 The WGA and the Attempt to Organize the Unorganized: Anti-union misconceptions | Dec. 28th, 2007 @ 03:21 pm  |
|---|
a corporate apologist with a generally anti-union bent, has written a red baiting anti-WGA screed at Huffington Post (see Revolutionary Street Cred). Normally rabid anti-worker nonsense such as this is best ignored, but I think it provides a chance to clear up some misconceptions about the attempts of the WGA to organize the unorganized.Galloway first says that "trying to co-opt reality and animation writers as part of their negotiations is a sub-optimal strategy by the WGA leadership." And later he says, "When the Longshoremen in Long Beach go on strike, do they try and pull in container manufacturers into the guild as part of the negotiation? No, they tend to the needs and concerns of their current members. Current. Members."
Apparently, Mr. Galloway in his continuous encomiums to WalMart, and similar corporate entities, has neglected to take into account the history of the union movement. Certainly, his reference to the longshore union shows little familiarity with the history of waterfront unions. It used to be standard practice for waterfront unions to strike in aid of organizing those who were not yet members of their union. The strike as a tactic in an organizing drive either to incorporate further members into the International Longshoremen Association (ILA) or to aid other unions in organization was not only commonplace but the main tactic for organizing the unorganized. All of those with even a cursory familiarity with the history of the West Coast waterfront unions would know this. In fact it should be general knowledge for anyone who even attempts to write on these topics. But people such as Galloway are so anti-Union that they don't let either facts or history get in their way when writing on the WGA strike. In fact, one would only have to take a couple of seconds to look at one of the typical educational resources such as the California History Online
, which states in its section on the 1934 waterfront strike:The ILA [International Longshoremen's Association] demanded improved wages and working conditions, coastwide bargaining rights, and the establishment of union-controlled hiring halls. The strike began in early May and continued through the summer.
Notice that the ILA demanded, coast wide bargaining rights. In other words, in their strike, they were bargaining for coast-wide jurisdiction over unorganized workers, many of whom weren't members of the ILA, or were members of other company unions. Many of these workers had waterfront related jobs but were not longshoremen, as defined by the waterfront companies, and thus were kept out of longshore unions by company definition. This company tactic should sound familiar to anyone who is following the writers' strike. The conglomerates who "own" the shows have simply redefined writing work as "editing" jobs or assisting jobs, in order to claim that people who write dialogue on animated programs are not writers. And if those writers try to join unions they, as often as not, are fired or laid-off.
In this strike there has been a lot of talk about how unprecedented it is for the WGA to ask for the right to represent writers in animation and reality shows, as part of their contract negotiations. There has been denunciations of the WGA leadership as ideological radicals and as focusing on non-economic "jurisdictional issues". The companies and their intellectual propagandists talk about Patric Verrone as if he were Harry Bridges (the radical leader of the 1934 ILA strike) or Walter Reuther, (the social democratic leader of the UAW).* If I were him I would consider this a high compliment, but in fact it is just the usual kind of scare tactics that companies use against unions. The strike demand for the right of representation of the unorganized is in fact a typical demand of all unions who are attempting to organize against union busting companies or companies that play one union off another union. The UAW used these kinds of organizing demands in the hey-day of their organizing of the Big Three; the Teamsters did it when organizing over-the-road independent drivers; and yes, the dockworkers did it when they were trying to organize. When-ever a union is actually organizing the unorganized, instead of simply (and selfishly) trying to create a monopoly for current members, some sort of job-action in favor of non-members is typically engaged in by that union. This does not mean that bargaining to represent some unorganized sector in an industry is an inflexible demand. In fact it is a matter of power and negotiation. And it does not have to be absolutely accepted or rejected. There is a lot of middle ground in such negotiating positions. It is a middle ground that the AMPTP moguls refuse to even explore. For instance one compromise would be for the bosses to agree simply to not oppose organizing drives. In other words, the bosses can withhold immediate recognition of specific unorganized bargaining units, but agree not to oppose any union (WGA or IATSE) in their attempts to organize a unit. Or the companies could agree on recognition of a union in principle but only accept a specific bargaining unit at the time of a simple signing of union cards, without delaying all union recognition until a NLRB administered vote occurs. But most of all they can agree that they will stop harassing union organizers in their attempts to organize.
So the attempt to organize animation and reality show writers is not an all-or-nothing negotiating position, except that the masters of the AMPTP absolutely refuse to negotiate.
The fact is that the companies, in the case of the current situation in the "entertainment" industry, have engaged in firing people who try to join the WGA. In the present political situation this is the typical union busting stance of most companies... and it happens to be an unfair labor practice. But because our labor laws have become toothless over the last quarter century, it is much easier for companies to break the law than it is to accept union members among their employees. It has become increasingly clear that the only way most unions can organize is through the strike and picket-line weapon.
This situation is not unique to the WGA. In fact the Hollywood unions are far behind in realizing that they have three choices: 1) give up organizing altogether and become restrictive craft unions, with a small elite membership, that tries to maintain a monopoly of the labor force in a small sector of an industry; 2) become a company oriented union that offers the bosses sweetheart deals in exchange for a closed shop and non-opposition to increased membership in limited areas; 3) an all-out organizing drive with publicity, picket lines, job-actions, demonstrations, and if necessary strikes, along the model of "Justice for Janitors" and some other unions. When Mr. Galloway is not acting as an anti-union apologist for WalMart or Wall Street, he is in favor of the first two kinds of unions -- unions that represent narrow interests and never encroach on the hallowed rights of management decision making, unions that only care for a few members, and don't look beyond their own little grievances. The WGA leadership has shown time and time again that they care about union organizing, even beyond their own industry. Verrone and the WGA leadership have been strong in their support of other unions, even when those unions have opposed them.
In reality there are really only two choices for the WGA. Either they fold up shop or they try representing the interests of people whose only possibility of countering the tremendous power of multinational corporations is collective action. Patric Verrone
and the WGA leadership have chosen the latter path. Far from being a "sub-optimal strategy" the attempt to organize the unorganized is the only principled strategy that a good union can take. They may or may not have the power (including combined support of other unions in solidarity) to succeed, but at least they are trying to fight.* Notice they never compare Patric Verrone to Caesar Chavez or the WGA to the United Farm Workers, even though their basic outlook qua-union is not dissimilar. There is a vast difference between the mostly college educated WGA and the mostly immigrant UFW but the basic idea of putting pressure on bosses to organize the unorganize is similar. So why not make the comparison. Because basically it would provide too much sympathy to the WGA. It would make people think that this is actually an small union fighting leviathan corporations.
Jerry Monaco
28 December 2007
New York City
[Caveat: I am not a member of the WGA, nor do I speak for any of the officers or members of that union or any other union. I have been a member of other unions in the past and I am a supporter of a stronger union movement in the United States. J.M.]
This work is licensed under a Creative
Commons License
music: CRIMETIME OTR - MOST Popular Old Time Radio OTR Station on LIVE365! Detectives and Mysteries oldtim
No comments:
Post a Comment