Walker’s Anti-Labor Law Null and Void

Huck/Konopacki Labor Cartoons

The good news is that a Wisconsin judge has ruled Gov. Walker’s anti-labor law, Act 10, null and void, restoring collective bargaining rights to Wisconsin’s public sector workers and the right to collect dues through payroll deductions. The bad news is that even if his appeal is rejected Wisconsin’s public sector workers will be back to where they were prior to the enactment of Act 10.

Key sections of Walker’s controversial anti-labor law were ruled unconstitutional by Dane County Judge Juan Colas. According to the Nation, Madison Teachers Inc. director John Matthews, whose union had filed the lawsuit, declared that “We are back to where we were before Scott Walker moved to take away our rights.” That is to say that they have the same low wages, the same mediocre health coverage, the same weak pension benefits, and the same weak unions (also, see here) that would rather send their members home from the nation’s largest workers’ protests in a generation with the promise of electoral victories that never come, than fight their rulers in the streets through a General Strike or even smaller local strikes.

As long as Wisconsin workers occupied the state building and the streets and were not on the job, they were cutting into the profits, ease and sense of security typically enjoyed by the ruling class. This is when they were at their most powerful and this is when they had the greatest chance of demanding and winning better working conditions, wage increases, shorter hours. Granted, the protests had originated as a struggle against Act 10, which which the unions spun as an attack on collective bargaining rights and the automatic dues check off. However, Walker had also demanded a 20% pay cut, which angered the rank and file. And even if the protests had begun with an emphasis on restoring collective bargaining, large sustained workers’ struggles and General Strikes can result in increased worker confidence and empowerment, inspiring them to demand more.

It is also important to remember that collective bargaining is a means to an end. It is an efficient way to win improvements in working conditions and pay, but only when backed with the threat of a strike. Without the force of a job action, the bosses have no incentive to give the workers anything and they generally don’t. Unions need to put the time and resources into organizing their members to strike, educating them as to why strikes are necessary and powerful, and prepare them to do so at the drop of a hat. Otherwise, they cannot accomplish much through the collective bargaining process.

The sad reality is that most unions today are terrified of strikes and avoid them like the plague. They simply do not invest the time and resources necessary to prime their members for the possibility of a strike, choosing instead to spend their resources on political campaigns and lobbying. And they sometimes actively discourage strike actions.

The case in Wisconsin was particularly telling.  Not only did the unions discourage a General Strike, but they essentially ignored Walker’s demand for a 20% pay cut, focusing almost entirely on preserving collective bargaining rights and automatic dues check offs. Some were even willing to concede the pay cut in exchange for winning back collective bargaining. Yet, what good is collective bargaining if it isn’t used to win improved working conditions and pay?

Dock Bosses Sue Over Solidarity Action

On April 4, thousands of longshore workers shut down the ports of San Francisco and Oakland for 24 hours in support of the national day of actions in defense of collective bargaining. According to Working in These Times, over 90% of the members of ILWU local 10 took part in the work stoppage. Their employer, The Pacific Maritime Association (PMA), filed a federal lawsuit against Local 10, arguing that their leaders deliberately violated the no-strike clause of their contract by promoting the action. ILWU members argue that their leaders had nothing to do with the action, which was organized by members during a general membership meeting. Working in These Times quoted Trent Willis, chair of the Local 10 Defense Committee, who said "Our officers, whether they supported it or not, were powerless."

There are several lessons in this for teachers and other workers. Local 10 has been one of the few unions in recent years to engage in solidarity strikes. They have shut down the ports in order to block weapons shipments to the repressive Salvadoran regime in the 1980s. They shut down the ports in solidarity with Mumia Abu-Jamal, who is being threatened with execution for a crime he most likely did not commit. They shut down the ports in solidarity with the anti-Apartheid movement. (For more, see here)

The problem is that while such actions are a necessary part of any attempt to change state or employer policies, they are unlikely to be successful in isolation. Large numbers of workers from across the private and public sector must join in such solidarity actions for them to be successful.

Another lesson is that the ILWU rank and file not only understands the importance of solidarity and the power of the strike, but they are willing to take great risks in carrying them out on a regular and ongoing basis. Each time they strike, workers risk arrest, injury, and possibly even death, should the state or company goons choose to unleash the full force of their power, while their union risks lawsuits and penalties. Indeed, during a port shut down protesting the war in Iraq in 2003, the Oakland police fired upon ILWU members and their supporters with rubber bullets, wooden dowels and bean bag rounds. They also threw concussion grenades at them, and used tear gas and “sting balls,” which spray BB-like pellets. (See here and here).

When a union refuses to stand up for what is right or to use the only effective weapon they have out of fear of jail, injury, lawsuit, or any other excuse, they become impotent and irrelevant. The fact that unions and strikes were once illegal, did not stop workers from forming unions and taking strike actions.

The current lawsuit against the ILWU is not simply about recouping corporate losses from the April 4 shutdown. More importantly, it is about intimidating ALL workers so that no one else considers solidarity actions, general strikes, or even actions to defend their own members in local disputes. It should be noted that the April work stoppage by Local 10 was in solidarity with the public sector workers of Wisconsin, who had shut down their state capital with demonstrations and an occupation, and who were on the verge of a general strike. Nothing terrifies the ruling elite more than a general strike, not only because it has the potential to cause huge losses in profits, but also because general strikes have a tendency to radicalize workers and encourage them to increase their demands.

Unfortunately, the mainstream unions in Wisconsin backed down and told all their members to go home, thus undermining the chances of a general strike or even localized strikes. It is also unfortunate that the rank and file listened and followed their union bosses’ orders, as it would have been relatively easy to parlay their existing demonstrations and occupation into a general strike, with so many already skipping work and with the support of Wisconsin’s South Central Federation of Labor.

PMA has recently reached out to Local 10 to discuss an out of court settlement. According to the Working in These Times article, PMA has offered to drop the lawsuit without damages, though they did not mention what, if anything, the ILWU would have to concede. It is also unclear why the PMA is backing down, except that numerous organizations and unions have come to the defense of Local 10, including Labor Secretary Robert Reich, the San Francisco Labor Council, Wisconsin’s South Central Federation of Labor, and the World Federation of Trade Unions.

Solidarity: What is it Good For? (Absolutely Everything!)

Poster for League for Industrial Democracy, by Anita Willcox Great Depression,

For a while, the term solidarity developed a negative image among Americans, with many associating it with communists, stodgy old school unions, or the right-wing Polish Solidarnosc movement. Sometimes I would use the word when talking with teachers and immediately notice defensive posturing, perhaps a sign of anxiety or discomfort over the inevitable request to join a picket line or to do something extra beyond their teaching duties on behalf of other teachers or workers.

Recently we have been hearing more positive talk about solidarity, like it is a good thing, a personal responsibility, such as showing support for Wisconsin public sector workers fighting state attacks on their right to strike and to collectively bargain. The California Teachers Association and other unions sent out messages saying “We stand in solidarity with you.” However, this is not solidarity at all. Rather, it is a message of spiritual support. Organizations that sent money were providing material support. Solidarity, in contrast, is when a group or individual that is not currently in conflict with the bosses goes out and physically supports another that is in conflict, generally by taking the same or more extreme risks in the process.

A labor struggle cannot be won through messages of spiritual support, though such messages may be inspirational and help participants to persevere. Likewise, victory cannot happen through material support, though this is often helpful in sustaining a local struggle. What wins labor conflicts and most other progressive causes (on the rare occasions in which they do win) is sufficiently harming the bosses’ bottom line or so inconveniencing politicians that they decide it is easier and/or more profitable to negotiate than to continue strong arming workers.

An Injury to One is An Injury to All

Solidarity is not only about helping a group that is in conflict to win their struggle. It is also about connecting their battle to a larger struggle in hopes of building momentum toward winning that larger struggle, too. The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) popularized the slogan: An Injury to One Is An Injury to All.  In other words, an attack on workers anywhere is an attack on workers everywhere. The threat to Wisconsin’s public sector workers threatens workers throughout the country because a victory by the bosses there emboldens them to launch attacks elsewhere. We can already see this happening with Democratically-controlled legislatures, like Massachusetts, also trying to gut labor protections (See Liberal Union Busting).

Ricardo and Enrique Flores Magon, L.A. Jail, 1917

The IWW not only supported other causes by sending members to join their picket lines. The IWW actively recruited people to “ride the rails” and physically travel across the country to help win local struggles. They even advertised for activists to “come fill the jails,” knowing that if they got enough of their members arrested, they would overwhelm the local government (both financially and physically) and be able to force them to negotiate. And they did not limit themselves to labor conflicts, either. They organized and recruited participants for Free Speech fights in Spokane, Fresno and San Diego, when local authorities tried to ban them from organizing and agitating on street corners. They even sent members to join the Mexican anarchist Ricardo Flores Magon in his uprising against the Mexican authorities. An IWW army briefly took over Mexicali and Tijuana in 1912 (See “IWW: Its First Seventy Years,” by Fred Thompson and Patrick Murfin).

ILWU Shuts Down West Coast Ports in Solidarity With Wisconsin Workers

Seattle ILWU Member Striking Against Iraq War (Image by WikiGolightly)

The International Long Shore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), especially Local 10 (San Francisco and Oakland), is one of the few fighting unions left in the U.S. Their website has even adopted the old IWW slogan: An Injury to One is An Injury to All.

Over the past 30 years, the ILWU has repeatedly shut down Bay Area ports (and occasionally the entire West Coast) in solidarity with other causes. On May 2, 2008, they shut down West Coast ports both to honor International Workers Day and to protest the war in Iraq. On October 23, 2010, they shut down Bay Area ports to support justice for Oscar Grant, an unarmed black man brutally shot to death by BART transit cop Johannes Mehserle. In 1995, during the San Francisco newspaper strike, they blocked newspapers from moving through Bay Area ports. In 1999 they shut down to ports in solidarity with Mumia Abu-Jamal, who continues to sit on death row despite overwhelming evidence of his innocence, including an admission of guilt by someone else for the crime Abu-Jamal was convicted of (See Mumia Death Sentence Ruled Unconstitutional). In the 1970s and 1980s they refused to handle cargo headed for the brutal totalitarian regimes in Chile and El Salvador, and in the 1980s, for 11 days, they refused to handle cargo from South Africa in solidarity with the anti-apartheid struggle (see Democracy Now, 4/29/11).

On April 4, 2011, the ILWU again shut down Bay Area ports, this time in solidarity with Wisconsin workers. For this they are being sued by The Pacific Maritime Association, which represents shipping companies, terminal operators and stevedoring companies that lost money as a result of their work stoppage. The ILWU believes the suit is not only about recouping lost profits, but also about stopping such solidarity from occurring in the future. Indeed, such lawsuits are one reason why we don’t see more solidarity actions elsewhere in the country.

Financial Martial Law in Wisconsin, Too?

According to Forbes magazine, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and his cronies are drafting legislation that would allow him to appoint emergency managers who could cancel union contracts, fire elected officials and school board members, and take control of entire cities and towns. Rick Unger, who wrote the piece, said that the plan is being written by the largest law firm in the state, Foley & Lardner, and is scheduled to be introduced to the legislature next month.

Walker went on the radio yesterday to deny the report, asserting that it was “absolutely bogus.” He denied that he or anyone in his office ever did or said or planned anything like this, which leaves open the possibility that Foley & Lardner are indeed working on such a plan, and that Walker is simply making a stab at plausible deniability. Unger’s source, a Wisconsin political organizer named Nate Timm, refused to name his source for this information, but had confirmed that he received his information from a “highly placed GOP source” who was in a position to know the governor’s plans.

If true, Wisconsin’s plan would be very similar to the financial martial law plan enacted in Michigan earlier this year, where Governor Snyder has already appointed an Emergency Financial Manager, Joseph Harris, to take over the town of Benton Harbor. One of Harris’ first acts as Manager was to issue an order stripping away all powers from the city’s elected officials. Erik Kain, another Forbes writer, said that the Michigan and Wisconsin plans followed a pattern of similar legislation being pushed through in other Tea-Party controlled states enacting strikingly similar legislation all at the same time across the country.

State Budget Lunacy

The following was sent out by the California Teachers Association (CTA). It is a pretty good summary of some of the more egregious examples of how states are squeezing working people for the benefit of the rich. It is no coincidence that California has been left out of their list. CTA is complicit in the state’s gouging of working people, including their own members, the teachers. They are even trying to rally teacher support for a state capital protest to force legislators to allow an extension of regressive taxes that would further squeeze working people, while letting the rich off the hook. 

Florida

In Florida, Governor Scott is proposing a K-12 education cut of 10% or $700 per student. Schools are considering cutting football and athletics programs. At the same time, Scott has proposed cutting the corporate income tax from 5.5% to 3%, and fully eliminating it by 2018. The tax cut will cost the state $459 million in 2012. Florida is already 50^th in per capita state government expenditures for all education and 43^rd among the states in state tax revenue per capita [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/2011; News 4 Jacksonville, 3/14/2011; Highlands Today 2/10/2011; Florida Times-Union 3/29/2011]

Maine 

In Maine, Governor LePage is cutting the alternative minimum income tax in 2012, lowering the top income tax rate from 8.5% to 7.95% in 2013, and in 2014 doubling the tax exemption in the estate tax. These cuts will cost the state $203 million over the next two years, but Mainers earning between $28,139 and $48,050 would only get a tax break of about $83 in 2013. Meanwhile, LePage is cutting health care for seniors, including a $14 million cut to Maine's Medicare Savings Program that would drop 40,000 people from the program which helps seniors and the disabled afford prescription medication. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/2011; WABI, 3/31/2011]

Michigan 

In Michigan, Governor Snyder wants to eliminate the state business tax, replacing it with a flat 6% corporate income tax. He is also wants an additional $1.8 billion in business tax cuts. Yet, Snyder recently signed a law cutting unemployment benefits from 26 to 20 weeks. He also wants to cut $470 per pupil from K-12 education spending and a 15% cut in state support for public universities. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/2011; Detroit Free Press 3/29/2011; Detroit News 4/1/2011]

Minnesota

In Minnesota, the Republican Senate has enacted new tax cuts costing $200 million in 2012-13 and $435 million in 2014-15. The tax breaks will be paid for by cutting the “Renter’s Credit” which provided a tax refund to over 300,000 low and moderate income households. [MN Budget Project 3/29/2011]

New Hampshire

Gov. Lynch wants to cut 23% of state funding from public universities ($750 per student) and 21% from community colleges ($400 per student). The New Hampshire house just passed a budget bill cutting $115 million from hospitals, $5 million from childcare aid for mothers trying to get off welfare, $90 million from the University System and $11 million from the Community College System. At the same time, the bill adds funding for charter schools and eliminates a $30 per vehicle registration fee.  [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/2011; Union Leader 3/31/2011]

New Jersey

Gov. Christie is proposing a 25% reduction in the corporate minimum tax, and he wants to raise the estate tax exemption from $675,000 to $1 million. These cuts will cost the state $200 million in 2012. He also gave away $800 million in corporate tax cuts through his “Back to Work NJ” program, while rewarding millionaires with tax breaks. At the same time, he cut $1.3 billion in state support for education. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/2011; Daily Record, 12/28/10; Office of Legislative Services Budget Analysis, April, 2010; NJPP Report 1/24/2011]

Ohio

Gov. Kasich is proposing a K-12 education cut of 10% ($489 per student) and a higher education cut of 11% ($510 per student), while giving away $1.2 billion vouchers and charters schools subsidies. Kasich cut Medicare by $1.4 million. Meanwhile, Kasich left 128 business tax exemptions, credits and deductions worth $7 billion in lost revenue and he is implementing an income tax break that will cost Ohio $800 million in revenue. [Policy Matters Ohio 3/25/2011; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/2011; Policy Matters Ohio 3/29/2011; Toledo Blade 3/20/2011; Columbus Dispatch 3/17/2011]

Pennsylvania

Gov. Corbett refuses to collect revenue from new natural gas drilling, while proposing a k-12 education cut of 10% ($550 million), plus an additional $500 million in cuts to implement effective educations practices, train teachers, and maintain tutoring programs. He is also wants to cut more than 50% from higher education ($271 million) and reduce community college funding by 10%. Yet, there is plenty of money for tax breaks for businesses, like the elimination of capital stock and franchise taxes. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/2011; Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center, 3/11/2011]

Wisconsin

Gov. Walker gave away $117 million in tax breaks for corporations and has promised to corporate taxes by $82 million. Meanwhile, he wants to cut education by 8% ($749 million) over the next 2 years, with an addition $250 million cut from state universities. He also wants to slash Wisconsin’s SeniorCare program. [Associated Press 2/4/2011; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/21/2011; WHBL News 3/31/2011]