US comrades position

[marx_was_right]

Could someone explain the position of the US comrades on trade unions and mass organisations as ive never yet managed to find out :cool:

 igor

[DrUSA]

Hey comrade!  Here is an excerpt from our US Perspectives document of 2002 (http://www.socialistappeal.org/documents/us_perspectives_2002.html):

The Trade Unions and the Labor Movement

With two bourgeois parties dominating the political scene, and alternative parties not yet strong enough to make a difference in national politics, the trade unions are in many ways the traditional mass organizations of the US working class. If a mass party of labor is to arise in the US, it must have the support of at least the major unions - a major and debilitating deficiency of the current Labor Party. The trade union movement in the United States has an extremely militant history, with the formative years of the CIO and the Teamsters an example to workers everywhere. In the absence of a established mass party of labor, many workers rely on their unions to defend their economic interests, and often turn to them for political guidance as well. Yet in recent years, the unions have on the whole been passive in the face of attacks on the working class generally.

There have been a number of contractual gains in the airline industry, but most of these have been resolved without the need for strike action and a public showdown between the unions and companies. But despite a handful of heroic struggles among some unionized workers (UPS and Overnite for example), organized workers in traditional industries have been largely inactive. Much of the new militancy has come from newly unionized workers in the service sector, especially among immigrant workers, many of them who are in the US illegally.

The labor bureaucracy acts as a colossal barrier to the forward movement of organized workers, tied as it is to the bourgeois parties and corporate interests. As Jim Smith of L.A. Labor News explains, “it is characterized by a “top-down” decision-making structure, relatively high salaries for those on the top and low salaries at the bottom, an ever expanding staff at the top levels, a reduction in autonomy at lower levels (think trusteeship), an exclusionary structure, a broad agreement with corporate political goals and an intolerance for democratic dissent at all levels.”

Inevitably, due to pressure from below, and in order to keep their lucrative positions, these bureaucrats are forced to fight for the membership. They are sometimes forced to talk and even act tough. Many may eventually adopt more and more aggressive and anti-boss rhetoric. But ultimately, the present leaders of the trade unions cannot solve the problems of the working class. They are wedded to the capitalist class and offer no alternative to the working class except to support the Democrats as a “lesser evil”. These union bosses are doing well for themselves by maintaining harmony between the capitalists and the workers, and are in no rush to change the status quo. In the recent period there have been some outright betrayals by the leadership, with little being done to stop the massive layoffs we have seen over the past years, especially among higher-paid unionized workers. Ultimately, this reflects their deep-seated lack of confidence in the working class’ ability to change society.

The restructuring of industry over the last twenty years or so has not been a revolution. It was a response to the present stage of general stagnation of world capitalism. The markets have not been growing at the same pace as during the post-war upswing, and the capitalists, in order to keep up their profit margins, along with the help of new technology, have been cutting everything there is to cut - the workforce, wages, breaks, warehouse stocks - with speed-ups, longer hours, etc.

Many rank and file union members have already begun to move to the left of the leadership, and it is inevitable that at some point they will come into open conflict, including on the issue of support for the Democratic Party. Many have already begun to mobilize in various TU democracy movements, and are beginning to assert their dissatisfaction by removing some of the more reactionary leaders from the ground up, and are working to expand the unions and organize new layers. But it is still early days in this process, and it is not all smooth sailing.

The defeat of Tom Leedham’s campaign to replace Teamsters boss Jimmy Hoffa Jr. is an example of the tenacity of the bosses, but also of the resolve of many workers to fight back. As Eric Robertson a UPS shop steward and member of the Teamsters for a Democratic Union explains, “in the last international election, 108,389(35.13%) of the Teamsters voted for Tom Leedham and the rank and file power slate’s program of aggressive organizing, rank and file mobilization and rejection of business unionism. While he lost, the campaign put out a powerful conception of how our union should be run and got a significant show of support from the rank and file. TDU serves as a model for several other reform movements in various unions that have been successful in some like ATU (the transit union) in winning local elections and shaking up things, like in New York in particular.” We can expect this general process to continue over the coming period, and must participate and report on it when possible.

The capitalist class will not stand still and allow workers to organize without a struggle. They use the most dishonest and misleading tactics in trying to discourage unionization, even at the expense of their own immediate profits. They would rather close down a new workplace than allow a union to develop and sink in its roots, especially among large-scale national employers like WalMart which is second only to the federal government as in terms of workers employed. They use the same “national unity” rhetoric of President Bush in order to get workers to believe they have shared interests with the bosses. They also have the backing of reactionary anti-worker laws like Taft-Hartley, and “right to work” legislation in many states to hamper efforts at unionization. During the 2000 election the union bosses forced workers to rally in support of Gore, and even to attack Nader supporters, threatening their jobs if they didn’t actively support the Democrats.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, union membership in 2001 was at 13.5 percent, the same level as in 2000, and down from it’s high of 20.1 percent in 1983, the first year for which comparable union data is available. This translates into16.3 million unionized wage and salary workers. Nearly 4 in 10 government workers were union members as compared to less than 1 in 10 in the private sector. Protective service workers, a group that includes police officers and firefighters, had the highest unionization rate among all occupations, at 38 percent.

Continued....

[DrUSA]

Continued...

Although absolute numbers of unionized workers are stagnant, due largely to the huge slashing of payrolls in recent years, interest in unionization is high. Numerous polls show that workers favor having a union by a large majority. A recent poll by the Associated Press demonstrated approval for unions runs by a nearly 3-1 ratio, roughly the same as in recent years but higher than 20 years ago, when it was at a ratio of 2-1. Along with better job security and collective bargaining, unions offer pecuniary proof of their value for members. In 2001, full-time wage and salary union members had median usual weekly earnings of $718, compared with a median of $575 for wage and salary workers who were not represented by unions.

Although is appears that not many workers are actually organized in unions, they do represent an extremely powerful organized force for the working class generally. We must also pay attention to the situation of those who are not yet unionized. Companies purposely avoid hiring full time workers so as to avoid the costs of benefits. During the last boom, the temp agencies were the fastest growing employers in the country. In many service-sector companies, there are huge concentrations of workers in one workplace whose conditions of life are now very much like those of traditional factory workers. And for the tens of thousands working in fast food the conditions are often far worse. The pressure of these jobs, most of them non-union and with few benefits, will result inevitably in an explosion. It is important that strong links be built between the established unions and those seeking to form them.

Other important initiatives with union support such as the various Living Wage Campaigns, Jobs With Justice, the Farm Labor Organizing Committee, etc. are important in mobilizing non-union workers and involving local communities. These campaigns could eventually create openings for our tendency, especially since the bureaucracy does not directly control them. We should also note the development of “extra-union” workers’ movements. For example, the proliferation of “Workers Centers” particularly among communities of workers who have difficulty unionizing, such as undocumented workers and day laborers.

As the economic position of millions of workers continues to worsen or stagnate, things on the trade union front will heat up. Workers and even their pro-capitalist leaders will be forced to fight back to defend the small gains they have made or at the very least maintained over the past 20 years. One example of the simmering discontent and willingness to fight among organized workers is the Teamsters of UPS. Their last strike in 1997 was militant, energetic, generally supported by the wider population and above all successful in securing better wages and conditions. Their contract ends soon and some 90 percent have voted to go out on strike if an agreement is not reached by the deadline. A major action like this would serve as an inspiration to many other workers, both organized and unorganized. The workers want a share of the wealth they created during the boom, yet with profits at dismal levels, big business will not be willing or able to grant many concessions. This will lead eventually to sharp struggles.

It is vital that we follow the development of the rank and file resistance to the pro-boss leadership, and that we join and participate in unions, extra-union movements, unionization campaigns and their struggles whenever possible. A mass political alternative to the dominant bourgeois parties is essential, but unions remain the front line of defense for many workers, and will be an essential source of support for a mass political party genuinely fighting in the interests of the working class.

[davem34 UK]

Comrades, I send you a message of support in a personal capacity from the PCS (Public & Commercial Services Union) over here in the UK.

We represent members across the UK civil service, from the Inland Revenue to The Home Office, Immigration and Nationality Directorate which is where I am based.

We are currently beginning negotiations in the 2003 pay round, pay being a major issue with the lower admin grades earning as little as £11,129 per annum. In fact many of our members have to claim top up security benefits as salaries are so bad.

many of us to not even take home enough to buy or run our own homes, and with the attacks of privatisation. Outsourcing as they like to call it, the situation has become untenable.

I have been a marxist for many years, and welcome the development of the technology that allows us to communicate across continents. I believe this technology has made it easier than ever to sink roots within the worker's movements in the UK, the US and internationally.

The collapse of stalinism, as we predicted back in the 1980's has removed what opposition there was in the world to capitalism, and world capitalism is now beginning to show it's true colours. The war on Iraq being the latest episode. Our leader in the UK Mr. Tony Blair blindly follows Mr Bush in the hope that UK Multi-Nationals will be thrown a few crumbs when Iraq is conquered and the US Imperialist, puppet regime has been put in place.

It is of course no co-incidence that Iraq has the second biggest oil reserves on the planet. Rich pickings in the award of contracts from a future regime subserviant to imperialist interests.

We must band together, and oppose all these reactionary developments on a world scale, by building a mass movement internationally based on the ideas of scientific socialism, in other words of marxism. It is our duty to agitate, explain and educate the working classes of our respective countries for the coming battles ahead, and continually educate and arm ourselves with the correct ideas, in order that we can eventually carry through the socialist transformation of society, not only in the UK and the US, but internationally. Then we can evolve as a race and move to the next level of human endeavour.

We have nothing to lose but our chains. Forward to socialism.