So are you against card check agreements to bypass the NLRB system?
Any card check requires some degree of agreement with the employer - class collaboration if you will - so are they forbidden for class struggle unionists?
^^^ CB: I'm not against card check.
Those are buzz words to me , because the original distinction between class struggle unionism and partnership unionism was that cs unionism means a trade union theory that the interests of the employers and workers are irreconcilable,ultimately, despite short term periods of consonance. Thus, in the long run U.S. capital has clawed back, and continues to clawback gains made the working class; specifically , especially, union membership has fallen, as far as the ultimate purpose of cardchecks. In fact, the Stern is having to discuss this _because_ the number of cards being checked is falling. Staying within the NLRB system is not particularly a sign of class struggle trade unionism, by the way. Nothing against the NLRA, but it has been significantly emaciated since it was won in an era that real class struggle trade unionism had significant impact on the trade union movement, predominant impact in some ways. We want to repeal Taft-Hartley, and some of Landrum-Griffin. Yet that's reform too. There would be some qualitative changes in radical reform. Ultimately, the employer-workerandunion relationship has to be fundamenatlly , you know. That's a class struggle trade union perspective, and the approach following from it is a concrete task for every generation.
Class struggle trade unionism considers the NLRA a reform, which has been
demonstrated to be fragile since the overall working class, unionized and
not, has not had its representatives elected to take state power and legally
transformed the U.S. Constitution and laws to a socialist America, Right to
a living ,money or work, government employer of last resort, right to
education, right to health care, peaceful foreign policy, _all_ troops home,
disassemble nuclear weapons. :>) that is move on to a revolutionary change.
>From a cs standpoint, trade unions would be involved in all these political
questions because we don't practice Economism, socalled trade unionnism pure
and simple. Rather workers are to be involved in _poltical_questions such as
war and peace, not just shop floor issues, etc., etc. Nowadays, clearly
trade unions must _lead_ in stopping global warming and other environmental
pollutions.
I guess now that I think of it Stern isn't using the words that way, but still , "class struggle" is socialist intellectual property.
At any rate, the form of unionism may have to change, and the current crisis of the national federation may produce the forms for more radical trade union political struggle.
^^^^^
Or what kinds of "class collaboration" do you want to eliminate that you think folks like Andy Stern are continuing to engage in?
Nathan