Zogby has released a new poll:<\/p>\n
Disorganized Labor<\/a><\/p>\n Released: August 10, 2005<\/p>\n Disorganized Labor For the first time since 1938, the labor movement actually seems in danger The AFL-CIO is effectively committed to the Democratic Party. So are the But Labor’s problem is not politics. Labor’s problem is Labor. Labor faces a The origins of Labor’s problems may be in the fact that people just don’t That is bad news for organized labor. However, the fact that I posed a The decision by the Teamsters and the Service Employees International Union Although Mr. Sweeney’s decade as president of the AFL-CIO has not brought Zogby has released a new poll: Disorganized Labor Released: August 10, 2005 Disorganized Labor As Seen in The Wall Street Journal For the first time since 1938, the labor movement actually seems in danger of becoming politically irrelevant. Or at … Continue reading
\nAs Seen in The Wall Street Journal<\/p>\n
\nof becoming politically irrelevant. Or at least that is the spin that
\ncommentators have offered. I’m not so certain.<\/p>\n
\nTeamsters and the SEIU and the other members of the nascent Change to Win
\nCoalition. Teamsters President James P. Hoffa even addressed the 2004
\nDemocratic National Convention. These groups will continue to support the
\nDemocrats, to donate to the Democrats, and to mobilize resources on Election
\nDay for the Democrats. Unionized voters will continue to be at least twice
\nas likely to join the Democrats as the Republicans. And the Democrats will,
\nin turn, continue to largely listen to organized labor.<\/p>\n
\ncrisis in confidence among non-union workers. A poll I recently conducted on
\nbehalf of the Public Service Research Foundation found that a 56% majority
\nof workers who are not organized wouldn’t vote to organize — while just 35%
\nwould consider doing so. And for America’s organized labor movement, that’s
\na significant problem.<\/p>\n
\nidentify themselves with the goals of their union. We can still picture an
\nera when “Union Yes” bumper stickers were everywhere, and only “scabs”
\ncrossed picket lines. Today, that sentiment has cooled.
\nTwo summers ago, I asked voters whether the AFL-CIO spoke for them when they
\nwent to the polls. The answers produced a real surprise: Among unionized
\nlikely voters, just 27% said the AFL-CIO spoke for them all or most of the
\ntime. This was lower than the 32% of unionized voters who said the NRA spoke
\nfor them! In fact, nearly as many unionized workers (23%) said the
\nRepublicans spoke for them as said the AFL-CIO, while a higher percentage —
\n35% — believed that the Democrats spoke for them.<\/p>\n
\nsimilar question in 1999 and found that 46% of unionized voters believed the
\nAFL-CIO and other unions spoke for them is even more telling. When that lack
\nof union identity is coupled with a labor force where 39% of workers believe
\nthat while unions once were necessary, their time has passed, it becomes
\nobvious that Labor has lost the hearts and minds of the work force. And when
\nunion members stop believing that organized labor speaks for them, the
\nresults are declining membership and influence, and an almost inevitable
\nschism among member unions.<\/p>\n
\nto bolt the AFL-CIO — and for the other members of the Change to Win
\nCoalition to boycott last week’s AFL-CIO convention — reads like an epitaph
\nafter a decade of John Sweeney’s leadership of organized labor. Of course,
\nthis is not the first time that organized labor has split. Lane Kirkland
\nspent the ’80s bringing the United Automobile Workers, Teamsters, and United
\nMine Workers back into the fold after infighting. And the decision by the
\nCongress of Industrial Organizations to break away from the American
\nFederation of Labor in 1938 was a pivotal moment in the evolution of the
\nAmerican Labor movement.
\nBut Labor now stands on different ground. With less than 8% of private
\nsector workers unionized, individual identities are much less shaped by
\nunion membership. And with a recent Zogby International poll of public
\nsector union members suggesting that 24% consider themselves conservative
\nideologically, and with 49% owning either stocks or a 401(k) plan, the needs
\nof unionized workers have shifted.<\/p>\n
\ngrowth or consensus to organized labor, recent events could ultimately
\nstrengthen it. The Change to Win Coalition’s stated goals offer some new
\nideas, re-addressing bad employers and the need to redirect resources to
\ngrow organized labor. Our poll of workers found that while 70% say their
\ncompany cares about them as individuals, 26% do not believe that. And with
\none in every four workers believing his employer doesn’t care about him, the
\nground is fertile for Labor’s main goal — reaching out to workers who have
\nnot chosen to organize. Labor must stay politically relevant; but unions
\nmust go back to what they were once very good at: They must convince people
\nthat organized labor has workers’ interests at heart.
\n(8\/10\/2005)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"