2. Work as meaningful, with a maximum integration, in every job, of our uniquely human capability to conceptualize and carry out work tasks, and a sharing of society's more onerous tasks. A democratic union will naturally turn its attention to the workplace, and the hierarchies found there will be no more tolerable than those in the union. Workplace hierarchies are based, in part, upon an inhuman division of labor, which divides up our jobs and doles them out to us in little mechanical pieces, unfit for truly human labor. From democratic unions to democratic workplaces seems a natural progression.
3. A good deal of consumption fully socialized: education at all levels, health care, including care for the aged, child care, transportation, and recreation (libraries, parks, playgrounds, gyms, etc.). In a real democracy, peoples' basic needs must be socially provided. Otherwise it will be difficult for some to fully participate in making decisions, in unions and in other organizations, and democracy will be defeated.
Michael Yates
-------------------
Rakesh already mentioned something along the lines of well rounded skills and capital's dependence on such a work force. But I want to suggest something similar, but heading in a anti-capitalist direction.
As I was reading your talk, I imagined myself sitting in an audience with my work buddies. The first question that came to mind was, `yes, yes, but what are we supposed to do about it--in direct concrete terms?' Then I recalled an old thought, my usual answer to myself on these matters.
The one thing that an intellectual class can contribute directly to a working class is education skills. So, in the context of a union, that is something that the union can directly offer its members, i.e. school. Not tuition credits or vouchers or some programmatic get an education jive---but straight ahead, night school, with union selected teachers, union designed courses. However, the direction is not for apprenticeship or improved job classifications or certifications or other little hierarchical nonsense. The direction and goal is improved working lives.
I've seen many people try to go back to school at community or city colleges and they all have the same reaction. They come into a classroom full of other students and feel stupid, old, and worthless. Many teachers do nothing to make them feel welcome and the entire process is so ego destroying that they give up either immediately, or very quickly. The result is that all the oppressive nonsense that they carry around in their minds is re-enforced by the education system.
Now, I have no idea what the state of education and skill is for most members in your union. I would assume since the union is called United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America, that both the skill and education level is pretty high. No matter really, because neither skill nor education is ever completed.
(A brief personal digression.) At one time, I had to pass an employer paid for package course (Healthkit) in electronics so I'll use that as a basis. After that course I was certified (a laugh) as an electronic technician. I got to thinking about the concrete difference between that course which cost my jerk-off boss several thousand dollars (and me, several hundred) and about the same amount of time I could have spent in electrical engineering courses for something like thirty-five dollars a semester at a city college. The single biggest difference between the two was the level of math and physics. At the technician level we were taught (with a heavy basic algebra refresher) a limited variety of circuits and devices in some detail. After cross checking with an old physics text, I recalled similar devices and circuits were also covered, but at a theoretical level, i.e. not in a usable form. My guess would be that the engineering level would be somewhere in between these two extremes.
With that background, I think you can see where union courses and education fits as a bridge between all three levels: science, engineering, technical. These levels are essentially the division of labor that partitions the class hierarchy and provides the socio-economic means to reward one class over another and directly suppress or oppress the others---with the understanding that both rewards and oppression are just differing modes of exploitation---some obviously more egregious than others.
The long term direction and goal to this suggested union based education (not mere training) is complex. Capital specializes in appropriation of skill and its conversion into the means of production. The way out of this equation of depredation is to re-appropriate those skills and knowledge, and retain them as part of a culture of labor, not a culture of capital. And, the only way I can think of to cut this loop is to provide sophisticated levels of education and skills learning within a union context that re-appropriates prior generations of skill and knowledge devoted to production. Pull that blood and sweat back out of the hands of capital, so to speak.
Of course this doesn't just apply to one particular group, but any group of workers at any level, from finally learning how to read and write, to being able to argue with some managerial clone over engineering principles in quality control.
And whatever else happens, I can assure you that management and capital positively hate workers who are smarter and better educated (in concrete terms) than they are. Such a position highlights the lie of meritocracy for the entire system. Evidentially, a sophisticated level of shop floor expertise grinds away all the flimsy hierarchical crap that goes on---leaving nothing but the raw armature of exploitation in full view.
One way or another, good luck with your presentation.
Chuck Grimes