This is such a well-rounded write up. Kudos!! I'm celebrating everyone who is positively impacted by this change. When I lived in France, there were strikes with different cohorts every single month. From elementary school cafeteria workers, to bus drivers, to carnival workers.
It's clear that organizing has a measurable impact on worker conditions, hours, and compensation. I'm not part of a professional union, but if it was an option for me I'd love to participate. Thanks for writing about this important news!!
Starbucks is a bad example of why store by store organizing “works” because they have no franchises. At the end of the day the campaign was able to push for and win coordinated bargaining with a national employer. Winning that at an employer like McDonalds which does utilize franchises is an entirely different campaign when they can hide behind franchise law to avoid any duty to bargain. This point also diminishes the struggle that fast food employees had to engage in to even get this law passed. There were literally hundreds of strikes.
No one is arguing that sectoral bargaining could replace worker organizing, that’s a straw man. I do think it’s interesting that when French neoliberals pushed to move away from sectoral bargaining to an enterprise bargaining model there were massive strikes in response. To favor enterprise bargaining over sectoral bargaining I think you need to address two questions:
1. Why are CGT and CFDU, two of the most militant trance union federations on the planet, wrong on this issue?
2. Why are you siding with the French neoliberals over the elected representatives of the French working class?
My whole problem with this is: if you're 40 years old and working at Mickey D's you have failed. It's not societies fault that you failed to raise your station along the way. Flippin burgers and delivering pizza....when I was growing up....was reserved for high school kids. Personally....I will lmao when you are replaced by a machine. Enjoy that 25% bump... for as long as it last.
Here's what this article overlooks. It's not that FF businesses will fail directly due to $20 hr min wage requirement. Though some certainly will. They will begun to fall like domino's because folks will refuse to pay $20 dollars for a buger when the prices increase. And increase they will. 1 week ago I paid $15 for combo burritos and a reg fry no drink at Del Taco and that was before the forthcoming increase. My willingness to pay for substandard food for convenience sake has been exceeded. I won't pay it. And of you can read you will see this feeling is widespread. These businesses will fail from lack of business. We the average consumer cannot afford to pay the increase required to meet the $20 FF min wage. I'll be eating PBJ's at home or brown bag.
"In the mid-1980s, local authorities carried out a national job evaluation scheme, which awarded all manual workers, from carers to refuse collectors, the same basic pay. But local authorities failed to address the many added perks for male-dominated jobs, such as bonuses and generous allowances for overtime. 'Each local authority developed its own way of enhancing the pay of the men – and they were very creative in the way they did it,' said [Stefan] Cross [KC]. Glasgow had more than 120 bonus schemes for its employees, and every single one benefited jobs dominated by men. Often these schemes were the direct result of trade unions, which are traditionally male-dominated, lobbying hard for particular groups of employees. ...
"Not only did unions sign off on earlier job evaluation schemes, but some of the worst disparities came about as a result of union pressure that prioritised men over women. 'Obviously they’re meant to go hell for leather on getting the best possible deal in every dispute,' said one London-based council officer. 'But this is the public purse, and getting insanely preferential deals for refuse workers, which then means home carers are discriminated against, opens the door to public sector layoffs. So where does your socialism start and finish?'"
To achieve equal pay for men and women for equivalent work, the work first needs to be equated. What often happens is that unions will fight a cause that gets a victory rather than one that achieves equal pay, with fringe benefits lumped in for traditionally male-dominated industries, which get conveniently swept under the carpet as time goes by when female employees make claims for equal PAY. One must not forget that unions depend on union membership and, to be worthy of that, they must book results. Just like employers, they can tend to compromise and favour certain parts of their membership in order to be seen to be booking successes, instead of fighting for total victory. In Belgium, we have a National Labour Board and negotiations at sectorial level according to so-called "joint committees" and even then we suffer with unequal pay. Equal pay - a scourge that has not to this day been resolved in most civilised western nations - suffers continuously from fragmented bargaining structures.
If you have a chance, read the long article, which is an eye-opener to a massive success driven by workers themselves, and not the unions; but at what a price!
Because I’m dense, I’m ever bewildered by the failure to fight for a mandatory living wage for full time employment (which should be defined to 30 hours a week). Fighting for $15 or 20 an hour when a living wage is ~$35-45,000/yr depending on location is not a bad thing of course but I don’t know.
I guess my confusion is where is the energy pushing for a mandatory living wage? Am I missing something? Am I just wrong?
This is such a well-rounded write up. Kudos!! I'm celebrating everyone who is positively impacted by this change. When I lived in France, there were strikes with different cohorts every single month. From elementary school cafeteria workers, to bus drivers, to carnival workers.
It's clear that organizing has a measurable impact on worker conditions, hours, and compensation. I'm not part of a professional union, but if it was an option for me I'd love to participate. Thanks for writing about this important news!!
Starbucks is a bad example of why store by store organizing “works” because they have no franchises. At the end of the day the campaign was able to push for and win coordinated bargaining with a national employer. Winning that at an employer like McDonalds which does utilize franchises is an entirely different campaign when they can hide behind franchise law to avoid any duty to bargain. This point also diminishes the struggle that fast food employees had to engage in to even get this law passed. There were literally hundreds of strikes.
No one is arguing that sectoral bargaining could replace worker organizing, that’s a straw man. I do think it’s interesting that when French neoliberals pushed to move away from sectoral bargaining to an enterprise bargaining model there were massive strikes in response. To favor enterprise bargaining over sectoral bargaining I think you need to address two questions:
1. Why are CGT and CFDU, two of the most militant trance union federations on the planet, wrong on this issue?
2. Why are you siding with the French neoliberals over the elected representatives of the French working class?
My whole problem with this is: if you're 40 years old and working at Mickey D's you have failed. It's not societies fault that you failed to raise your station along the way. Flippin burgers and delivering pizza....when I was growing up....was reserved for high school kids. Personally....I will lmao when you are replaced by a machine. Enjoy that 25% bump... for as long as it last.
Here's what this article overlooks. It's not that FF businesses will fail directly due to $20 hr min wage requirement. Though some certainly will. They will begun to fall like domino's because folks will refuse to pay $20 dollars for a buger when the prices increase. And increase they will. 1 week ago I paid $15 for combo burritos and a reg fry no drink at Del Taco and that was before the forthcoming increase. My willingness to pay for substandard food for convenience sake has been exceeded. I won't pay it. And of you can read you will see this feeling is widespread. These businesses will fail from lack of business. We the average consumer cannot afford to pay the increase required to meet the $20 FF min wage. I'll be eating PBJ's at home or brown bag.
Sectoral bargaining bodes dangers. It's not wrong, but the problem arose in the UK cities of Glasgow and Birmingham. From https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/feb/01/they-were-dying-and-theyd-not-had-their-money-britains-multibillion-pound-equal-pay-scandal:
"In the mid-1980s, local authorities carried out a national job evaluation scheme, which awarded all manual workers, from carers to refuse collectors, the same basic pay. But local authorities failed to address the many added perks for male-dominated jobs, such as bonuses and generous allowances for overtime. 'Each local authority developed its own way of enhancing the pay of the men – and they were very creative in the way they did it,' said [Stefan] Cross [KC]. Glasgow had more than 120 bonus schemes for its employees, and every single one benefited jobs dominated by men. Often these schemes were the direct result of trade unions, which are traditionally male-dominated, lobbying hard for particular groups of employees. ...
"Not only did unions sign off on earlier job evaluation schemes, but some of the worst disparities came about as a result of union pressure that prioritised men over women. 'Obviously they’re meant to go hell for leather on getting the best possible deal in every dispute,' said one London-based council officer. 'But this is the public purse, and getting insanely preferential deals for refuse workers, which then means home carers are discriminated against, opens the door to public sector layoffs. So where does your socialism start and finish?'"
To achieve equal pay for men and women for equivalent work, the work first needs to be equated. What often happens is that unions will fight a cause that gets a victory rather than one that achieves equal pay, with fringe benefits lumped in for traditionally male-dominated industries, which get conveniently swept under the carpet as time goes by when female employees make claims for equal PAY. One must not forget that unions depend on union membership and, to be worthy of that, they must book results. Just like employers, they can tend to compromise and favour certain parts of their membership in order to be seen to be booking successes, instead of fighting for total victory. In Belgium, we have a National Labour Board and negotiations at sectorial level according to so-called "joint committees" and even then we suffer with unequal pay. Equal pay - a scourge that has not to this day been resolved in most civilised western nations - suffers continuously from fragmented bargaining structures.
If you have a chance, read the long article, which is an eye-opener to a massive success driven by workers themselves, and not the unions; but at what a price!
Because I’m dense, I’m ever bewildered by the failure to fight for a mandatory living wage for full time employment (which should be defined to 30 hours a week). Fighting for $15 or 20 an hour when a living wage is ~$35-45,000/yr depending on location is not a bad thing of course but I don’t know.
I guess my confusion is where is the energy pushing for a mandatory living wage? Am I missing something? Am I just wrong?
(signed) Deeply Confused
is it possible for the SEIU to act as an advocate for union organizing?