Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Labor and the Media

Presented by the MU Labor Education Program, University of Missouri Extension

MU Labor Education Program

December 8, 15, and 22nd, 2009

6:00 – 8:30 PM

Heinkel Building Room 226 (7th and Locust)

$40.00


This non-credit program will consider the issue of labor’s image in the mainstream media, the structure and function of the media in the United States, as well as, the roles of reporters, labor organizations, and local union leaders in making “news.” Participants will analyze reporting on labor issues, prepare and critique press releases, and develop a basic media campaign for a local labor issue.

Return the attached registration form with a check made payable to The University of Missouri

by December 2, 2009 to the following address:

Labor Education Program Phone: 573-882-8358

University of Missouri-Columbia Fax: 573-884-5423

Heinkel Building Room 212 Labored@missouri.edu

Columbia, MO 65211-1341

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Columbia laborers propose alternate budget cuts

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Columbia Missourian

COLUMBIA — Columbia City Council chambers were filled to standing room only Tuesday night, in part because three labor groups showed up to oppose changes in overtime and sick leave for city employees. The groups suggested alternate cuts to the personnel cost reductions in the city manager's 2010 budget at the council meeting.

Scores of Columbia Water and Light Department employees, Columbia Professional Firefighters members and Laborers' International Union of North America Local 773 filled the back rows of the city council chambers to show support, and silently stood as their representatives outlined to the council their philosophy on personnel-related budget cuts.

City Manager Bill Watkins' 2010 budget would pay overtime based on hours worked as opposed to hours in pay status, meaning employees would only be paid overtime if they worked more than the normal hours in a week, rather than working extra hours in one day.


"When you have no power in the middle of the night and it is 10 below zero, someone has to fix it," he said.Fred Eaton, a spokesman for Columbia Water and Light Department employees, said the overtime change would be unfair because these hours are based on variables such as weather and equipment malfunction, so employees rarely work overtime by choice.

Watkins' proposed budget would also reduce the amount of unused sick leave employees could get paid for, from 75 percent to 50 percent.

Representatives from the labor groups said these changes would place an unfair burden on city employees in lower pay grades.

"We are all concerned with those in the workforce at the lowest end of the pay scale, but the city's proposal takes overtime dollars away from the lower paid, hourly employees," said Brad Frazier, president of the Columbia Professional Firefighters.

Frazier, along with the other labor representatives, acknowledged the need to reduce personnel costs by $1 million butproposed a 1.2 percent pay cut to all city employees.

"The proposal we endorse does not discriminate," Frazier said. "It distributes cost reductions evenly among all city employees with an average impact equivalent to one hour of salary per paycheck, per employee. With our proposal, they would have only lost 1.2 percent, which is the equivalent of a can of soda a day" for employees that earn about $10 per hour.

According to a document distributed by Laborers' Local 773, the pay cut would lead to $800,000 in savings for the city. This, paired with some of Watkins' proposed reductions, would lead to $1,006,900 in total savings.

During a pre-council meeting, Frazier stressed that Watkins' open door policy has led to constructive discussions on the issue, and he realizes that tough decisions need to be made.

Council members will vote on the budget as early as the next meeting in two weeks.

Strong unions are good for America's workers, businesses

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Columbia Missourian

In the days when I was a union member and worked in a closed shop, I liked the fact that all the people who worked in management were former union members and therefore the environment was not toxic. We were able to avoid a lot of the nastiness people encounter among those who think of collective bargaining units in the same way they do terrorist cells.

One would think with the obvious greed exposed in the financial arena that led to our current economic crisis, people would get over the attitude that labor unions are nothing more than gangs of pirates.


Before this recession, the wages of the working class were stagnant even though the economy was booming. And let’s face it, most employers like it that way. Most of them are not interested in creating a fair playing field; they believe in winner-take-all. A lot of them don’t see the point in paying their employees benefits when workers can sign up with the state welfare office for health care, food stamps and subsidized housing. Why shouldn’t the executives take home fat bonuses and let the public foot the bill for their employees? I truly don’t think there is any way the Employee Free Choice Act could be written so that these business owners wouldn’t object to it. They don’t want their employees to unionize, and it’s as simple as that.

Unfortunately, no matter how prosperous some businesses and industries become, many of them would rather ship the jobs overseas than pay their workers an adequate wage. The days when Americans had the best interest of other Americans at heart have long gone. The working class will have to fight for every dime it can get.

Apparently, these business people don’t even understand the importance of maintaining the middle class. They seem to be hellbent on wiping them out as well. When they look at Third World countries where there are only two classes, the very rich and the very poor, can’t they see that at the rate they are going, the country is heading in that direction?

When we had to walk the picket line to secure pay increases and benefits, I never heard anyone complain about the fact that our fellow employees who lived in states that didn’t have closed shops, many of whom didn’t belong to the union, also gained the same privileges as we did. The thing union members have in common is that they think workers should receive fair wages for the work they do. And it pleases me to know that those who remained with the company until retirement are now enjoying good pensions and good health insurance. After all, these people worked hard for years for these benefits.

When workers began to walk away from union membership and thought that they could bargain individually on their own, how many years did they have to wait for an increase even in the minimum wage? I hoped they learned something and will write letters to their senators and representatives urging them to vote for the Employee Free Choice Act. While there are some employers who value the work their employees do, I doubt they are in the majority. And I honestly think that most workers waiting to organize a union will have retired before their employers grant them that right.

The way some members of Congress and business leaders talk, you would think Chrysler and General Motors executives never made a dime and all the money they made selling cars went into the pockets of members of the United Auto Workers union. The jets in which automakers rode to Washington D.C. on that first trip to meet with Congress belonged to the union members, right?

Anyone watching television has obviously witnessed the absolute disrespect many members of Congress have for the people who work on assembly lines. I would be absolutely ashamed and embarrassed if anyone in my family displayed such despicable manners toward people who actually work because they have the nerve to ask for fair wages for the jobs they do.

As a former union member, I’m pretty sure that when the automakers signed the union contracts, they were confident they would make enough money selling cars to pay workers' salaries and make an adequate profit. Otherwise, they would still be negotiating. And, of course, no one seems to mind that foreign automakers have come into America and undermined American carmakers and automobile workers.

Unfortunately, as sad as it is, this has become the American way.

You can join the conversation with Rose M. Nolen by calling her at 882-5734 or e-mailing her at nolen@iland.net.

Union objects to UM pension decision


University of Missouri System President Gary Forsee has a big sales job ahead of him, convincing employees that contributing to their defined benefit pension program is a good thing.

A business representative for the union that covers campus workers says employees already have contributed to their pensions by accepting lower wages and their contract with the university does not provide for another contribution.

“Our biggest question right now is whether it’s even legal to take your wages and do anything with them without your authorization,” said Rex Taggart, business representative of Local 773 of the Laborers International Union of North America. The union represents some 1,100 food service workers, custodians, maintenance employees and groundskeepers on the MU campus.

The UM Board of Curators has approved Forsee’s proposal to require workers with salaries below $50,000 to contribute 1 percent of their wages to their pension plan. Those whose income is $50,000 and above would pay 1 percent on the first $50,000 and 2 percent on the amount above that. Employees who leave the university before their contributions vest would get them back.

Currently the plan is financed entirely through university contributions, similar to plans that cover state workers and employees of the Missouri Department of Transportation.

“It’s worked out very well,” Taggart said. “It’s always been the light at the end of the tunnel for people.”

Missouri’s public school teachers contribute to their own plans, which are matched by local school districts. The teachers’ pension plan is the biggest in the state. Defined benefit plans differ from defined contribution plans, common in the private sector, in which workers kick in a percentage to their own 401(k) plans.

Many government pension plans lost a quarter of their value in the collapse of the stock market last year. Contributions will be needed to make up the difference. Forsee wants some of that to come from employee wages. The administration is hosting a series of workshops on the campuses explaining the plan.

“Our issue is that it’s a change,” Forsee said. He said the economy had rifled its way through the university budget and the impact on the pension plan needed to be considered. He said many other states and universities as well as the private sector had shifted to plans in which employees contribute something.

Forsee said information from actuaries indicated the university would have to significantly step up its contributions over the next three years for the plan to be fully funded. “For the university to assume that those funds are going to be available to us from state sources was a high-risk proposition,” Forsee said.

Taggart said the plan as proposed would take money away from workers’ income at a time when they need it most.

“It’s going to make a hardship for people,” Taggart said. “If the fund was in a crisis, it would be one thing. People need this money in their pockets.”

Reach Terry Ganey at 573-815-1708 or e-mail tganey@columbiatribune.com.

Labor pains


Russ Unger
Since the 1980s, the labor movement has suffered greatly under the combined weight of free trade policies that lack provisions to protect workers’ rights and a concerted political agenda designed to turn a blind eye toward corporate greed and union busting. The Employee Free Choice Act is not revolutionary legislation that will automatically restore power to workers and their organizations. It is, however, an effort to restore a semblance of balance to industrial relations by giving workers an opportunity to bargain collectively in today’s harsh economic reality.

Under the NLRA, one way workers can gain union recognition and collective bargaining rights is if the employer voluntarily agrees to majority sign-up, often referred to as card check. Card check is a simple process where the employer agrees that if a majority of the company’s employees desire to be represented by a union, it will recognize the union and bargain with that organization. The Employee Free Choice Act merely extends this right to workers as well as employers. There have been thousands of workers organized under this process, with Cingular and Dana Corp. being well-known employers that have agreed to allow card check recognition.The Employee Free Choice Act will amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) of 1935. The NLRA did not mandate unions, but it did recognize the potential social good that collective bargaining could bring to the United States. Based on a belief that workers should have the ability to join a union of their own choosing and an opportunity to bargain collectively, the NLRA provided workers a voice and a stake in the success of their employers.
Where the Employee Free Choice Act will diverge from the NLRA is in the area of bargaining. The Employee Free Choice Act will encourage more efficient bargaining of a first contract between an employer and a union. If an agreement is not reached in 90 days, the Employee Free Choice Act allows for mediation of the unresolved issues. If mediation fails, the Employee Free Choice Act requires that both parties submit to binding arbitration 30 days later. The reason for this is simple: For too many years, too many employers have refused to bargain in good faith and have not signed an agreement in a reasonable period of time. By stalling, these employers erode union support and, most important, deny workers their goal of having a collective voice at work.
The Employee Free Choice Act will also increase penalties for violating the NLRA — which forbids discrimination against workers during an organizing drive — because, once again, some employers have willfully violated this aspect of the current law. The Employee Free Choice Act will require employers who violate the law to pay triple back pay to workers victimized by the violations and an additional $20,000 fine per violation. Even these increases in penalties for violating workers’ basic rights to organize free of harassment, intimidation and discrimination are far less than the penalties to employers who violate anti-trust or civil rights laws.
The debate about the Employee Free Choice Act should be placed in a broader context. Card-check union recognition “elections” have been around for years. Many companies have allowed their use in the United States, and the world did not end. It is a process that gives workers a more efficient means to exercise their legal right to have union representation where they work. The act promotes workplace democracy and does not, in any way, curtail the democratic rights of working people to improve their economic well-being.
Russ Unger is apprentice coordinator for the Sheet Metal Workers’ Local 36 and president of the Mid-Missouri Labor Club.