You shouldn't worry about repeating yourself as it's a message that bears repeating. Thursday night I'll be giving a talk during the general assembly for our on-campus union where I'm going to be essentially imploring everybody in attendance to try to get at least three people to join the union. I fully intend to quote some things I've read in this newsletter.
We're in a deep-red state and as a result the union isn't able to negotiate on our behalf. While it's incredibly frustrating in many regards, it means we're already prepared for and experienced with the type of hostile environment that the current regime will impose. We're a wall-to-wall union, which is better for solidarity, and we have had success campaigning, organizing, and agitating around specific issues such as providing better health insurance by switching providers.
Our current campaign is for a CoLA and we've been able to gather support from people with vastly different political views from the majority of us because almost all of us are being taken advantage of regardless of our electoral preferences.
There is increased salience and visibility to labor unions that we may yet harness for a positive outcome. It's not over. As a physician, I have never wanted to be in a union until a few years ago - and now many doctors are coming around to this idea. If even we can change our minds, there are cultural tides that may yet turn more former skeptics into believers.
That said, as you correctly pointed out, even a favorable administration was necessary but nowhere near sufficient for meaningful change and growth. Union leadership has a lot of work to do.
I’m in a very effective, large, well established union and I’m alarmed at the inherent individualism of my fellow members. Despite the fact that many of us would have lost our jobs during Covid, and would not make near as much money or have the quality of life we do if not for our collective bargaining agreement, most of my colleagues voted for Trump. They are pro-union only so far as it benefits them and outwardly vocal about the type of worker that should be allowed to unionize. (Cue me slowly banging my head against the wall all day long).
This rightward movement (yay propaganda) of the working class who would benefit most from unionization is a huge problem! That combined with the anti-union drives these big companies do and the collective exhaustion of workers is a recipe for dwindling organization.
The cynic in me says bailing out union pension funds may also have been more primarily about helping out the financial services sector that manages the pension funds than an alignment with the workers.
Also Biden did tell railworkers to talk to the hand. A little too rosy on Biden being a pro-labor president to my taste. 50 years from now a historic interpretation of him being in any way an ally to unions seems unlikely.
The salient point of the article very much stands though, 200 million would go a lot farther used for union organization and strike funds rather than giving it to Democrats. Union donations actually make a quite small % of their total wage chest, they won't miss it.
People want unions. Support is at an all-time high. The potential to channel the rage and impotence people feel about the present moment into a movement to build collective worker power is huge. Working people across both sides are furious about the state of our lives and our world and throwing up their hands practically pleading for answers to what can be done. The ‘vote, vote, vote’ mantra of USA capitalism feels hollow to most; everyone sees that both sides are animated by the billionaire class.
As Trump works to show us each day what authoritarianism is, we will become more desperate for a means to counter his massive power grab. We need a massive effort to educate people about the dynamics of power, and as people become more desperate for answers as to what we can do to counter the oligarchy that is forming before our eyes, we can provide them an alternative to ‘vote, vote, vote.’ We can tell that the only way to counter the power of the oligarchs is to utilize our source of leverage, our numbers, to form powerful unions of working people. Labor unions. Tenant unions. Debtors unions.
People are ready for a new path. People are ready for an explanation of power dynamics that make evident we only counter monopoly/monopsony through the creation of labor monopolies on the supply side of the supply/demand dynamic.
People are ready for unions to be the answer. Are unions ready to lead the fight?
I'm also disappointed to see the 2024 stats. And to keep in mind that simply growing union memberships is not enough to wrest more power to the working class. Our unions have ossified and leadership is meek. Shawn Fain has a bigger vision and a deeper understanding of the transformative potential of unions than most in the top tier of leadership but he's just one. Im a teacher and my husband a firefighter. Our unions are so strong in terms of numbers of members as a ratio of our states population so they could do SO much, but their vision is myopically focused on contract negotiations above all else. What seems to be missing is a class consciousness along with the historical purpose/gains/need for unions. I recall many comments to the effect of "wtf does the UAW have to do with a ceasefire for Palestine?!" meaning they should be focused on benefits and working conditions and stay in their lane. We have a lot of work to do, and your voice makes important contributions to this work, thank you!
I understand what you're saying the number of union members isn't in and of itself enough to get more power to the working class but I think the reason Hamilton keeps talking about union density is if you have smaller and smaller numbers of workers who are actually in unions then labor union issues become nothing more than a small "interest group" narrowly representing a small number of people. Increasingly unions only advocate for stuff that helps existing union members which isn't that helpful to workers as a whole when the vast majority aren't in unions
Thank you for saying this because it's not talked about enough. It is MUCH harder than it needs to be at every step for interested workers, especially for folks in right to work states. There's obviously going to be an immense amount of bullshit to grapple through but it shouldn't be coming from the established unions. Why is it like that? It's discouraging and intimidating.
It seems to me that part of the problem is union leadership. In the biggest Unions they are far from the shops they represent, and they are enchanted by the notion of being catered to by politicians. The work of engaging political leadership is largely because Union leadership likes to feel visible and important, not because it is efficacious.
I work in the trades union space for a local that has 15 million in the bank. They are stuck in the past, have outdated practices and willfully refuse to come into the 21st century and do zero internal organizing. They don’t give a shit about membership and a majority of membership are rabid Trumpers. Leadership are just cronies handing the torch to the next guy. And all are thin skinned mediocre white dudes who fall prey to the propaganda. The call is coming from inside the house. I came from service union comms to this shitshow and I’m disgusted and embarrassed for them. The pettiness between trades - the absolute abysmal solidarity and disregard for picket lines because it would disrupt their social lives is gross. I can’t wait to get out. It is literally taxing my mental health. Many in this space don’t give af about the labor movement - just getting that job with high wages and H&W benefits their CBA affords them. This is not relegated to just this trades local. I’ve witnessed it with members of other trades unions too - from all over the country. Shame on em. They are a disgrace to the movement. And will crybag when the shit that is coming for them - gets here. I talk to members every single day who are willfully ignorant and cannot seem to comprehend that those green energy sites where they were making 250-300k a year (thank you per diem and tax payer money) are done. Gone. Complain about the woke green agenda and trans members while enjoying protected high wages, benefits because THANK YOU COLLECTIVE BARGAINING - and haven’t fully comprehended that they are actually on the menu. It’s hard to care. I try to reach those I can - because the local sure doesn’t give a shit.
I've been a photojournalist for 20 years. We desperately need a union. Rates continue their downward slide, and there's an endless line of young photographers who are good enough and want a foot in the door. It's become impossible to make a middle-class income from photojournalism alone. Unless you come from money, we all have to scrounge for other gigs to make ends meet (weddings, commercial work, events, portraits, etc.).
Very true and obviously the hard part is that most photographers are independent contractors rather than employees. That said you could reach out to News Guild, there are still ways to build on the power of existing media unions to help out photographers who work with them.
“Unions have money. They don’t spend it on new organizing. “
Money is the starting point for any analysis of the failure of unions to grow. Then add political will, and strategy and you have the minimum foundation for growth.
At the moment it is hard to see all 3 (money, strategy, political will) as part of most unions core work.
Unionize doctors , lawyers , scientists , computer programmers , writers , photographers , artists in general, etc. Unions for these people are desperately needed. If unionized their combined clout would be enormous. The typical trade type unions will hold but continue to loose membership. AI in whatever form it takes in terms of robotics and general automation will decimate jobs. This is true for the trades and for so called professional and other white collar jobs. This is also an opportunity because all labor is in the crosshairs of the GOP. IF Not just blue collar workers. SEIZE THE MOMENT
I read Paul Starr's book, The Social Transformation of American Medicine, a few years ago, and one thing has really stuck with me: Samuel Gompers' opposition to government-provided healthcare. Gompers is known as a relatively conservative guy, so when his opposition was first mentioned, I scoffed at it as totally predictable. But he wasn't just pro-health-insurance-industry, as most opponents of universal healthcare are today. Rather, Gompers knew that what the government could give, the government could take; only something *won* by union struggle could be *held onto* in the long term. Seems like a useful lesson.
you don't bear any of the blame for this...You have been doing your part and doing it VERY well...I have become functionally literate about unions and how they work/ don't work BECAUSE of your writing. Being a voice for labor in the wilderness is a VERY important job, and you do it very well
Sadly, philanthropy is similar. Foundations have massive amounts of money. Their leaders do not want to fundamentally change the world. If they did, they would use all of that money to completely change our economic structure. Instead they hide behind excuses like "sustaining their work for the long-term." Because they can't imagine actually fixing anything.
You shouldn't worry about repeating yourself as it's a message that bears repeating. Thursday night I'll be giving a talk during the general assembly for our on-campus union where I'm going to be essentially imploring everybody in attendance to try to get at least three people to join the union. I fully intend to quote some things I've read in this newsletter.
We're in a deep-red state and as a result the union isn't able to negotiate on our behalf. While it's incredibly frustrating in many regards, it means we're already prepared for and experienced with the type of hostile environment that the current regime will impose. We're a wall-to-wall union, which is better for solidarity, and we have had success campaigning, organizing, and agitating around specific issues such as providing better health insurance by switching providers.
Our current campaign is for a CoLA and we've been able to gather support from people with vastly different political views from the majority of us because almost all of us are being taken advantage of regardless of our electoral preferences.
That is exactly the type of work we need. Salute.
Nice work!! Keep up the fight!
There is increased salience and visibility to labor unions that we may yet harness for a positive outcome. It's not over. As a physician, I have never wanted to be in a union until a few years ago - and now many doctors are coming around to this idea. If even we can change our minds, there are cultural tides that may yet turn more former skeptics into believers.
That said, as you correctly pointed out, even a favorable administration was necessary but nowhere near sufficient for meaningful change and growth. Union leadership has a lot of work to do.
This is disheartening but not surprising.
I’m in a very effective, large, well established union and I’m alarmed at the inherent individualism of my fellow members. Despite the fact that many of us would have lost our jobs during Covid, and would not make near as much money or have the quality of life we do if not for our collective bargaining agreement, most of my colleagues voted for Trump. They are pro-union only so far as it benefits them and outwardly vocal about the type of worker that should be allowed to unionize. (Cue me slowly banging my head against the wall all day long).
This rightward movement (yay propaganda) of the working class who would benefit most from unionization is a huge problem! That combined with the anti-union drives these big companies do and the collective exhaustion of workers is a recipe for dwindling organization.
Very nice article.
The cynic in me says bailing out union pension funds may also have been more primarily about helping out the financial services sector that manages the pension funds than an alignment with the workers.
Also Biden did tell railworkers to talk to the hand. A little too rosy on Biden being a pro-labor president to my taste. 50 years from now a historic interpretation of him being in any way an ally to unions seems unlikely.
The salient point of the article very much stands though, 200 million would go a lot farther used for union organization and strike funds rather than giving it to Democrats. Union donations actually make a quite small % of their total wage chest, they won't miss it.
Damn. That is what’s up
People want unions. Support is at an all-time high. The potential to channel the rage and impotence people feel about the present moment into a movement to build collective worker power is huge. Working people across both sides are furious about the state of our lives and our world and throwing up their hands practically pleading for answers to what can be done. The ‘vote, vote, vote’ mantra of USA capitalism feels hollow to most; everyone sees that both sides are animated by the billionaire class.
As Trump works to show us each day what authoritarianism is, we will become more desperate for a means to counter his massive power grab. We need a massive effort to educate people about the dynamics of power, and as people become more desperate for answers as to what we can do to counter the oligarchy that is forming before our eyes, we can provide them an alternative to ‘vote, vote, vote.’ We can tell that the only way to counter the power of the oligarchs is to utilize our source of leverage, our numbers, to form powerful unions of working people. Labor unions. Tenant unions. Debtors unions.
People are ready for a new path. People are ready for an explanation of power dynamics that make evident we only counter monopoly/monopsony through the creation of labor monopolies on the supply side of the supply/demand dynamic.
People are ready for unions to be the answer. Are unions ready to lead the fight?
I'm also disappointed to see the 2024 stats. And to keep in mind that simply growing union memberships is not enough to wrest more power to the working class. Our unions have ossified and leadership is meek. Shawn Fain has a bigger vision and a deeper understanding of the transformative potential of unions than most in the top tier of leadership but he's just one. Im a teacher and my husband a firefighter. Our unions are so strong in terms of numbers of members as a ratio of our states population so they could do SO much, but their vision is myopically focused on contract negotiations above all else. What seems to be missing is a class consciousness along with the historical purpose/gains/need for unions. I recall many comments to the effect of "wtf does the UAW have to do with a ceasefire for Palestine?!" meaning they should be focused on benefits and working conditions and stay in their lane. We have a lot of work to do, and your voice makes important contributions to this work, thank you!
I understand what you're saying the number of union members isn't in and of itself enough to get more power to the working class but I think the reason Hamilton keeps talking about union density is if you have smaller and smaller numbers of workers who are actually in unions then labor union issues become nothing more than a small "interest group" narrowly representing a small number of people. Increasingly unions only advocate for stuff that helps existing union members which isn't that helpful to workers as a whole when the vast majority aren't in unions
Thank you for saying this because it's not talked about enough. It is MUCH harder than it needs to be at every step for interested workers, especially for folks in right to work states. There's obviously going to be an immense amount of bullshit to grapple through but it shouldn't be coming from the established unions. Why is it like that? It's discouraging and intimidating.
It seems to me that part of the problem is union leadership. In the biggest Unions they are far from the shops they represent, and they are enchanted by the notion of being catered to by politicians. The work of engaging political leadership is largely because Union leadership likes to feel visible and important, not because it is efficacious.
So, in other words, you're right.
I work in the trades union space for a local that has 15 million in the bank. They are stuck in the past, have outdated practices and willfully refuse to come into the 21st century and do zero internal organizing. They don’t give a shit about membership and a majority of membership are rabid Trumpers. Leadership are just cronies handing the torch to the next guy. And all are thin skinned mediocre white dudes who fall prey to the propaganda. The call is coming from inside the house. I came from service union comms to this shitshow and I’m disgusted and embarrassed for them. The pettiness between trades - the absolute abysmal solidarity and disregard for picket lines because it would disrupt their social lives is gross. I can’t wait to get out. It is literally taxing my mental health. Many in this space don’t give af about the labor movement - just getting that job with high wages and H&W benefits their CBA affords them. This is not relegated to just this trades local. I’ve witnessed it with members of other trades unions too - from all over the country. Shame on em. They are a disgrace to the movement. And will crybag when the shit that is coming for them - gets here. I talk to members every single day who are willfully ignorant and cannot seem to comprehend that those green energy sites where they were making 250-300k a year (thank you per diem and tax payer money) are done. Gone. Complain about the woke green agenda and trans members while enjoying protected high wages, benefits because THANK YOU COLLECTIVE BARGAINING - and haven’t fully comprehended that they are actually on the menu. It’s hard to care. I try to reach those I can - because the local sure doesn’t give a shit.
I've been a photojournalist for 20 years. We desperately need a union. Rates continue their downward slide, and there's an endless line of young photographers who are good enough and want a foot in the door. It's become impossible to make a middle-class income from photojournalism alone. Unless you come from money, we all have to scrounge for other gigs to make ends meet (weddings, commercial work, events, portraits, etc.).
Very true and obviously the hard part is that most photographers are independent contractors rather than employees. That said you could reach out to News Guild, there are still ways to build on the power of existing media unions to help out photographers who work with them.
“Unions have money. They don’t spend it on new organizing. “
Money is the starting point for any analysis of the failure of unions to grow. Then add political will, and strategy and you have the minimum foundation for growth.
At the moment it is hard to see all 3 (money, strategy, political will) as part of most unions core work.
If we get Amazon we can change this country. Let’s f’n go, Teamsters!!!
Unionize doctors , lawyers , scientists , computer programmers , writers , photographers , artists in general, etc. Unions for these people are desperately needed. If unionized their combined clout would be enormous. The typical trade type unions will hold but continue to loose membership. AI in whatever form it takes in terms of robotics and general automation will decimate jobs. This is true for the trades and for so called professional and other white collar jobs. This is also an opportunity because all labor is in the crosshairs of the GOP. IF Not just blue collar workers. SEIZE THE MOMENT
I read Paul Starr's book, The Social Transformation of American Medicine, a few years ago, and one thing has really stuck with me: Samuel Gompers' opposition to government-provided healthcare. Gompers is known as a relatively conservative guy, so when his opposition was first mentioned, I scoffed at it as totally predictable. But he wasn't just pro-health-insurance-industry, as most opponents of universal healthcare are today. Rather, Gompers knew that what the government could give, the government could take; only something *won* by union struggle could be *held onto* in the long term. Seems like a useful lesson.
you don't bear any of the blame for this...You have been doing your part and doing it VERY well...I have become functionally literate about unions and how they work/ don't work BECAUSE of your writing. Being a voice for labor in the wilderness is a VERY important job, and you do it very well
Sadly, philanthropy is similar. Foundations have massive amounts of money. Their leaders do not want to fundamentally change the world. If they did, they would use all of that money to completely change our economic structure. Instead they hide behind excuses like "sustaining their work for the long-term." Because they can't imagine actually fixing anything.