Unions 2.0? Trumka on Austerity, Elizabeth Warren, and Progressives

[Jefferson23]

June 16, 2014


AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka characterizes his vision of a progressive and populist-oriented labor coalition, not as a modern innovation, but as a return to labor’s roots. In an in-depth interview for The Zero Hour, Trumka covered a range of topics that included the postwar heyday of the middle class, the union movement’s relationship to the left, the logic behind fighting for non-unionized workers, and the possible presidential candidacy of Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

The interview can be seen in its entirety above, but here are some selected excerpts. I began the interview by describing my own childhood in Utica, N.Y., during the 1950s and 1960s, when a family could live a good life on a single blue-collar income, and asked: “Are those days gone forever?”

“Those days will be gone forever if we continue with the same austerity policies of the last thirty years,” Trumka replied. “If we change those policies those days can yet be in front of us … we can produce good jobs … They’re doing it in Germany, they’re doing it in Brazil, they’re doing it in Australia, they’re even doing it in Canada.”

Former participants in the antiwar movement of the late 1960s recall a time when many unionized workers were pitted against progressive activists under the leadership of the AFL-CIO’s then-President George Meany. We mentioned this history to Trumka after he used the word “progressive” to describe the AFL-CIO’s goals. In his response (excerpted below), Trumka spoke about the progressive origins of the United Mine Workers of America, where he served as president before joining the AFL-CIO leadership:

http://ourfuture.org/20140616/re-envisioning-labor-an-interview-with-the-afl-cios-richard-trumka

[BillZBubb]

1. Union workers got reasonably affluent after the progressives helped them reach their goals.

As soon as they got theirs, they turned their backs on the rest of the Democratic coalition and started voting for republicans. They got played like violins by the Nixons and Reagans of the right. That was the beginning of the end for the union movement. They voted for their own demise.

[Jefferson23]

2. Do you find Trumka to be insincere?

Thanks for the response, I thought more people here would be interested in this thread.

[BillZBubb]

3. No, I believe Trumka is sincere,

but it is too late. The union movement has been crushed--by its own hand. When reagan destroyed the Air Traffic Controllers Union, many union members had no objection.

In the 1960's had the unions supported progressives instead of being openly hostile, things might have turned out differently.

Even now too many union workers in the more well paid trades vote republican.

I agree that the lack of response to this thread is surprising. Maybe that says a lot about the relationship between the unions and progressives and many Democrats.

[Jefferson23]

4. Terrible history of decisions..how sad. I appreciate your reply. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

6. Unions did protest, I was one of the members who protested.

[whathehell]

9. Yep, so did my union member Dad...He hated Reagan for breaking the ATC union. n/t

[JDPriestly]

7. It's a great post, but this has been a busy week thanks

to the Supreme Court. Thanks for posting this.

I well remember the days when a family could survive on the income of one working parent. It wasn't that the income was so high but housing was not so extremely expensive compared to the income.

I remember when my parents bought a home in 1952 for I think about $5,000. That might have been about what my father earned in two years. The median income that year was about $3,900.

http://www2.census.gov/prod2/popscan/p60-015.pdf

Ir rose to $4,200 in 1954.

http://www2.census.gov/prod2/popscan/p60-018.pdf

Between 2010 and 2012, median income in the US fell by 1.3% from $51,144 to $50,502.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/acsbr11-02.pdf

The ugly truth:

Although median annual household income rose to $52,100 in June (2013), from its recent inflation-adjusted trough of $50,700 in August 2011, it remained $2,400 lower — a 4.4 percent decline — than in June 2009, when the recession ended. This drop, combined with the 1.8 percent decline that occurred during the recession, leaves median household income 6.1 percent — or $3,400 — below its level in December 2007, when the economic slump began.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/us/politics/us-median-income-rises-but-is-still-6-below-its-2007-peak.html?_r=0

The house we bought for $5,000 is now estimated by Zillow to be worth $80,000. $5,000 was a lot to pay for that house but houses were hard to find. Not much had been built during the war and then the GIs came home, started families and needed someplace to raise their children.

There was lots of work in construction but the builders could not satisfy the demand. I remember looking at houses that were "unfinished." The buyer was supposed to finish the house himself. That's how great the demand was -- they could sell "finish it yourself" houses.

I assure you the neighborhood is not as nice as it was when we bought there. The local school is a nightmare. It was wonderful and part of it was new when we attended it. So, $80,000 is a lot for that house in that school district.

We need to get a fairer playing field in our economy. I think Elizabeth Warren is the only potential candidate who can bring that about.

Bernie Sanders has a lot of good ideas too, and I would like to see him run and would support him. We need big changes.

[Jefferson23]

8. Overhelmed, that is how many Americans see the obstacles, I think. We have far too

many issues to address, the recent SCOTUS decisions present another set back.

The policies were established and now ingrained in our political system to enhance
the 1%. What can we point to any longer that does not have this upset?

I fear that without a movement to over turn CU, and then move to fight
for exclusive public funded elections, we will not achieve our goals.

Your data presents an American story and one that is not promising for the
near future.

Warren/Sanders, Sanders/Warren or anyone bold enough to make the
commitment..I am there. But I can't say enough that for me, much should
hinge on a focus to eliminate the money influence. I don't see how we can
separate them any longer.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply, JD..have a Happy 4th, too.

[Thinkingabout]

5. Unions lobbied for safer working conditions, mini mun wages, overtime rates and pension

guarantees. Because of unions some employers gave benefits without having unions because of getting good workers. Unions did not abandon others but was abandoned.