--- Marvin Gandall <marvgandall at videotron.ca> wrote:
> These are always fair questions, and whether the
> failures are essentially
> ones of leadership, as you maintain, or objective
> ones pertaining to the
> nature of the workforce (eg. dispersed and transient
> vs concentrated or in
> short supply), the working conditions (eg. white
> collar vs. blue collar),
> and the relative bargaining power of the two sides -
> as the unions with
> jurisdiction would undoubtedly claim - these
> questions can really only be
> answered by those with knowledge of these industries
> and the considerations
> which have shaped the union responses. Certainly,
> I'm not in a position to
> know, and neither I suspect are most of the people
> on this list with very
> definite opinions on these matters.
[WS:] Looking at the objective conditions in which union organizing occurs is a very good idea, indeed. To the ones that you mention, I would also add generalized social norms, values and expectations that aid or impede collective action. Unions tend to thrive in societies that put more value on collective action and social solidarity - but the US is not one of them.
It seems that the US society has thoroughly adopted the value system of its ruling class e.g. individulalism, competition, free market, opportunity to pursue wealth, business as the highest form of social institution and consumerism. This social value system is not very conducive toward labor unionis.
I would go even further and conjecture that in the past, US unions got a free ride from social solidarity expectations brought from overseas by immigrants. However, as the immigrants became acculturated to the US society - they tended to adopt the WASP pro-capitalist value system that dominated this society almost since its inception (as Richard Hofstadter convincingly argued.) Consequently the social millieu has changed and became more and more difficult for union organizing.
This also seems to be true today of Latino immigrants, they put a greater value on social solidarity and they also seem to be more likely to join unions. I suspect, however, that when they acculturate to the US society, their willingnewss to support unions declines.
The bottom line is that union organizing in the US is extremely difficult - this country is not a fertile ground for this type of collective action. Blaming union leadership for a failure to gain new members is like blaiming them for a failure to squeeze blood out of a turnip. It seems that in such a deeply pro-business society, corporate unionism a la SEIU is the only form of unionism that has a chance of survival.
Wojtek
____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ