Volume 16, Issue 2: May 2007




Table of Contents | From the Editors | Abstracts                        Down

Free Labor Today

By James Gray Pope, Peter Kellman, & Ed Bruno

Imagine the gun rights movement without the Second Amendment, and you get some idea how strange it is for the labor movement to be limping along without the Thirteenth. Until the 1950s, the Thirteenth Amendment—known then as “The Glorious Labor Amendment”—sustained workers’ rights in much the same way that the Second Amendment supports gun rights today. When employers or the government interfered with the rights to organize and strike, labor leaders and activists invoked the Thirteenth Amendment. They declared yellow-dog contracts, labor injunctions, and antistrike laws unconstitutional. They sought labor rights legislation to enforce the Amendment. If the American Federation of Labor had had its way, the Norris-LaGuardia Anti-Injunction Act would have commenced with this declaration:

Every human being has under the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States an inalienable right to the disposal of his labor free from interference, restraint or coercion by or in behalf of employers of labor, including the right to associate with other human beings for the protection and advancement of their common interests as workers, and in such association to negotiate through representatives of their own choosing concerning the terms of employment and conditions of labor, and to take concerted action for their own protection in labor disputes.

Like the gun rights movement today, the old labor movement did not turn to the Constitution expecting court victories in the short run. Nor did the movement use the Constitution to appear more respectable in the eyes of “the public.” Instead, workers and unions invoked their constitutional rights in order to mobilize supporters, stiffen their resolve, justify confrontational and even illegal tactics, and signal elites that workers were fighting over issues of fundamental principle that would not be traded away for a wage hike. Beginning in 1909, it was the official policy of the American Federation of Labor that a worker confronted with an unconstitutional injunction had an “imperative duty” to “refuse obedience and to take whatever consequences may ensue.” Every attack on workers’ rights was met with an impassioned defense of the constitutional rights to organize and strike. When the state of Kansas banned strikes in key industries, for example, the AFL declared the law unconstitutional and ten thousand coal miners staged a four-month protest strike. Conservative business unionists like Samuel Gompers backed radicals like Alex Howat, the Kansas miners’ fiery leader, in their open defiance of "unconstitutional" laws.

Many intellectuals—including some who claimed to be “friends of labor”—joined employers in pooh-poohing the movement’s Thirteenth Amendment claims. They pointed to the text of the Amendment, which states: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” How in the world, they sneered, could workers be in a condition of “slavery” or “involuntary servitude” when they enjoyed the individual right to quit their jobs? But labor leaders and activists held firm and insisted that without the rights to organize and strike, workers could not be free.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Immigrant Rights and the Thirteenth Amendment

By Maria L. Ontiveros

When thousands of immigrants and immigrant rights supporters took to the streets on May 1, 2006, it felt like the coming-of-age of a social movement akin to the civil rights movement of the 1950s-60s or the labor movement of the 1930s-40s. Just as sanitation workers in Memphis, supported by Martin Luther King, Jr., carried signs proclaiming “I Am a Man” to support their fight for labor, civil, and human rights, immigrant rights groups have also invoked a range of moral justifications. Immigrant rights groups speak about human rights, workers’ rights, citizenship rights, and civil rights. Immigrants, especially immigrant workers and their families, might as well draw on the language of the Thirteenth Amendment.

The Thirteenth Amendment provides a compelling moral and analytical description of the immigrant rights issue. A case can be made that that the Amendment prohibits abusive work relationships that interfere with workers’ rights, citizenship rights, human rights, and civil rights in ways similar to the institution of chattel slavery. Currently, two labor arrangements affecting immigrant workers arguably violate this holistic vision of the Thirteenth Amendment—the limited remedies available to undocumented workers and the treatment of “guest workers” on temporary visas.

Moreover, the Thirteenth Amendment offers an organizational bridge connecting citizenship rights groups with liberal constituencies focusing on workers rights, human rights, and civil rights. The Amendment’s history, social meaning, and case law weave together and highlight the interrelatedness of these four key rights. Too often they are advanced independently by four different groups. Labor unions and other labor organizations currently advocate for workers’ rights. Immigrant rights groups focus on citizenship rights. Various human rights organizations, including “nongovernmental organizations,” fight on behalf of enslaved workers, trafficked workers, and workers employed in coercive work relationships. Finally, civil rights groups combat discrimination against racial or ethnic minorities. The time is ripe to bring these constituencies together, and the Thirteenth Amendment provides the means to do so.

Contrary to popular belief, the Thirteenth Amendment goes far beyond the elimination of chattel slavery as practiced in the South prior to the Civil War. Its prohibitions against “slavery and involuntary servitude” sought both to rid the country of an immoral, inhumane social system and to eliminate oppressive labor arrangements. By ending slavery, it sought to help the slaves and improve society by eliminating certain types of evils, which we currently think of as human rights or civil right violations, such as the selling of human beings, forced labor, lack of family autonomy, and racial inequality.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Why Labor Needs a Plan B: Alternatives to Conventional Trade Unionism

By Janice Fine

The recent consolidation of democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (albeit by only one vote in the Senate) has revived the fortunes of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), the labor movement’s signature proposal for labor law reform which would reinvigorate the Wagner Act by enshrining card check recognition into law. No one really expects the president to sign it and there may not be enough votes in the Senate for it to pass there, but labor has placed EFCA at the very top of its legislative agenda in order to open up a much broader conversation about how impossible it has become for workers to choose unions, and to make clear that it expects this democratic congress to be accountable to its chief benefactors.

The firing of workers during union organizing drives has become a daily, in fact an hourly occurrence. According to American Rights at Work (ARAW), every twenty-three minutes, in the United States, a worker is fired or discriminated against for her support of union organizing. While vicious employer opposition is a main reason that unions are struggling, it is not the sole culprit. The mismatch between union models and contemporary business and industry structures as well as the mismatch between union models, firm structures, and New Deal labor and employment laws are major obstacles.

Today, most jobs are “born” nonunion, and nonunion firms are in the majority in most industries. As a consequence, it is extremely difficult to successfully organize individual companies that are embedded in largely nonunion industries. In this context, a one-firm-at-a-time worksite approach to organizing stands little chance of success. Instead, unions are endeavoring to organize across multiple firms within regional labor markets at once—“whole market” or “labor market” unionism. While a minority of unions have been developing effective strategies for unionization in this environment, the vast majority are struggling to stake out fixed points in the radically transformed world of work.

The decomposition of the vertically integrated firm with an embedded internal labor market has been accompanied by a dramatic increase in subcontracting and other nonstandard work arrangements. To maximize profit and minimize risk, and to avoid social insurance obligations and unionization, firms in many industries have increasingly turned to part-timing, subcontracting, and classifying workers as independent contractors rather than employees. Many workers have less job security and are less likely to access health insurance, pensions, and job training through their employers. It isn’t just contracting out that is the issue. Even those workers still in traditional employment relationships are seeing their benefits packages curtailed. Only 50 percent of all private sector employees today receive their health insurance through their employers. Meanwhile our public policies are still stuck in the 1930s.

Most workers still need and want unions but they need the kind of union membership that helps them fill in the benefits and training that is not available to them at their place of work, that is flexible and fully portable between employers.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Construction or De-Construction: The Road to Revival in the Building Trades

By Jeff Grabelsky

“Brothers and sisters, we are at a crossroads,” announced IBEW president Ed Hill to over three hundred thousand union electricians across North America. “There are only two ways we can go. We can continue on with business-as-usual and have a front row seat to our own demise, or we can put the IBEW back on the path of success.” That kind of candor may be rare among contemporary labor leaders, but it reflects a perspective held by many building trades unionists who share Hill’s view that “we have a hammer over our heads. Call it a crisis. Call it a threat. We could become insignificant in our industry.”

According to Peter A. Cockshaw, a national labor analyst who has been covering the construction industry for forty years, “The unionized construction sector is in a battle and a war for economic survival. I have never seen a situation so grave.”

The building and construction trades have historically been one of the most stable and secure sectors of the American labor movement. In the period immediately after World War II, their power in the construction industry was legendary, controlling over 80 percent of the work and setting standards that were the envy of workers everywhere. How did the building trades’ position devolve so dramatically that it is now commonly described as a crisis of survival? How has the construction industry evolved in ways that have undermined the strength and vitality of building trades unions? How have construction unionists responded to the changed circumstances of their industry and their weakened position in it? How has the larger context of a labor movement in crisis influenced the strategic options of building trades leaders on both sides of the national split?

The Construction Context: An Industry in Transition

Construction is one of the most important and least understood sectors of the American economy. It is a one trillion dollar industry, a solid barometer of general economic performance, and the only goods-producing sector that continues to post job growth. Between 1994 and 2004, employment grew by 2.5 million—from 5 million to 7.75 million—while mining and manufacturing lost about that many jobs during the same period of time. Over the next decade, construction employment is projected to grow by another seven hundred ninety thousand jobs, lagging behind only retail trade, health care, employment services and food services. The opportunity for union growth is enormous.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Latin America Leans Left: Labor and the Politics of Anti-Imperialism

By Dan La Botz

After almost twenty years of living with the Washington Consensus of free trade policies, a broad opposition to the political economy of neoliberal globalization developed throughout Latin America in the late 1990s. As the Inter-American Regional Organization of Workers (of the ICFTU) meeting in Cochabamba, Bolivia, in December noted, “The victories of Evo Morales [in Bolivia], Lula [in Brazil], Chávez [in Venezuela] and Rafael Correa in Ecuador, create an opportunity for the establishment of an integration process different from the neoliberal model…and an opportunity to confront the free trade agreements that are being negotiated in the region.” Some workers see an opportunity to build a more humane capitalist system, while others see a chance to construct socialism in Latin America. Whatever their long-term political agenda, all see opportunities in the present dynamic situation to advance workers’ interests.

The change in Latin America has been driven by massive protests involving general strikes, sometimes violent uprisings, and a left-wing military coup. By 2006, these protest movements brought to power new left-of-center governments in several countries. The presidents elected in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Uruguay in this period came to power by opposing, at least nominally, the free market policies pushed upon them by the United States and the world financial institutions—the IMF, World Bank, and WTO. While the visions, programs and actions of these governments vary significantly, taken together this development represents an important shift in the politics of Latin America vis-à-vis the United States and its free trade agenda. More important, this block of nations and of peoples represents a search for an alternative to the destructive and dehumanizing regime of savage capitalism masked by the term globalization.

Working people, organized in many fashions, have been pushing from below to create governments that will stand up for them against Washington and the international financial institutions. The shift leftward has been anything but simple, and the labor movement is far from being the only factor. Unions as we know them are not the only, nor even necessarily the most important, organizations of working people. In Latin America, labor unions exist in complex relations with many other social movements and political parties, and sometimes with armed guerrilla movements and left-wing military officers. Relations between unions, peasant organizations, indigenous movements and left political parties are complex and dynamic and each nation’s experience is unique. Only in Brazil has the labor movement been central to the political shift, while in other countries military leaders with broad popular followings, indigenous people, or even students have been more important. Labor and social movements have used tactics and strategies ranging from protest demonstrations and strikes to national uprisings, that verged on becoming revolutionary upheavals.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

The Coalition to Win: Gomperism for the Twenty-first Century

By Clayton Sinyai

A quick history quiz: It is a period of U.S. History in which fewer than 10 percent of private sector workers belong to trade unions. The embattled labor movement can expect no support from a hostile or indifferent government. The year is:

A) 1896, as the young American Federation of Labor (AFL) led by cigar maker Samuel Gompers struggles to survive and grow

B) 1936, as the emerging Committee on (soon to be Congress of) Industrial Organization (CIO) led by mineworker John L. Lewis charges out on the great organizing campaigns of the twentieth century

C) 2006, as a labor movement much diminished from its mid-twentieth-century peak struggles to right itself and resume growth

If you answered either (A) or (C), of course, you are correct. Enchanted by the spectacle of a split in the national labor federation by a dissident “Change to Win” grouping of trade unions—proposing aggressive organizing with a new structural approach—many observers have been quick to draw comparisons with the explosive 1935 rupture that led to the foundation of the CIO. That split resulted in an unprecedented tripling of trade union membership in a single decade, and soon thereafter propelled American union membership to its historic plateau of about one-third of the workforce.

Yet, as Jack Metzgar concluded in this space two years ago (“Is This the Second Coming of the CIO?” New Labor Forum, Summer 2005), this is probably not the best historic parallel for understanding Change to Win. The organizing breakthroughs of the era were made possible by two essential conditions: a massive upsurge of rank-and-file activity among American workers, and the support of a sympathetic government in Washington. I suspect that the absence of either factor—this bursting grassroots enthusiasm for organization or Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal Democracy—would have crippled the CIO initiative. Many on the left have insisted that genuine organizing will be impossible without the former; more importantly, many in the AFL-CIO have argued that it will be impossible without the latter. But neither condition obtains today, and since no one has demonstrated an ability to conjure up either condition in the next month or year or perhaps decade, the argument is academic.

We are not in the world of John L. Lewis and the CIO, I would argue, but that of Samuel Gompers and the AFL. And now for the good news: although the AFL in its early decades enjoyed neither the sustained spontaneous self-activity that characterized the mid-1930s working class, nor the solicitude of a friendly government periodically intervening on its behalf, the federation and its affiliates found a path to steady if unspectacular growth, and built a labor movement capable of enduring in these challenging circumstances. Confronting a hostile state, and employers prepared to use violence where necessary to defeat them, a handful of trade unions representing a mere 150,000 workers marshaled their meager resources to form the American Federation of Labor.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Response to ”The Coalition to Win: Gomperism for the Twenty-first Century”

By Elly Leary

There are some things on which Clayton Sinyai and I both agree—the Wagner era is over; labor organizing did not begin with the Labor Board; the AFL under Gompers (actually William Green, who took the helm in 1924 upon Gompers’ death and remained president until he died in 1952) never matched the growth “that made the industrial union movement of the 1930s legendary;” and the Justice for Janitors campaigns (under the able leadership of Stephen Lerner) are exciting and have lessons for all working-class organizations.

But there is much on which we disagree. It is impossible to comment on all of Sinyai’s examples here. For example, his statement that the main predecessor of the UFCW is the retail clerks—by most accounts it is both the Amalgamated Meat Cutters and the Retail Clerks; or the implication that only the Change to Win unions appreciate how little the NLRB election process works for workers; or that the difference between the AFL-CIO and CtW unions can be neatly reduced to legislation versus organizing—both groups engage in electoral politics and organizing. Instead, I’ll focus on the larger issues upon which Sinyai’s article relies: historical context and the role of unions in the working class.

The Historical Context of the AFL’s “Success”

Sinyai posits that the path to rebuilding union density involves taking a page from the AFL “voluntarist” playbook. As Sinyai states, “[t]he key insight of the old AFL voluntarism [was that] we cannot rely on the government to solve our problems.” The AFL steered clear of both engaging in the social issues of the day as well as “entrusting labor’s fate to political panaceas and friendly politicians. “[I]nstead relying on tools … and devices under their control” and focusing on their members’ needs, the AFL “created a labor movement capable of enduring hard times and even flourishing in them.” This program, Sinyai suggests, allowed the AFL to succeed while other unions like the IWW, the Knights of Labor, and American Railway Union collapsed under hostile employers, Pinkertons, and Republican and Democratic governments alike.

There is, however, more to the story.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Organizing Wal-Mart in China: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back

By Anita Chan

Surprise, surprise, it is the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU), the trade union notorious throughout the world for being “useless,” that has taken on Wal-Mart and succeeded in setting up workplace union branches at twenty-two Wal-Mart supercenters in China within four weeks. The Western mass media and some of the Chinese media coverage of the incident have been generally dismissive, on the presumption that the ACFTU does not really act like a trade union. Western reporters have indicated that Wal-Mart has finally found a union that it can live with. But has nothing positive emerged from the organizing of Wal-Mart’s stores? Is the ACFTU a dinosaur that never changes? Or, could there be reformers from within the ACFTU pushing for change?

After analyzing eighty reports from Chinese newspapers and magazines, it became obvious that in taking on Wal-Mart, the ACFTU attempted to do something it has not endeavored since the early 1950s—grassroots union organizing. How the first few union branches came to be formed within such a short period provides intriguing insights into this new phenomenon.

Before all else, it is necessary for us to understand that the Chinese press today is no longer totally under state control. On their own initiative, newspapers cover stories they consider newsworthy. For more than three years, the Chinese media has followed closely the jostling between the ACFTU and Wal-Mart and has, helped shape Chinese public opinion on the issue. At least some reporters have adopted the stance—why should we Chinese give in to this giant corporation, which comes to China, throws its weight around, and openly defies the law of the land.

Setting up Unions from the Top

Wal-Mart miscalculated in thinking it could use the same antiunion tactics in China that it does around the world. If, like its main competitor in China, the giant European retailer Carrefour, Wal-Mart had welcomed the ACFTU to establish union branches in Wal-Mart superstores, those union branches would not have challenged management. The process would have been similar to so many other workplace union branches set up by the ACFTU in foreign-funded enterprises—from the top down.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Nannies in New York

By Debbie Nathan

At four o’clock in the afternoon, the nannies begin to swarm Manhattan’s Washington Square Park. They’re mostly the watchers of downtown children—the Tribeca and Soho and Village nannies. In search of camaraderie and relief from the boredom that comes from spending large amounts of time with the preverbal, they wheel their charges around on a circuit that goes from the River Park Playground, at Chambers and Greenwich, to Bleecker Playground, Madison Square Park, Union Square, and homeward through Washington Square Park.

The playground at that final destination has special appeal. Riffs from conga drums, acoustic guitars, and saxes drift in from other parts of the park. The noise of soap box ranting against the war in Iraq enters with sufficient volume to energize adults but not loudly enough to spook babies. “It just seems livelier,” says one nanny of Washington Square. “Like Union Square,” says another, “but cleaner, and there’s cops to protect us from drug dealers and weird men.” “I’ve seen Uma Thurman,” notes a third. “She just acts ordinary, playing with her kid.” “Upper West Side nannies dress too fancy, and on the East Side they wear labels. Here it’s tee shirts, flip flops; we’re more relaxed.” “There aren’t so many mothers to spy on us. And the ones who do come are artists and things like that, so they’re nice.” “The diversity! There are people from everywhere!”

Indeed, Washington Square Park is a nanny United Nations. Trinidad, Jamaica, Barbados, Poland, Russia, Ireland, China, Chile, Honduras, the Philippines, Nepal, Tibet, Bhutan—on a random day, a visitor can count women from these countries and a half dozen others, not to mention natives of Alabama and Great Neck. But unlike UN delegates, nannies tend to segregate themselves along strict racial, ethnic, and national lines. Those from the English-speaking Caribbean and South America congregate on the north side of the playground, by the swings and the gate. Latinas cluster on the south side, near the jungle gym. Asians sit to the right of the Latinas, or exit the playground at naptime with sleeping children, to form grouplets elsewhere in the park. Non-Hispanic white nannies, a rarity, seldom bunch up. Instead, some sit quietly here and there. Others stand. Some wander near the sandbox, looking lost.

Carolyn is from Guyana. She favors sensible denim jumpers, glasses that are too big now that little ones are in vogue, and a poker-straightened page boy hairdo. She’s friends with Susan, who is a deep shade of black with natural kink in her hair to match. Susan’s home country is St. Vincent. She and Carolyn are members of the city’s biggest nanny cohort: those hailing from former colonies of Great Britain in the tropical Western Hemisphere. These nannies tend to have green cards or U.S. citizenship. Many got high school educations in their native countries, and even some college. English is their native tongue. They can sing “London Bridge is Falling Down” to American tots without missing a beat, and help older kids with language arts homework. They’re the nanny elite.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Youth Unemployment Rising, with Hundreds of Millions More Working but Living in Poverty

ILO News, November 24, 2006

The number of unemployed youth aged fifteen to twenty-four rose over the past decade, while hundreds of millions more are working but living in poverty, according to a new report by the International Labour Organization (ILO).

While the number of young unemployed increased from 74 million to 85 million, or by 14.8 percent between 1995 and 2005, more than 300 million youth, or approximately 25 percent of the youth population, were living below the US$2 per day poverty line.

The ILO report estimates that at least 400 million decent and productive employment opportunities—simply put, new and better jobs—will be needed in order to reach the full productive potential of today's youth. The report also says youth are more than three times as likely to be unemployed than adults, and that the relative disadvantage is more pronounced in developing countries, where youth represent a significantly higher proportion of the labor force than in developed economies.

"Despite increased economic growth, the inability of economies to create enough decent and productive jobs is hitting the world's young especially hard," said ILO director-general Juan Somavia. "Not only are we seeing a growing deficit of decent work opportunities and high levels of economic uncertainty, but this worrying trend threatens to damage the future economic prospects of one of our worlds' greatest assets—our young men and women."

The report emphasizes that today's youth face serious vulnerabilities in the world of work and warns that a lack of decent work, if experienced at an early age, may permanently compromise their future employment prospects. The report adds urgency to the UN call for development of strategies aimed at giving young people a chance to maximize their productive potential through decent employment.

Among the report's key findings:

  • Of the 1.1 billion young people aged fifteen to twenty-four worldwide, one out of three is either seeking but unable to find work, has given up the job search entirely, or is working but living on less than US$2 a day.

  • While the youth population grew by 13.2 percent between 1995 and 2005, employment among young people grew by only 3.8 percent to reach 548 million.

  • Unemployed youth make up 44 per cent of the world's total unemployed despite the fact that their share of the total working-age population aged fifteen and over is only 25 percent.

  • The youth unemployment rate was far higher than the adult unemployment rate of 4.6 percent in 2005, rising from 12.3 percent in 1995 to 13.5 percent last year.

“Idle youth is a costly group,” the report says, noting that an inability to find employment creates a sense of vulnerability, uselessness, and redundancy. There are costs, therefore, to youth themselves, but also to economies and societies as a whole, both in terms of lack of savings, loss of aggregate demand, and less spending for investment as well as social costs for remedial services such as preventing crime and drug use. “All this is a threat to the development potential of economies,” Mr. Somavia said. "Today, we are squandering the economic potential of an enormous percentage of our population, especially in developing countries which can least afford it. Focusing on youth, therefore, is a must for any country."

This article is reprinted from http://southasia.oneworld.net/article/view/142915/1/1893

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Economic Prospects

Making the Federal Minimum Wage a Living Wage

By Robert Pollin

The Democrats moved rapidly after taking control of Congress to make good on their 2006 campaign promise to raise the federal minimum wage. The minimum wage is now scheduled to rise in three steps up to $7.25 an hour as of mid-2009. This is the first federal increase since 1997, when the $5.15 minimum was enacted. (As of this writing, the final version of the law still awaits reconciliation between the House and Senate bills that have passed. President Bush’s approval will almost certainly follow a House/Senate agreement.)

Congress passed the $7.25 minimum wage because the political support for it outside the Beltway was rock-solid. Its foundation was the living wage movement that has organized and won victories throughout the country for over a decade.

In the November 2006 election, six states—Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, and Ohio—passed minimum wage increases with a 65 percent average level of support. This means when the new federal minimum wage becomes law sometime in mid-2007, twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia, representing nearly 70 percent of the total U.S. population, will already be operating with minimum wage standards above $5.15. Beyond this, more than 140 municipalities now operate under some version of a living wage law, with the living wage minimum generally set between nine and eleven dollars per hour.

Voters throughout the United States clearly support the principle of living wage standards. But do we really know what a reasonable “living wage” minimum is for the country today? And if such a figure were to be enacted into law, would it lead to job losses for low-wage workers, as critics persistently assert? These are the questions that move us usefully beyond the official Washington frame of reference that is culminating with the new $7.25 minimum.

What is a Living Wage?

Let’s first be clear that $7.25 an hour as of mid-2009 is not close to a living wage. After controlling for inflation, $7.25 as of mid-2009 will likely represent an increase of only about 4 percent over $5.15 as of 1997, when $5.15 became the federal minimum.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Caught in the Web

By Kim Phillips-Fein

When the Berlin Wall came down and the Soviet Union dissolved, the language of globalization quickly emerged to describe a world no longer divided by walls and political barriers. No more would there be a First World, a Second World, and a Third World. Instead, the tripartite division would be replaced by an invocation of unity: a single global community, united by free markets.

Yet, the transformation of the world into a vast marketplace came at a cost for working-class people. Where capital appeared newly free, mobile, and capable of opening factories or outsourcing labor, workers remained reliant on social and political rights for their economic power—and these rights depended for their enforcement on national governments. What was more, virtually all labor organizations were national or at the most regional (like the “international” unions of the United States, which include members in Canada). Despite the rise of an international economy that highlighted the continued divisions of class, workers’ organizations remained separated by the boundaries of nations and the political ideologies of the Cold War era.

On the last day of October 2006, the labor movement took a major step towards building truly international institutions for working people. The International Conference of Free Trade Unions dissolved itself, merging with other organizations to create a new global labor federation: the International Trade Union Confederation. The organization will consist of member unions representing more than 190 million workers around the world. The new group’s website—which contains English, French, Spanish, and German translations—testifies to the astonishing diversity of the global labor movement—the press room feature has links to articles about migrant workers, repression of union activists in Iran, exploitation in Hong Kong. ITUC also does its own research and reports, on subjects such as Estonian migrant workers.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Sometimes a Great Notion: The Democrats and Their Rendezvous with Destiny

By Robert Andersen


The Courage of Our Convictions

By Gary Hart

Henry Holt, 2006


Take It Back: A Battle Plan for Democratic Victory

By James Carville and Paul Begala

Simon and Schuster, 2006


Building Red America: The New Conservative Coalition and the Drive for Permanent Power

By Thomas Edsall

Basic Books, 2006

Rapture is a ten million vote margin. Lifted up by the windfall in the midterm election, Blue America has good reason to celebrate its long sought deliverance. Happy Days Are Here Again. Well, not quite. Rephrase: happier days are here, until Red America binds up its wounds and brings it on in the next election cycle. The decisive repudiation of Conservatism and the Bush Administration means the Party Of The People has another shot at the brass ring of political dominance.

Of course, the Democrats could blow it, succumb to majority-whip temptation, become Beltway Bandits every bit as greedy and heavy-handed as pay-for-play Republicans. Already there are disturbing reports about inner-circle lobbying hires and welcome wagon campaign contributions. But it is not hard to imagine the Democrats toeing the ethical line, and refraining from the kind of pimp-my-office influence peddling that distinguished the gangsta tenure of The Hammer and his K Street Project.

More ominous perhaps is the ease of victory itself, shades of Baghdad revisited. Toppling the statues of George W. Bush and Karl Rove proved something of a cakewalk. The flanking army of moderates and independents—more awe than shock—spoke with one clarion voice: Out of Office Now.

One can hope that Red America will accede to the will of the heartland and go gently into that good night, but don't bet on it. Look for the Rove Punishment Guerilla (RPG) to regroup and fight another day, on terrain it knows only too well: Bloody Kansas. Statute 527 outriders and firebrands will surely turn the 2008 presidential campaign into scorched earth, particularly if Hillary Clinton runs. In short, the Dems have only a small window in which to secure the election before it is hijacked and turned into shrapnel.

As brevet Majority Party, the Democrats are at sea, trying to see through the fog of war long enough to get a bearing or two. This way lies a Hobson's choice and that way a double bind, and Iraq is a Gordian knot composed of no less than seventy-nine tightly interwoven strands, according to the Iraq Study Group. Staying the centrist course means point-by-point reckoning, hugging the shore via the celebrated zigzag originally laid down by Bill Clinton—call it left Reaganism. There be demons and dragons should the Party dare go boldly where none but Lyndon Johnson has gone before. Red America can be expected to sabotage the steering mechanism in any case.

But if the books under review are any compass, the Party may have no choice but to put caution to the wind and push on to the antipodes. Gary Hart, Thomas Edsall, James Carville, and Paul Begala, a brain trust of no little authority and experience, agree that the Party is in serious if not mortal jeopardy. In their collective analysis, the Party has reached its nadir, lacks wisdom, direction, and (above all) courage. It even lacks a soul.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Love of God Among the Ruins

By Mark Hulsether


How the Other Half Worships

By Camilo José Vergara

Rutgers University Press, 2005

How the Other Half Worships, by Camilo José Vergara, focuses on the religious lives of African Americans and Latinos/as who create churches in some of the nation’s most impoverished inner city neighborhoods. It is beautiful to look at, stimulating, original, and altogether commendable within the limits it sets for itself. At the same time, these limits make it feel incomplete in ways that may be frustrating for some readers.

A critical study of inner city religion would be a welcome addition to recent public discussions of religion, which too often imply that most U.S. religion is either conservative or otherworldly and politically disengaged. Pundits have exaggerated both the supposed decline of liberal Christianity and the supposed monolithic and conservative nature of evangelical Christians. True, evangelicals are disproportionately conservative, but at least a third of them are politically moderate or left of center, especially if we include nonwhite churches. Moreover, although liberal churches have slipped in power relative to other groups, they retain more momentum than is often acknowledged. I once worked in an inner city Minneapolis church that sponsored a homeless shelter and taught English to Hmong refugees; its minister and key parishioners were active in community organizing efforts. A map of religion in this church’s neighborhood that excluded it would be misleading—and more pointedly, an organizer informed by this map might make serious mistakes.

The great virtue—and at the same time the frustration—of Vergara’s book is the way it relates to rethinking such maps: both its straightforward contributions and the opportunities it misses. Vergara was born in Chile and studied sociology at Columbia University. Since 1977, he has been using photography and ethnographic observation to document changes in U.S. cities, with special attention to architecture and uses of space. Earlier books, notably The New American Ghetto (Rutgers University Press, 1995) and American Ruins (Monacelli Press, 1999) established a foundation for the current project. His work has gained wide attention; the BBC has produced a documentary about him, the Nation has published his articles, and museums have exhibited his photos. In 2002, he received a MacArthur Foundation genius award.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Is Free Trade Globalization Defensible?

By Thomas Greven

Globalization and Its Enemies

By Daniel Cohen

MIT Press, 2006

The world may be flat, as New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has famously argued, but it certainly is not fair. The big question in the current debate on globalization is whether making it flatter, so to speak, will make it fairer. Daniel Cohen, professor of economics at the elitist Ecole Normale Supérieure, advisor to the French prime minister, and columnist for Le Monde, can be found on both sides of the issue.

On the one hand, Cohen strongly rejects the traditional exploitation arguments of the left. He essentially argues that more, not less, participation in the global economy is necessary for the development of the “periphery,” i.e. the developing countries and emerging market economies. This is a standard argument of globalization apologists. However, what distinguishes Cohen is that he carefully examines the consequences of connecting places of human dwelling, i.e. of making the world “flatter”—be it with roads, seaways, or the Internet. Theoretical considerations and economic history lead him to predict considerable negative consequences for places on the periphery, if a simple strategy of reducing barriers to trade and capital movements is followed. First, historically, they were not protected against the cultural and ecological effects of industrial society. Second, the historical and in part current unwillingness of employers to accept local workers’ demands for higher wages in exchange for increases in productivity as legitimate—the “spirit of colonialism” as Cohen calls it— prevents the entry of peripheral societies into a virtuous cycle of production and consumption. Last, Cohen argues that it is not just comparative advantage but economies of scale that drive the specialization of countries. Why does most trade take place between developed countries (in fact, mostly within and between transnational enterprises), and why are most products being traded practically identical, e.g. different kinds of cars rather than textiles and wine as in Ricardo’s classic example? The developed centers are productive enough to supply each other, and increases in productivity pressure them to expand their markets to supply the rest of the world. Even when the countries of the “center” focus on the design and delivery of products and services and leave the manufacturing to the low-wage “world’s workshops,” peripheral countries can be trapped in this specialization in the new international division of labor, just as many have been trapped in the delivery of natural resources.

Is there a way out for countries on the periphery? Only one, according to Cohen.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Democracy and the New Capitalism

By Wallace Katz

The New Spirit of Capitalism

By Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello

Verso, 2006

The New Spirit of Capitalism, by Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello, professors at the Ecole d’Histoire et Sciences Sociales, is a lengthy and dense opus. The book is too theoretical for all but academic sociologists concerned with the fine points of sociological theory. Its primary sources are exclusively French, namely the managerial literature generated by French corporations and their publicists. And one-third of the book is devoted to a portrait of a new capitalism that, for Americans, is hardly new. We have had our fill of baloney about project-oriented and communal workplaces, “the creative class,” flexible production, so-called lifetime learning, “networks” and “networking” that replace bureaucratic hierarchies, along with distinctions between the “new” entrepreneurialism and the “old” managerialism.

Yet, despite these flaws, this is a valuable book, partly because of its many detailed insights. It usefully underscores the differences between French capitalism and its American counterpart. French corporations can engage in strategies of permanent reconstruction that hurt workers and the labor movement—downsizing, mergers and acquisitions, casualization of labor, export of production to the Third World, opting out of pensions and other benefits like health care—and be assured that they will not destroy the fabric of French society via inequality. What the corporations relinquish, the French government assumes, namely the social costs of production. As recent immigrant riots in the suburbs and student-worker protests over new employment laws amply demonstrate, the French government cannot declare, as Bill Clinton did, that “the era of big government is over,” or discard the French welfare state.

The authors also argue that in spite of massive de-unionization in France, just as in the United States, the two major French unions—the Confederation Generale du Travail and the Confédération Française Démocratique du Travail—are more influential than their membership in local enterprises would indicate. Because of the Auroux laws put in place in the early 1980s and the continued existence of French social democracy, the unions are seen as broadly representative of all workers in France, even though most workers no longer belong to unions. Both unions have contributed to their own decline in membership by tacitly or overtly accepting what Boltanski and Chiapello describe as capitalist displacement techniques: negotiations at the local level where unions are weak rather than at the national level where they are strong, the elimination of specialized job descriptions, and the creation of new forms of management—quality circles and workers’ discussion groups—that bring employees closer to their bosses than to their union representatives.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown

Out of the Mainstream: Books and Films You May Have Missed

By Matt Witt


A Common Thread

by Beth English

University of Georgia Press, 2006

This study tells the history of the shift of the New England textile industry to the South, with a particular focus on one company.

Big-Box Swindle

by Stacy Mitchell

Beacon, 2006

Local businesses and working people are paying a hidden price for the shift to mega-retail chains. Mitchell details how nearly two hundred big-box developments have been stopped by local coalitions, and discusses local policies that can promote strong communities.

Black Milwaukee

By Joe William Trotter, Jr.

University of Illinois Press, 2007

This is an updated edition of the 1985 study that analyzes the development of the urban African American working class, using one city as an in-depth case study.


by Joe Miller

Farrar Straus & Giroux, 2006

This eye-opening profile of a groundbreaking debate team at a poor black high school in Kansas City describes not only how these students overcome the odds against them but also how they begin to challenge racism and classism in the debate community and beyond.

Hadi Never Died

by Abdullah Muhsin and Alan Johnson

Trades Union Congress, 2006

Iraqi unionists were brutally persecuted under Saddam Hussein and continue to face antilabor policies under the current government. This book tells the story of the Iraqi union movement and one of its leaders who was tortured and murdered in 2005.

Is Iraq Another Vietnam?

By Robert K. Brigham

PublicAffairs, 2006

Partisans on both sides, from labor opponents of the war on Iraq to proponents such as John McCain, cite America’s experience in Vietnam to bolster their case. A Vassar professor looks carefully at the actual similarities and differences between the two wars and in the process provides a useful short analysis of both. One key conclusion is that military might ultimately cannot resolve fundamental political and economic issues.


by Nomi Prins

PoliPointPress, 2006

In conversational style, a former Goldman Sachs manager compiles in one place the way working people she met around the country are being hurt by Bush era policies.

Las Soldaderas: Women of the Mexican Revolution

by Elena Poniatowska

Cinco Puntos, 2006

An insightful essay shedding light on Mexico’s cultural roots by one of the country’s leading writers accompanies archival photos.

My Body Politic

by Simi Linton

University of Michigan Press, 2006

A must-read autobiography by a woman whose legs were paralyzed in a car accident on her way to an antiwar demonstration during the Vietnam War. Through her warmly engaging, honest, and often humorous account of her own life and the experiences of friends and colleagues, Linton increases the reader’s sensitivity to the obstacles people with disabilities face at work and in everyday life. She asks why their struggles for more equitable and inclusive social policies are often ignored by progressive activists who support challenges to other kinds of discrimination.

Not Quite White

by Matt Wray

Duke University Press, 2006

Even among liberal whites who would never use derogatory epithets to refer to African Americans or Latinos, terms like “redneck” continue in common use as a reflection of disdain for working-class white people. This monograph explores the early history of the stigmatizing of poor rural whites as “white trash” by dominant elites protecting their own status.

On The Picket Line

By Mary E. Triece

University of Illinois Press, 2007

Working class women developed their own tactics and leadership styles to challenge economic injustice and discrimination during the Great Depression. This study looks, for example, at the way female organizers often used a more personal speaking style to connect with audiences.

Red Stick Men

by Tim Parrish

University Press of Mississippi, 2000

Nine short stories describe working-class characters in the shadow of the oil industry in Baton Rouge who keep their humanity despite low wages, layoffs, war, pollution, and other challenges.


by Julius G. Getman

Plain View Press, 2006

The rhetorical sounding title doesn’t do justice to this entertaining and very insightful novel about a paper workers’ strike in a small town in Maine in the late 1980s. The novel gives a rare inside view of human dynamics inside a local union as the decline in the strength of the industrial labor movement is underway.

The Spirit of Disobedience

by Curtis White

PoliPoint, 2006

Whether talking about Wal-Mart or about our work lives, a social critic in the tradition of Thoreau asks in these out-of-the-box musings where we are really trying to go as individuals and as a society.

The Working Life

By Nan L. Maxwell

Upjohn Institute, 2006

A survey of more than 400 employers finds that so-called “low skill” jobs often require problem-solving, communications, physical, and mechanical abilities that companies cannot easily find.

Tim Hector: A Caribbean Radical’s Story

by Paul Buhle

University Press of Mississippi, 2006

While focusing on the life of this long-time leader for self-determination and social justice in Antigua and throughout the Caribbean, Buhle also provides a broader history of workers’ and progressive movements in the region.

Wartime Shipyard

by Katherine Archibald

University of Illinois Press, 2006

This reprint of a 1947 book by a woman who spent two years working in an Oakland shipyard during World War II chronicles the obstacles faced by women, African Americans, and “Okies” from the South, and serves as a useful reminder of discrimination in the union movement that still must be overcome.


Crossing Arizona


All sides get their say in this documentary about the border, from immigrants who try to cross the desert, to farmers who need their labor, to political groups who oppose or support immigrant rights.



Filmmakers spent a year documenting the complex interaction of Mexican immigrants and residents of a small suburban New York town, where immigrant labor is an economic necessity to some and a threat to others. The town had attracted national attention after the attempted murder of two immigrants.

Quiet Revolution


A twenty-three-minute video produced by the Alliance for Justice shows how right-wing extremists have placed activist judges on the courts to undermine well established rights and protections. News clips show the Right’s message discipline. This will be of most interest to law students and liberal activists.

                                                                           Table of ContentUpDown


Walking with Tillie: A Remembrance of Tillie Lerner Olsen, January 14, 1912—January 1, 2007

By Janet Zandy

Tillie Olsen, author of Tell Me a Riddle, Yonnondio: From the Thirties, Silences, inspired teacher, catalytic friend to The Feminist Press, champion of human rights, and pioneer writer of and for the working class, has died.

Tillie had a strong gait, a physical assurance that mirrored her power of observation and attention to the world. Yet, walking with her took time. Whether on the congested streets of San Francisco or New York, she stopped frequently to recognize those who lived on the edge of others’ material worlds. She carried dollars in her pockets, and, as she walked, she folded those wrinkled bills into the hands of homeless strangers. She refused to walk in self-isolation or without connection, perhaps to the consternation of her family and friends who knew she did not possess that many dollars herself. To call it charity is to miss something essential about Tillie’s capacity to embrace other people. To share a meal or ride in a cab with her meant getting to know, through Tillie, not the generic but a particular waitress or cabby or shopkeeper. She imaginatively and empathetically internalized the lives of others. I wonder how many strangers felt her always-extended hands of human fellowship.

To experience the physics of Tillie’s world—whether through her writing or her presence—involved entering a space of paradoxical compression and expansion. She burrowed unflinchingly into the deepest recesses of human experience. She opened up the folded, hidden, and ignored. The stakes were high, for the reader, and always, for her. Tillie created a palpable reality where the separations between feeling and thought, imagined writing and lived experience, fell away. Her writing is a great uncoiling like the convoluted ear in “Tell Me A Riddle,” an “infinite mile on mile, trapping every song, every melody, every word, read, heard, and spoken.” In a transcribed conversation with her daughter Julie, she recalls from “Tell Me a Riddle”—the expression on the lips of that dying woman strong with the not yet in the now, that was what keeps us going, because we are part of that not yet in the now. We are part of what can be. Tillie viewed art as awakening—an active catalytic process. Her powerful compression was literally visible in her famously diminutive handwriting—perfectly formed letters in miniature—her signature “o.” She contained worlds and she also could not be contained, whether in her spoken words, her long-goodbyes on the phone, or her willing inclusion of others. She affirmed human potentiality. She perceived creativity “as an enormous and universal human capacity.”

Knowing intimately the hurt of class, she wrote privately, I am so old so class conscious have lived so with the gargoyling. She was generous with her love, often closing her notes and letters with—“best love”—an embrace-in-writing borrowed from Agnes Smedley.

Indeed, what luck to have walked with Tillie Olsen. o tillie, best love.

                                                                            Table of ContentUp


[Home] [About Us] [Archives] [Letters] [Subscribe] [Staff]

Copyright © 2007


May 2007

NLF Home
NLF Home
NLF Home