There’s a moment in Robert Greenwald’s new documentary, Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, that serves as a perfect metaphor for the entire battle between organized labor and the country’s largest private employer. Josh Noble, an employee of the Tire and Lube Express division of a Wal-Mart in Loveland, Colorado, is attempting to organize 17 of his fellow workers… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (18)Page 1 of 1 pagesSince he is an early Rabbit the post is re-done with the electrons in line this time.
A book-length report on U.S. labor practices released by Human Rights Watch in 2000 found that “workers’ freedom of association is under sustained attack in the United States, and the government is often failing its responsibility under international human rights standards to deter such attacks and protect workers’ rights.”
This was in 2000 does anyone expect the picture to be better now after five years of “Compassionate Conservatism”?
Except of course the usual suspects. Come on down trolls.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 7, 2005 at 3:54 AM I was in a situation nearly identical to Josh Noble’s. I was trying to organize fellow employees at a non union Pulitzer newspaper. Of the 16 employees in our unit, 14 signed cards that requested a vote on unionization. 12 commited firmly to vote yes. 10 remained firm during the lengthy campaign. On election day, I lost 14-2.
What happened? One employee had his personnel record cleared of a serious reprimand. One recieve a performance raise that just three months earlier he had been refused. The rest weren’t talking, but each and everyone of these “bribes” were illegal under NLRB laws. But the process to prove the charges would have been arduous and lengthy.
Six months later I was laid off.
Posted by AshC on Nov 7, 2005 at 9:53 AM Rabbit had some experiences with Big-W here, the same thing, probably the same corporation for all I know. These experiences were in 1979, I was a casual and fifteen. There and then Rabbit resigned, and vowed never to have more to do with corporate employers, and I have watched them grow and spread like a terrible cancer since. Back then nobody else would dare treat their employees so bad, now this is the norm. The big corporations set the standard, such that they inevitably bring down standards for everyone. They get away with it for long enough until it just becomes the way things are done, and with their lobbying of government they finally get the law to be brought into line with their idea of what’s good for them. Thus the whole workforce is affected eventually.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 7, 2005 at 6:05 PM Wal-Mart’s behavior is in some ways a repeat of U.S. big business a century ago. To use a mixed metaphor I heard a while back, “The pendulum has swung overboard again.”
In the early 20th Century my great uncle served under Teddy Roosevelt as one of the “Trust-Busters”. His job was to go after the Chicago meat packers who had a strangle hold on prices.
My paternal grandfather, a Swedish immigrant/coal miner at that time, lay on his side in a vein of soft coal with a pick and shovel. Often he worked in water (about 60 F) and was in constant danger of flooding. The unions came too late for him an he died young.
My father, while working at a brick plant during the depression, saw the violent effects of the union organizers in that industry.
During my working years I experienced strikes at the only full-time large corporation job I ever held — threats and intimidation, paint-filled egg shells and stones, etc.
The power shifted from owners and managers to unions. When the unions got too strong they put the U.S. auto industry in jeopardy by going too far. Now the trend has shifted way too far to the management side in most companies.
During the 50s, 60s and 70s, I worked with many corporate executives who were considerate and generous to suppliers, employees and their community. Over the past couple of decades I noticed a distinct change to an attitude by many of the newer ones. Egos inflated, arrogance, greed and an elitist attitude began to emerge.
Who was it that said, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”?
Wal-Mart has become a prime example.
I think it’s time for a new broom.
-------------------
Note to Rabbit,If you were fifteen in 1979 then you are only about 41 now. No wonder you think the Soviets were all imagination and no threat. The Berlin Airlift, The Hungarian Uprising, The Wall going up and people risking their lives to flee, The Cuban Missile Crisis… all were before your time.
We may as well have been discussing the Middle Ages. You are forgiven. I guess you had to experience the times.
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 8, 2005 at 11:53 AM One thing which is strongly in Wal-Mart’s favor right now is the off shoring of U.S. jobs. Wal-Mart has squeezed suppliers on price since day one. This allowed companies to claim they HAD to move to where cheap labor allowed them a chance to compete.
The world has a supply-demand imbalance like never before. Autos are a classic example of an oversupply in the goods department. Every year the global production exceeds the prior year’s sales.
The same is true for computer memory. In 1993 I paid $45.50 /MB and in 2005 I paid $0.27/MB due to oversupply.
There is a global glut of labor — India and China make up 40 percent of the world’s population and are willing to work cheaply by western standards. Will this labor supply do for the developed countries’ pay what over supply did for micro chips?
The spin is that the foreign made goods (mostly by expatriate U.S. firms) is giving our consumer a great deal on lower priced goods. Of course this ignores the fact that to be a consumer (buyer) you must first have money.
When workers have lost their good jobs (with benefits like medical care) to foreign operations, they are limited to buying lower price (Wal-Mart) goods. So Wal-Mart is actually expanding its own customer base.
However, if 2/3 of our economy is dependent on the U.S. consumer, it seems obvious that there will come a point when he/she will only be buying according to need, not desire.
If it takes long enough to get to that point, Wal-Mart may be the only game in town — for ordinary people, that is. Tiffany is doing just fine — It is Sears/K-mart and others who are slowly starving.
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 8, 2005 at 1:08 PM And as obvious as this trend toward killing off what’s left of the middle class in this country is, you would think alarm bells would be sounding in the halls of government. Instead they suggest ending the home mortgage deductions and counting employee health benefits as taxable income, cutting medicaid, food stamps, and other social programs, while giving the top 3% another 70 billion in tax cuts. And Bush has now borrowed from foreign banks, more money than ALL PREVIOUS PRESIDENTS COMBINED, funneling it to his cronys in the form of tax cuts and no bid contracts. This is a criminal enterprise, not a government.
Posted by Kenneth D. Brown on Nov 9, 2005 at 1:55 AM Kenneth,
It is next to impossible to “tell” a top executive, General Officer, or elected official anything — unless, of course you are one of the “experts” invited into the circle of power.
Either those with access truly don’t know what is reality, don’t dare to tell, or know and prefer it as is. In my experience, numbers people rarely think of the human element. They like nice, clean numbers which give predictable (in their opinion) results. Economists are giving text book scenarios while the global economy is still being written. Einstein said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge.” There is little imagination in this administration as evidenced by “post war” Iraq.
In 1922, T.E.Lawrence commented:
“All my experience of the Arabs was in the God-father role: and I think they have outgrown that. If they are to make good as a modern state (how large an “if”) then it must be by virtue of their own desire and excellence.” — (p.806, Lawrence of Arabia, Jeremy Wilson, Athenum, 1990)None in power is “alarmed” because...1.) They don’t personally know anyone devastated by the resizing, right-sizing, off-shoring, due to globalization 2.) Because they believe people can/will retrain to some other job. OR...3.) They just don’t give a damn as long as they get theirs.
The simple fix for Social Security/Medicare is to remove the $90,000 cut-off and tax all forms of income. It will never happen. The war in Iraq is undermanned and badly managed. It will not be admitted.
We need a government who reads, understands and is committed to the Preamble of our Constitution.
By his own admission, Bush does not read. Perhaps none of them reads.
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 9, 2005 at 8:03 AM I hesitate to discuss anything involving German society on this forum for fear that JC the CJ might chime in with some more idiotic Lederhosen-Romantik comments on (virtually) non-existent autumn harvest festivals or our lack of ability to queue up at bus stops to prove how familiar he is with the country…
... but the article mentioned Walmart in Germany and I felt I had to comment. Walmart has had a very tough stand here - and there are justified hopes they will close down and go away. There have been many articles in the business press about how German consumers are uncomfortable with (at best - many reject Walmart totally) the whole philosophy of the company. They just don’t feel comfortable being in their stores. I myself have never been in a Walmart - I only know of the existence of two of them here in the former East Germany - so I can’t comment in more detail.
As far as their labour policies are concerned, the company simply has no choice when it comes to basic worker rights. In principle, the American company bosses must absolutely hate Germany. I assume they’re here just on principle, since it is a big, important economy. The law dictates that their regularly employed staff must have legally-binding employment contracts - and these include things like six-weeks of paid holiday a year, protection from being fired, the employer paying half of the retirement tax and mandatory comprehensive health insurance, etc. And an important right is the right to have a works committee - a body consisting of employees that is voted into office by the employees (once every four years). It sits in on management decisions on all aspects of company policy - and has 50 per cent of the say. In addition, the works committee meets regularly (once a week is the norm) to deal with work-related issues, workers’ complaints, problems, etc. They try to resolve these issues - when they can’t, they then take them to management. The size of the works committee depends on the number of employees. A company the size of Walmart will have to allow for some full-time representatives on the committee. Full-time members are freed from all their regular duties - and spend 100 per cent of their time as representatives of the interests of the staff.
All members of the works council have a right to be sent to courses at certain intervals (at the expense of the company) in all sorts of areas involving employment law, psychology, public-speaking training, etc.
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Nov 9, 2005 at 3:10 PM I myself was on a works committee for four years.
As far as trade unions are concerned, there is no such thing as a “closed shop” here. Membership is entirely voluntary. And it is a guaranteed right of every worker. I have been a member of a union all my working life (actually, of many different unions due to career changes) - in the days of East Germany, membership was obligatory, but unions had a different function in the state socialist system. Under capitalism, I consider membership simply a moral obligation, since it is the unions who do the bargaining and arrive at the collective agreements for entire industries.
This was the “normal citizen” in me speaking - who has to provide for a family, etc. The anarchist in me works and longs for a truly just and free society - without hierarchy, without the management-employee dichotomy…
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Nov 9, 2005 at 3:24 PM A short aside to whattheheck:
I was not 15 in 1979 but 25 - so I remember all your examples except for Berlin 1949 and Hungary 1956, albeit from the perspective of “the other side"…
Far be it from me to deny that the Soviets were a threat - it is a threat I lived under. But let’s not forget things like the American-British coup overthrowing a democratically elected Persian leader to install the Shah in 1954 (?), the Bay of Pigs, the attack on and occupation of South Vietnam, US support for the murderous Somoza regime in Nicaragua, the overthrow of Allende, Iran-Contra, the mining of Nicaraguan harbours (for which the US was convicted by the world court), etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc,…
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Nov 9, 2005 at 3:54 PM My Thanks to all the above writers. I had nearly forgotten what it felt like to read and participate in intelligent conversations, without the inane comments and personal attacks from the right that have come to be a frequent feature of these forums.
Posted by Kenneth D. Brown on Nov 10, 2005 at 1:21 AM Anarcho-Sozi,
My comment to Rabbit was in response to his having said in effect, “The Cold War was an imaginary conflict conjured up by the U.S.”
To those of us witness to it, (on both sides, I believe) it was a very real danger in several ways.
From our point of view any number of things could have set off a nuclear response:
1.) An actual grab for more of Europe by the Soviets
2.) An accidental triggering of nuclear war based on faulty information
3.) A game of “chicken” by at two or more macho figures — political or military
4.) Some unimaginable other cause
Had it happened, the triggering event would not have mattered much.
-----------------------------
As for the other international incidents you listed:
Out of fear, misperception, political posturing, bad judgment, and probably others, countries do stressful, unnecessary, irrational, or just plain stupid things.One of the problems inherent with a democratic form of government is the change of leadership and therefore strategy and tactics with each new administration.
In a totalitarian form such as Nazi Germany or Stalin’s regime, a longer term pattern allows a degree of predictability.
A lot of the seemingly incongruous U.S. decisions in dealing with various minor dictators came from the “Communist Threat” sometimes perceived to be worth supporting them based solely on their anti-Soviet or anti-China claims.
We not only backed the Shah, but more recently Saddam!I say this not to excuse, but to attempt explain there may be reasons for policies other than what seem most obvious.
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 10, 2005 at 12:20 PM Seemingly incongruous decisions? Sorry, whattheheck, but the long-term pattern is totally clear in the case of the USA - from the Spanish-American war and the initial occupation of the Phillipines onward: making the world safe for American business. In another word: empire.
This is not what this topic is about, but I will submit the following overall judgement and then remain silent on this:
Of the two “partners” (enemies) in the Cold War, the US was the more consistent and aggressive (particularly wherever “democracy raised its ugly head” (in places like pre-Shah Iran and pre-Pinochet Chile, for example) to quote Chomsky.)
Now that the Cold War is over and the “excuse” it provided for US aggression, we see the ugly naked face of US foreign policy.
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Nov 10, 2005 at 2:51 PM Anarco-Sozi,
Trade (business) has been the backbone of social interchange since the caveman swapped a deer for a bunch of arrowheads.
Empire? The Spanish American War was the last time the U.S. exercised any empirical tendencies. All of those territories are now either independent or, In the case of Puerto Rico have had access to mainland U.S. (There are more Puerto Ricans in New York than the home country.)
Last I knew Japan, Italy and Germany were all free, independent and democratic countries. South Korea — the same.
Due to the Cold War we kept troops in Europe which allowed western Europe to maintain a minimum military force and earn billions from goods and services bought by our armed forces. Ever hear of the Berlin Airlift?
Apparently you were happier before the Wall came down. (Or are you, like Chomsky, happiest being angry about everything?) What is it you dislike about the current Germany? You have a short work week, long holidays, and many tax paid benefits. Not so?
However, with the tight lending practices and workers having a 50 percent say in running a business, there seems to be a lack of investment incentives. Why would anyone invest under those circumstances?
What alternative instead of business do you offer as an Anarcho-whatever?
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 11, 2005 at 3:53 PM Americans knowingly and unknowingly support crummy sweatshop life
in China. Who comes out ahead? The Chinese government and Wall Street, not middleclass american workers or consumers.This could be the situation if middleclass americans on all sides of the aisle if more is not demanded of our respective politicians. Before 1980 when it came to american jobs both sides tried to keep jobs in america. Then this global economy nonsense was introduced big time and middleclass america
was tricked into believing that this was a great thing. Next thing we know politicians had crafted tax laws making it attractive for USA industry to move abroad and pay people 17 cents an hour to produce goods with a USA name on it. The only part that remained in america was a home office. General Motors makes most of it’s parts in China and is preparing to shut down more plants and taking more manufacturing to China. Wal-Mart is the largest exporter in China...yep they export 11% of chinese manufactured goods to all of their stores here and abroad.Both parties more or less subcribe to Fair Trade approach. It has not been working towards creating well paid jobs for the american middleclass. Credit card debt is one obvious indicator.
Fair trade: Creating jobs at home means opening markets abroad. The Democratic Party supports fair trade agreements that raise standards for workers abroad while making American business more competitive. We will also fight for stronger enforcement of our existing trade agreements.
This is simply not working. It’s not working for slave labor abroad either.
Does anyone ever wonder why a pair of slick looking basketball shoes manufactured at 17 cents an hour retails for $150.00...think about it.How about creating tax incentives to bring jobs back home and creating new green jobs through alternative energy? It seems like all we get is rhetoric.
So why are members of both parties so complacent on this matter? Campaign funds. The Reagan,Bush and Bush people have screwed up jobs for americans. Democrats on the other hand seem to have gone along with it because it appeared Reagan was a popular president. Should lousy legislation pass simply because a president is popular? No way jose.
The bottom line is we need to demand more of our politicans… not having them tell us what we need. Middleclass americans and consumers need to step up and decide who our candidates will be and set the agenda as well.
The first items on the list should be:
1. Jobs back to America...provides more revenue for our government instead of the Chinese government.
2.Healthcare for Americans after all we provide healthcare for millions of city,state and federal employees with middleclass tax dollars. Everybody deserves medical care.
3. We need/want the best public education. No Child Left Behind needs to be gone. It is an expensive mandate that is not conducive to learning.
4. Clean air and water must be priority in America...bring it all back.
5. Restore relationships with the rest of the world. The longer we stay in Iraq the more difficult this project will be.
6. Bring on alternative forms of energy. This will not only reduce our need for oil it will create thousands of new jobs for skilled labor.
7. Bring the war for oil to an end.
8. Let’s do business with the rest of the world but not at the expense of middleclass america.
The neocons must go. We need some new democrats as well as moderate republicans. Green Party thinkers where we can get them.
Posted by merrill on Nov 17, 2005 at 8:52 AM Blah blah blah...boycott Wal Mart
Blah blah.
I’ve been boycotting them for about a year, since they closed the store in Quebec that tried to organize. I don’t think they miss my money much.
I’ve noticed how we’ve turned underdeveloped countries into our sweat shops, and turned our own country into a management and service industry, headed by a group of people who inherited wealth, and were crass enough to exploit that advanatge even further....sociopathy is so much more than convenience store bandits and serial killers, don’t you think?
I wonder about the system that props up this ‘bull in the china shop’ corporation.
Wal Mart is as easy to push over as the disabled greeter they got rid of once ‘dead peasant insurance’ became unpopular...the younger, healthier specimens they require now for their drudgery factory will thrive and kick our asses ...if they don’t move on to a more hospitable work environment through their native intelligence.
In the mean time, until there are better options for all of us, I’ll support the anti Wal Mart folk, and continue my boycott...but it’s getting harder and harder to buy food and clothing made locally...and I’m a wage pig myself, and have
little time to make my own.Maybe if our schools spent more than a week or two on ‘Economics’ we’d have the necessary skills and insight to make wise, or at least wiser, decisions.
Posted by minerva on Nov 17, 2005 at 3:00 PM The following is a comment I sent in response to an editorial which was very pro Wal-Mart. It is from my own experience with a client whose packaging I designed in the mid 1980s.
It actually took about a decade and the screws were made in several countries over that time — Taiwan, Singapore, India and others — I simplified it a bit.
-----------------The Wal-Martitis pandemic:
Here’s how they work it....Wal-Mart has demanded lower prices from suppliers for years. A fastener manufacturer No.2) beats the current supplier (No.1) by one-quarter of a cent per package of screws by producing them in Mexico.
Wal-Mart switches to supplier No.2.
Supplier No.1 fires his U.S. workers and opens a plant in China — he now undercuts No.2, etc.
The former employees at both No.1 and No.2 are working for less per hour and without benefits at… That’s RIGHT! Wal-Mart!
Since they make so much less they have no choice but to shop at… Yup, Wal-Mart!
------------------------------New Slogan… Wal-Mart — Always a low ethics!
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 18, 2005 at 11:32 AM Whattheheck:
Sorry to have kept you waiting for a response. I’ve been travelling in several countries in central Europe for two weeks…
I simply don’t have the time or the inclination to go back to square one with you concerning the topic “Empire”. There are many books you could read to inform yourself, but I will recommend just one, an American source anyone with an open mind should be able to comprehend: Noam Chomsky’s “Hegemony or Survival”. I could recommend radical treatises, but I think it makes more sense to point you to a totally objective, factual account of the history of American foreign policy. I know of no more objective – i.e. completely lacking in ideology – treatment. You are very wrong about Chomsky, by the way. He is the antithesis of an angry person. He is a positive, warm and wonderful human being. I have met him personally – professionally, as a linguist. He just happens to be someone who has not allowed his brain to be shut off by the permanent propaganda of the system.
Yes, Japan and Germany, etc are ostensibly “free” but we are all part of the system that happens to be dominated by the USA. Japan and Germany, etc are not the issue – they were and are too “powerful” economically to have been subjugated directly even after military defeat. Most of the countries of the third world are under the American boot directly and it would be absurd to associate the word “freedom” with them.
To be honest, yes, in many respects I was happier before the Wall came down. But that’s another story. And I cannot here in this forum possibly answer your question about what alternatives an anarchist-socialist has to business. Do some research if this question interests you.
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Nov 23, 2005 at 4:15 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Christopher Hayes
- The New Road to Serfdom
Over the course of 500 pages in The Shock Doctrine, Naomi Klein documents the moments of chaos and disruption that allow a small coterie of experts to swoop in and administer what's invariably called "bitter medicine," "painful reforms" or "shock therapy" - Who’s Afraid of Democracy?
Believing that "people are rational as consumers and irrational as voters," many conservatives would favor free markets without democracy - What We Learn When We Learn Economics
Is a little economics a dangerous thing? - The Abramoff Babies
Like the "Watergate Babies" of 1974, the new Democratic Congress will have to pick between sustanative or procedural reforms. - The Good War on Terror
How the Greatest Generation helped pave the road to Baghdad - Economic Populism Proves Popular
To thwart legislation that put caps on payday lending rates, Republican lawmakers in Oregon had to pass it
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2005 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
