Thanks a lot, unions

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The European definition of "union" and that of the USA are substantially different.

The Euro "strong" union tradition has a much more specifically marxist origin -- ALL workers unite to control the means of production -- than do unions on this side of the pond. Our last effort along those lines was the Wobblies, and they took it on the chin. The AFL-CIO, by contrast, is an umbrella organization that seeks to imitate this one big union power bloc, but simply can't accomplish the level of needed solidarity -- the voices are too disparate and the agendas too independent among its constituent elements. In the USA, it is all too often the case that a union's International headquarters is quite a bit out of touch with its union locals, and for reasons surprisingly paralell to the reasons our elected representatives in DC can become out of phase with their own constituencies.

Union organizing in the USA, as in Europe, went through a period of out-and-out violence as well. Violence was a common component of strikes here well into the 1970s and still occurs on occasion. However, no union in the USA has ever been quite big enough, complete enough, or had the degree of solidarity necessary to actually de-stabilize the country or otherwise demonstrate a critical degree of power. In contrast, there are a number of instances in European history where large (at least relative to the country in question) unions have effectively paralyzed the whole nation until their issue was addressed.

Unions in the USA today focus most of their effort on: political lobbying and extracting the greatest possible amount of money from employers. Workplace Safety and Fairness issues feature in every contract, but for the most part the Unions are content to let OSHA dictate safety standards and to let 3rd party arbitrators keep worker grievances out of court. They really fight to take as much money as they can, with their favorite tactic -- pattern bargaining -- having become so important that some strikes appear to have been called by the International HQ more to preserve that tactic's power than to benefit the local union branches directly affected by the strike and the subsequently negotiated contract.

Sadly, this style of bargaining is not always done in an intelligent fashion. Unions in the USA have fought for and won contracts that have made the company decidely less competitive and contributed to the company's downfall. Their negotiating teams rarely have individuals who are truly knowledgeable about industry competition norms and standards or about the actual cost of manufacture/service in those industries (I've been led to understand that such expertise is often available in European union negotiation teams). To be fair, both the Unions and Management often take highly antagonistic attitudes into the negotiations -- rarely the most positive framework to start with -- so that part of the mess is shared all around.

Anyway....unions in the USA and Europe do not mean the same thing. Evaluating them using the same rubric would be difficult at best.