dirt by management and customers alike are recently-arrived immigrants. It is dangerous for anyone to get involved in organizing and it's even more dangerous for people who are always vulnerable to harassment by the INS. But they do it, and their courage and determination in putting their jobs and their futures on the line to make things better for their brothers and sisters is an inspiration and an admonishment to me.

The problem is coming from the top, not the bottom. When I was doing my union-themed 40 Ways entry a couple days ago I called my partner up to ask her whether something I was planning to say about the Taft-Hartley act outlawing sympathetic strikes was right. She said no, the Taft-Hartley act doesn't outlaw sympathetic strikes. But, she said, I'll tell you what the real problem is with strikes in this country: the National Labor Relations Board has decided to allow companies to permanently replace striking workers. This, according to her, should be considered a coercive practice and therefore illegal under the National Labor Relations Act--but the NLRB, dominated as it is by Republican appointees, doesn't choose to interpret the law that way. So as soon as union local goes on strike, the company is free to hire as many replacement workers as it wants, thanks to its friends in Washington.

This is the kind of thing we should focus on changing--the roadblocks that have been generated since the 1930s to make it harder and harder for workers to organize and harder and harder for unions to make a real impact. The manufacturing sector in America is dying fast, with or without a guest worker program, because everything that can be sent to Mexico or China or Indonesia has already been sent there. The only thing that's going to bring those jobs back to the US is either--as we like to say in the Plaidder household--HUGELY PUNITIVE TARIFFS!, or an increase in the global standard of living that makes overseas labor more expensive. I don't see either happening any time soon, though we might hope. The service industries, however, cannot be outsourced; you cannot ship a hotel room to China. Organizing those workers is the real future of labor in America and it cannot be done without the active participation and leadership of workers who have come to this country as immigrants.

The problem comes from the top, not the bottom. The rules are made at the top. If you turn on the people below you because you're afraid they will steal the pittance that has been allotted to you, all you're doing is accepting big capital's terms. As long as you accept the rules, you will never change the outcome of the game.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

have succeeded in pissing everyone off.

I think I'll go do something I can actually do -- like walk dogs or watch television.

yeah, I've said it too, again and again, that the problem is CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATISM. Offshoring and the importation of easily exploited Mexicans who have the effect of driving down wages for Americans are only the symptoms. The disease is expecting a free ride on the backs of exploited workers, wherever they are.

There is so much at play in this whole topic, (not the least of which is political exploitation of emotions on the part of BushCo) that I think it's extra important that we focus and redouble our efforts to listen to one another, and be responsible for any strong emotions and anger we may feel as we reach out for consensus.

We are not each others enemy, though it does appear Bush is striving, with some success, to have us turn on one another.

I hope hope hope they don't succeed.

calm down as perspective is gained. I think posts like PA's here help that along. The more the better.

People are economically fearful these days and Bush is looking to scapegoat, much as--what do ya know--adolph did in Germany when the economy was sinking.

Focusing on the REAL problems that comes from the top (thank you, Plaid) is really the only way around this. BushCo has gutted our economy on many levels and wants us to blame someone else.

The legal issues and protecting families already here are not out of the realm of fair and decent resolution, but we'll never get from point A to point B when everyone is angry, unfocused, and actually being fooled by the shitheads in Washington.

You've been doing yeoman duty, sfexpat2000. :-) have a nice relaxing dinner, treat yourself well-you know we can work all this out.

You know, I've noticed that you do a great job no matter what forum you're in! :-)

:)

:D :hug:

It's obvious the problem comes from the top, not the bottom, but most people are cowards and are afraid to take a stand against Goliath. Instead, they rather pick on the peasants beneath them because they are easy targets.

It's really human nature where the middle manager gets bitched out by the corporate boss, so he takes it out on his worker, who has to take it, but he is so mad that he gets home and yells at his wife for not giving him dinner on time. She just takes it, but is also mad, so she slaps her kid across the face when he eats with his mouth full. He, in turn, goes outside after dinner and kicks the dog around.

The following day, nobody can understand why the dog insists on tearing up the yard.

When people are afraid, you know what happens. There is no creativity, there is no really good problem solving.

There is reactivity.

I can't quite give the opposition credit for being smart enough to do this, but most days, I'm not sure they haven't.

/s

I feel very upset with some of the posts I have read on DU about this. It's like the same points are recycled depending on which demographic is the devil at the time.

:thumbsup: and an Recommend.

To be sure you are living in a market where low end labor is in short supply due to the lack of housing for them. Even immigrants are only willing to stack themselves so deep to work as janitors.

Out here in the hinterlands it's understood that there are places where the immigrants can live or camp as long as they don't cause trouble. Out here we can barely get our hospital workers organized. It's not like the hospital can close for a month while they starve the workers out. Hell even when we won the union election they just ignore the union.

So until "organized labor" gets organized enough to make sure that nobody goes hungry, freezes, or gets evicted during a strike I think that plans just a bit too much like wishfull thinking.

I propose we attack employers of illegals with ferocity and tenacity UNTIL they pay all of their workers a union wage and benefits. Then we attack retailers who import slave labor goods unitil THOSE workers are getting US market wages.

Of course given the complete lack of vigor with which americans protect their rights we can wait for hell to freeze over before any of this has an effect.

effective. Labor laws passed during the Reagan/Bush years have weakened the bargaining power the unions used to have back in the fifties.

Ay!

and wait for market forces to "trickle down" the wealth into marginally higher wages, the "Fortress 'Murka" approach to immigration is just wishful thinking.

but living in their homeland. They come here to give their kids and themselves a better life, but long for home--at least that's what I hear from the immigrants I work with.

The same forces which have destroyed organized labor in this country have made third world countries barely livable.

The composition of the current NLRB is a major thread to American workers, as far as I'm concerned. I'm currently on strike because Bush's NLRB has overturned the ruling that I am even a worker with worker's rights. Our shop is simply fighting for the right to negotiate.

The immigrants are not the problem. We need laws that protect them from exploitation. The corporations are the problem.

:thumbsup:

:kick:

labor." As a person who has concerns about the exploitation of workers, I want to be sure that the issue is properly stated before I comment. The reason illegal vs legal immigrants are problematic is because people/corporations can prey on illegals and the rest of us are left to compete with the exploited.

However, I agree the problem starts at the top and must be addressed from that perspective. That is something our legislators appear to be missing? Raising fines for regulations that are not enforced is lip service - period. Republicans are talking about making it a felony to cross the border for work. What about making it a felony to hire an illegal immigrant? Why, we'd never suggest such a thing - would we!?

That said: If we want a "guest worker" program, lets first determine what the "jobs americans wont do" are ... and next, bring these workers through a union giving them rights and access to organizations that will protect them and our own working conditions/wages. Heck the unions could bring these people on buses so they wouldn't have to die in the desert trying to make it to the "promise land."

I do agree with Dean and yourself that illegal immigrants have become the scapegoat in this issue and they are not the problem, predatory employers are. And as you said the fix is at the top.

unregulated immigration vs the US economy.
And this doesn't even consider the problems with
the increased load on our rapidly decreasing social services.
Supporting unregulated immigration is supporting a
cheap labor marketplace for all -illegal immigrants and Americans alike.

turn it around, the Republicans aren't the answer and todays Democratic party has pretty much abandoned labor in favor of the Corporations. George Bush 41 couldn't get enough Democratic votes to push NAFTA through so Clinton gets it passed with the Republicans help. We were told NAFTA would help bring the wages up in Mexico and it would solve the illegal immigration problem. Ohio for example has lost 300,000 manufacturing jobs do to NAFTA, that translates into at least 300,000 votes the Democratic party lost in this state. West virginia had voted Democratic forever until the party abandoned labor now they are solidly Republican, that state alone would have been a given for Gore and a vicory in 2000 if not for NAFTA.

This gets to the heart of the matter.

Policies from the top affect and lately more and more afflict those at the bottom, who sometimes turn on each other to fight for scraps instead of banding together to demand fair policies for all. And it has become more difficult to do this as unions have been attacked and weakened ever since the Reagan years.

How many times in recent years have we heard of the astronomical raises or bonuses given to executives by themselves even as the workers in these same companies take pay cuts, lose health benefits and see their pension prospects disappear.

I saw this just recently and was struck not only by how wrong it is , but also by how common it has become:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/261936_airlinelabor07.html

Manager bonuses rankle American Airlines pilots
'There is a considerable busting of trust'


American, based in Fort Worth, Texas, is the only airline among the five largest U.S. carriers never to have sought bankruptcy protection. The company averted filing for Chapter 11 in 2003 after workers approved $1.8 billion in wage, job and benefit cuts. AMR reported losses totaling more than $8.1 billion during the past five years.

Unions representing American's pilots, flight attendants and mechanics filed grievances in January over planned payments to 973 managers. The bonuses violate a 2003 agreement with the company and are tied to a measure that doesn't accurately reflect executive performance, the unions said.

The bonuses, tied to AMR's share performance since 2003, would make payments ranging from $2,177 for some middle managers to $1.92 million for one executive, based on AMR's closing stock price of $24.88 a share Friday. The final amount won't be determined until next month.


And now:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/3763585.html

American alters bonus plan

American Airlines changed a plan that would have paid executives more than $104 million in cash bonuses to one that awards a mix of stock and cash after unions objected to the payments.

Fort Worth-based American, the world's largest airline, made the change Friday as it waited for an arbitrator's decision on whether the cash payments violated a 2003 agreement that limited such bonuses. The cash portion for any manager under the new plan won't exceed the 20 percent limit in the agreement, American spokesman Tim Smith said.

Total bonus amounts won't change, he said.

Ralph Hunter, president of the Allied Pilots Association, said in a message to union members that "it appears we have achieved the best possible outcome over a highly contentious issue."


So, the union workers have been asked to give up so much, yet the execs turn around and make a money grab. The union tries to fight this, but the best it can do is to keep the execs from getting it all in cash.


It's all blatantly unfair at the root of it and we've been seeing and experiencing similar situations more and more, but when people feel powerless to fight the people at the top, they'll lash out at someone closer to hand.

Thank you for pointing out the root of the problem and examining genuine solutions.

"Don't mourn. Organize."

It's surprising how many 'DU-ers' don't see it.