Showing posts with label unions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label unions. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 29, 2021

There Is No Labor Shortage!!!

Accomplices Reporters keep labeling shitty-paying jobs, that are supposedly going unfilled, as a labor shortage. Labor Shortage Transforming State Workforce

There is no labor shortage. This is about a living wage, health care, and a pension (retirement). Respectable pay for an honest day's work - the mantra America has been shoveling and selling for generations. 

Unions were the answer to the disparity between the Haves and the Have-Nots. Yet, for decades, Republicans have attacked government and the public sector, in general, along with unions. It's no coincidence that as unionization has declined so have the wages and benefits of workers. 

Business news bloviators talk about how CEOs have earned and must be paid millions - that's just the market working. At the same time, Republicans, along with the business news crowd, tell us how these same millionaires shouldn't pay taxes - that would be a disincentive to their genius.

But when everyday workers decide certain jobs (and the lack of pay and benefits associated with such) aren't worth it - you know, the market - Republicans and the business crowd declare these workers to be lazy and ungrateful. Workers don't deserve good pay and incentives will only make them lazier.

I guess when CEOs get to make policy and write the rules, there is a set of rules for them and a set of rules for workers. The market rules for millionaires are very different from the market rules for workers. 

So is it really a surprise that as workers have had to work harder for lower pay and less benefits, the workers have turned away from these lowest-paid and worst jobs? It's not a labor shortage, it's a pay shortage. The labor is here and willing to do the work, they just need to be paid a fair market wage.

Saturday, November 9, 2019

Weekend Reading

The U.S. Only Pretends To Have Free Markets
So We're Supposed To Treat Donald Trump With Respect, After All This? Oh, Hell No
Elizabeth Warren's Plan To Pay For Medicare-For-All, Explained
Elizabeth Warren Proves She Does Her Homework With Impressive Plan To Fund Medicare For All
Senator Warren's Answer On Taxes And Medicare For All Is Exactly Right
How Elizabeth Warren Can Address The Medicare For All Question
The Happy, Healthy Capitalists Of Switzerland
Upgrade The New Deal, Riemer Declares
Everyone Deserves Clean Water
For Elizabeth Warren, The Wealth Tax Is About More Than Money
United States Spend Ten Times More On Fossil Fuel Subsidies Than Education
Thousands Of Scientists Around The World Declared A Climate Emergency And Warned Of "Untold Suffering"
The Debate Over Whether The Very Rich Pay Lower Taxes Than You, Explained
Unions Are Pushing Members To Run For Office - And It's Paying Off
We Get It, Rich Guys Are Not Into Elizabeth Warren
If Corporations Are Being Run To Maximize Returns To Shareholders, Why Are Returns So Low?
Did Warren Pass The Medicare Test? I Think So
Only A Global Green New Deal Can Save The Planet
Never-Before-Seen Trump Tax Documents Show Major Inconsistencies
If You're So Smart, Why Aren't You Rich? Turns Out It's Just Chance

Sunday, November 3, 2019

It's Time For Real Change

Nancy Pelosi Is Worried 2020 Candidates Are on Wrong Track
Those liberal ideas that fire up the party’s base are a big loser when it comes to beating President Donald Trump.
Pelosi believes most American don't want or don't support: improved health care (Medicare For All), improved infrastructure, public elections, taxing corporations and the rich, green (environmentally friendly) policies, getting rid of the electoral college, a higher minimum wage, and improved labor policies.  Just to name a few of the Sanders/Warren policy prescriptions.

Pelosi claims these are fringe, liberal, San Francisco, pipe-dream policies.  "What works in San Francisco does not necessarily work in Michigan,” Pelosi said.

Being a Midwesterner, I have to inform Pelosi she is way off.  In what has been referred to as the Rust Belt, deindustrialization has decimated many good paying jobs, left workers with less and less of a voice, and left many without decent health care or the hope of a stable retirement.

Most Midwesterners would be happy to see the playing field tilted in favor of workers rather than corporations and the rich.

As the article stated, "The speaker’s concerns reflect those of many Democratic leaders and donors who believe that left-wing policies will alienate swing voters and lead to defeat."

Translation - big moneyed donors like their power and wealth and they don't want to give any of either up.

Pelosi and the current Democratic leadership need to 'grow a pair' or get out the way.  We can't keep pushing climate change policies down the road; we can't keep taking from workers and giving to the already wealthy; all citizens deserve good health care; all citizens should be able to retire with dignity; we should all expect clear air and drinking water; our elections should be free, fair and representative.  If you don't have the spine or passion to fight for real change for the majority of Americans, you don't belong in politics.

Pelosi, Bill Clinton and the triangulation-gang got us to this point.  Always capitulating and cutting deals, slowly moving the Democratic party more and more to the right.  So much so, that the difference between the parties became almost indistinguishable.  Many former Democrats started voting for the Republicans - "Heck, they're not so different and the Republicans will cut taxes, so I might as well vote for them."

These triangulators made the Democratic party the Republican-light party.  Yet, we're supposed to let them keep driving the car?  These Pelosi Democrats are the ones who've been in power as wages have stagnated, unions have been destroyed, elections have been stolen and the standard of living for most working Americans has stagnated.  They have betrayed their Democratic base and the liberal policies that made this country great in the first place.

It's time for real change.  A new generation of Democratic leaders needs to take the wheel.

Sunday, September 4, 2016

Decline of Unions Has Hurt All Workers

Decline of unions has hurt all workers
The steep decline in union membership in recent decades has had an outsize effect on the American workforce, tamping down wage increases for nonunion workers, a new study says. 
Average weekly earnings for nonunion private-sector male workers would have been 5%, or $52, higher in 2013 if the share of union workers had remained at 1979 levels, according to the study out Tuesday from the liberal-leaning Economic Policy Institute ahead of Labor Day. That’s tantamount to a loss of $2,704 annually for the average nonunion worker. 
The paper was authored by Washington University sociologists Jake Rosenfeld and Patrick Denice, and Jennifer Laird, a research scientist at Columbia University’s Center on Poverty and Social Policy. 
The earnings loss is smaller for women because they were not as unionized as men in 1979. Weekly wages would be about 2% to 3% higher for women if union membership had stayed at 1979 levels, the report says. 
About 10% of male private-sector workers were union members in 2013, down from 34% in 1979. In that period, the share of women who belong to unions fell to 6% from 16%. 
The report argues the dwindling influence of unions is a significant but often ignored reason for wage stagnation, along with globalization, technological change and the slowdown in educational achievement gains. 
The prevalence of unions affects the pay of nonunion workers in various ways, the study says. Nonunion employers often raise their workers’ pay to foster loyalty and head off an organizing drive. Kodak deployed that strategy in highly organized New York State, the study says. 
The fatter paychecks of union workers also creates a more competitive labor market that forces nonunion companies to lift wages to prevent employees from jumping ship. And unions often establish labor-friendly policies that generally promote fairness in pay, benefits and worker treatment, according to the report. 
The gains of yesteryear were not limited to nonunion workers at risk of joining unions, the study says. When those workers received raises, their higher-level supervisors who couldn't join unions also saw sharper pay increases to maintain salary hierarchies, the paper says. 
But the losses engendered by shrinking union participation are most pronounced for nonunion private-sector male workers who lack a Bachelor's degree. Wages for that group would be 8% higher in 2013 if union membership had stayed at 1979 levels, translating into an annual wage loss of $3,016.

Saturday, March 12, 2016

Walker Signs Vocational Education Teacher Measure

Gov. Scott Walker signed legislation Tuesday that will let districts hire vocational education teachers who do not hold traditional teachers licenses. ...
Critics, including the state Department of Public Instruction, the state's largest teachers union and university schools of education have raised concerns, saying the measure would lower the bar on teacher standards and create an uneven licensing system around the state.
How does lowering the bar for teacher licensing do anything to impact job growth in Wisconsin? So we can hire more under-qualified "teachers"? (But wouldn't this also imply that we'll be hiring less properly-licensed teachers?) Licensing standards are in place for a reason. We want teachers that have met certain requirements. 

Is this another Republican divide and conquer strategy aimed at the teachers union?

Through defunding and lowering qualification standards, Scott Walker is diminishing the quality of Wisconsin education.

Yet again, Wisconsin Republican policy choices seem to have nothing to do with moving Wisconsin forward. Rather, their legislation is a continual sludge of favors, paybacks, posturing and cronyism.