Skip to content

POSTAL WORKERS DEMONSTRATE ACROSS AMERICA TO SAFEGUARD THE US MAIL & THEIR JOBS!

June 17, 2014

Photo by AFL-CIO

By Steven Weiner

I wholeheartedly applaud the members of the American Postal Workers Union (APWU) who recently took to the streets in 27 U.S. cities amidst shouts of “The US mail is not for sale!” They were vigorously protesting the latest attempt to privatize the United States Postal Service (USPS).

It began as a backroom deal with the office supply chain store Staples. Overriding the union, USPS management agreed to allow Staples, a private, for-profit company, to handle mail at “mini post offices”inside their stores, staffed by their poorly paid employees who have high turnover rates. To date, there are USPS counters in over 80 stores, with plans to put these outlets in over 1500 as early as the coming fall.

As the APWU president, Mark Dimondstein pointed out, “This is a direct assault…on public postal services.”   And referring to responsibility for and safety of the mail, he explained: “If we’re going to have mini-Post Offices in Staples stores, they should be operated by uniformed postal employees, who have taken an oath and are accountable to the American people.”  I totally agree with Mark Dimondstein.

Don-t-Forget-Republicans-Are-Still-Trying-to-Kill-the-Postal-Service_blogpostimage

It’s worth noting many news reports about the postal service’s large deficits, seeming to say that it doesn’t work efficiently.  But what these accounts rarely report is the fact that the USPS is required—as no other public or private institution is—to prepay its employee benefits 75 years in advance (even for those employees not yet even hired) at a cost of 5 billion dollars a year! The irony of this is something to see: the same politicians who forced this bill through Congress would happily get rid of the pensions for millions of other unionized government employees if they could.

My own experience illustrates the extent and perils of outsourcing the work of public employees to private firms. I worked as a Computer Specialist for the NYC Department of Education (DOE) and witnessed firsthand the privatization of jobs. These tasks, performed by skilled, unionized workers were outsourced to non-union employees. Consulting firms were paid huge sums to bring in hundreds of workers who most often had no experience in the field of education. Some were so unqualified that much of their work was slipshod and had to be done over; and the DOE, not the consultant firm, was charged for their training!   So, money that should have gone to an experienced, unionized work force was instead siphoned off to enrich outside companies.

Now there are escalating and intensive efforts to increase corporate profits by privatizing more and more public services. These include measures intended to weaken, demoralize, and ultimately destroy the unions that represent public employees.

The Success of Unions

I learned from Aesthetic Realism that the reason for the continuing, increasingly virulent attacks on unions, including the postal workers, arises from their success in raising the standard of living for millions of workers and their families, thereby cutting into companies’ profits.  Unions rose to power in a profit economy, where the profits from a person’s labor went to the owner (or shareholders), not to the person doing the work. In the 1950s and ‘60s, unions were a powerful force in American life; strikes were an effective tool for betterment, and unions achieved new prestige and economic gains. Although employers were never for unions, they were reluctantly tolerated because most companies were still able to profit. That is no longer true. Most companies cannot make profits to the extent they once did and at the same time still pay their employees decent wages and benefits. The only way that our profit-driven economy can stumble along is by impoverishing the American worker, forcing persons to work longer hours while paying them as little as they can get away with. As a result, the New York Times reports (June 15th) that America’s middle class has been steadily declining.  Aesthetic Realism taught me that the very success of unions, along with ever-growing competition with U.S. products, have been major factors weakening profit economics.

Ellen Reiss, Chairman of Education, explains that the profit system depends:

 “…on seeing a person in terms of how much money you can get from him; on a boss and stockholders, who don’t do the work, taking the profits that workers have produced with the labor of their thought and bodies.”

In these last years there have been massive attempts to save the profit system. One large way is the present assault on public services in America, including our postal system—which belongs to each and every one of 320 million Americans.  Explains Ellen Reiss in The Right Of #1789:

Because of …[the] failure of business based on private profit, there has been a huge effort…to privatize publicly run institutions. The technique is to disseminate massive propaganda against the public institutions, and also do what one can to make them fail, including through withholding funding from them. Eminent among such institutions are the public schools and the post office. The desire is to place them in private hands—not for the public good, not so that the American people can fare well—but to keep profit economics going… and to have people feel that the non-profit or public way of owning and employing does not work and that the only way things can possibly be run is through the profit system!

The Post Office is a proud American public institution, going back well over two centuries to Benjamin Franklin. We should cherish it, improve it, support it, and not yield it to the privatizers and their misleading propaganda.

 

Why the Big Push for Charter Schools Now?

April 23, 2014

 

IMG_4941 copy

Recently New Yorkers were subjected to a media blitz of deceptive TV ads touting the “excellence” of charter schools. These costly commercials, along with the support of some state government officials, resulted in the passage of the 2014-2015 New York State budget which:

would require the city to find space for charter schools inside public school buildings or pay much of the cost to house them in private space. The legislation would also prohibit the city from charging rent to charter schools….Under the budget agreement, charter schools would receive more money per student. The schools, previously barred from operating early education programs, would also be eligible for grants for prekindergarten….Charter schools in New York City will now enjoy some of the greatest protections in the country.

Parent activist Leonie Haimson described this new measure as “the most onerous charter school law in the nation.”

In the TV ads, charter schools were represented as an alternative to public education. Meanwhile, what these ads failed to disclose is that despite their “not-for-profit” status, charter schools are run by CEOs who are getting paid huge salaries, some as much as $485,000/year. In an article entitled “Big Profits in Not-for-Profit Charter Schools,” on the online journal, Portside, Alan Singer wrote that “operating non-profit charter schools can be very profitable for charter school executives.”

Further, most charter schools are non-union, so their teachers have no collective bargaining, no say about their work rules, no job security. This is what the backers of the TV ads are aiming for—to privatize education and enrich the companies running these schools. To achieve this, they are shutting out unions and paying teachers as little as possible in compensation and benefits.

The stakes are very high, and go beyond New York. Recently, the Kansas legislature, in a midnight vote with little discussion, passed a bill that robs members of the Kansas Teachers Union of their right to due process, to job protection and tenure, allowing teachers to be fired at will. If unions can be whittled down so much that they are virtually ineffective, then those individuals profiting from education will pay teachers as little as they can get away with. It’s vitally important for educators, parents, everyone interested in safeguarding education for America’s children to be clear about the relentless zeal to privatize education and bust unions. So we publish statements by New York City teachers about what they’ve seen. Each is a proud member of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT); each has seen and documented the success of the Aesthetic Realism Teaching Method in their own classrooms (more about this later). And each adamantly opposes the privatization of public education because they are so much for the education of all children.

Who Paid for the TV Commercials and What Do They Leave out?

Sally Ross, retired NYC science teacher, writes that the TV ads were:

sponsored by Families for Excellent Schools—a pro-charter group of hedge fund managers and wealthy financiers, like the Walton Family Foundation (read Walmart) and cost $3.6 million dollars to run. This pro-charter group is furious because Mayor de Blasio initially blocked the charters of three schools in the Success Academy network. What the ads don’t tell you is that these schools are trying to expand into space already occupied by existing public schools, including one elementary school for students with severe disabilities. With this co-location plan in effect, the school will be operating at 130% capacity—forcing students to have their speech and physical therapy sessions in overcrowded classrooms and hallways. Further, there is a selective admission process, and there are fewer ELL students—English Language Learners—and special needs students in NYC’s charter schools. I feel passionately that EVERY child deserves a quality public education.

Why the Big Push for Charter Schools Now?

In an issue of the journal The Right of Aesthetic Realism to Be Known, Ellen Reiss, Aesthetic Realism Chairman of Education, wrote:

 There’s a huge effort now to privatize public education in America—the public education that Horace Mann and others rightly saw as inseparable from a nation’s being ethical and civilized. It’s a phase of the effort to privatize everything in America. And Eli Siegel explained the reason behind it when he showed, in the 1970s, that economics based on profit—on seeing people and the world in terms of how much money you can get out of them—had failed and would never recover. Today, the profit system can stagger on only by turning everything people need, everything children need, into a means of lining some individuals’ pockets.

However disguised, the viewpoint of the school privatizers is the following: “The chief purpose of schools is not for children to learn—it’s to supply us with money!” And of course we have to break the teachers union, so we can pay teachers very little and treat them any way we please. Why should educators be respected—why should anyone who works? They, like the children, are just profit-fodder for us!

This purpose is one of contempt: “the addition to self through the lessening of something else,” which is the most hurtful thing in every person. We’ve learned it is the basis of our profit-driven economy, and therefore behind the new surge in the efforts to privatize education, including through charter schools.

 What Happens to the Children Who are Not in the Charter Schools?

 Christopher Balchin, Chapter Leader at Brooklyn Academy of Science and the Environment writes:

 Eli Siegel saw unions as one of the greatest forces on behalf of respect for people, and I’ve seen this is true. I thank my union, the UFT, that we teachers have health care, pensions, work rules that limit the hours in the classroom – things every person has a right to, and which charter schools would like to do away with in the name of “increased flexibility.” Teachers’ unions are also vital safeguards against the abuse of power by administrators.

We teachers have a mission to educate, but also to protect our students, and we need the freedom and the security to be able to speak up without fear of being fired for doing our professional and moral duty. This is what a union guarantees. One of the things you lose when you don’t have a union—and  most charter school teachers don’t—is the power to stand up against ill-advised policies and decisions that affect the most vulnerable members of our society—the children who can’t defend themselves. Who should be trusted with the welfare of children: ‘experts,’ some of whom never spent a day in front of a class and stand to reap vast financial benefits from the success of this or that pilot program, or teachers with literally thousands of hours of experience in the classroom?

 The Attack on Unions by Corporate Special Interests

Alan Shapiro, a NYC high school teacher for over 26 years, writes:

While millions of dollars in public education funds are being diverted to charter schools, public schools have seen their budgets slashed. The school I teach at, one of the largest high schools in the city, has at least 30% more students enrolled than the building was designed for, and has seen our annual budget cut 25% in the last 6 years. These are numbers, but what they represent affects real children who are forced to attend understaffed, overcrowded schools in buildings sorely in need of repair.

By design, charter school teachers are not covered by a union contract, and that is exactly how the various groups who are behind the push for charters would like to keep it. They want to undo decades of hard-fought labor victories so they can pay teachers less and have them work longer hours without job security. That way, more public money can go into the pockets of private investors in charter school companies and those supplying non-union support services for these schools—such as cafeteria, custodial, and accounting services that once were supplied by unionized, public-sector employees.

What Do We Owe All the Children of New York?

Barbara McClung, Chapter Leader and science teacher in a NYC elementary school on the Lower East Side, writes:

For years, teachers and administrators have been required to meet standards that made relentless testing and data collection a priority over student welfare.

Charter schools can pick and choose the students they want, and let students go who aren’t making the grade. Public schools can’t—they serve every child that walks through the doors. Every student has the right to the best possible education!

Education Is Completely Opposed to Profit Economics

 The teachers quoted in this blog represent many others who have seen that even with the intolerable conditions under which many children are forced to live, the Aesthetic Realism Teaching Method succeeds as nothing else has. They have documented this and have spoken at numerous education conferences over the years. What Barbara McClung writes about is needed in education today—not charter schools, not new pilot programs that enrich the designers at the expense of educating children, nor new batteries of testing. She writes:

 I’m so grateful that for almost 30 years I have taught in NYC classrooms—from the Lower East Side to East Harlem—knowing the great principle about education, stated by Eli Siegel: ‘The purpose of education is to like the world through knowing it.’ The Aesthetic Realism Teaching Method enables students in every grade and from every background to see through the subjects in the curriculum—science, math, history, reading, and more—how the structure of the world makes sense and is well made. As a result I’ve had the pleasure of watching my students learn successfully, and as they see their relation to other things and people, they become kinder. This is the true, democratic purpose of education that every educator, administrator, legislator needs to know!

We’ve learned from Aesthetic Realism that we have reached a point in history when we will either have economics and education fair to every person in America, or have profit economics maintained a little longer, with increased suffering for most Americans, including our school children. We feel it is crucial for people across our nation to be clear about this choice.

For further reading about this teaching method, you may go to:

The Teaching Method Children Deserve

How Our Schools Can Really Succeed

Needed by America’s Schoolchildren!

 

What the Labor Movement Needs to Learn from the UAW-Volkswagen Vote

March 10, 2014

By Matthew D’Amico

As a political coordinator for a labor union that represents both public and private sector workers throughout New York State, I have seen how important union representation is for working men and women. Our members do difficult work, such as taking care of the disabled and sick, or plowing our roads after a snowstorm.  Thanks to their union contracts, fought for over decades, they are treated with more of the dignity and compensation they deserve.

In recent years, however, there have been intensified concerted efforts by big business and elected officials at the national and state levels to have unions not exist at all.   In the private sector, many good-paying union jobs in manufacturing have been outsourced to countries where labor is cheap and unions are almost non-existent.  And the assault on unions has continued with laws to make states “right to work” (which really means “we can force you to work for less”), and some states have passed or proposed laws taking away collective bargaining rights for public employees, as Wisconsin did.  The attempt to destroy unions and all that they have achieved—decent pay, safe working conditions, medical benefits, pensions–exists because every dollar that goes to a union worker takes away from the profits that corporations insist are their due.

  • The Need for Unions, and What Happened in Chattanooga

The need for unions to grow is larger than ever.  That is why I, like many people, followed so closely the organizing campaign of the United Auto Workers (UAW) at the Volkswagen (VW) plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee.  The importance of this effort was clear, because more foreign-owned auto companies have been opening up plants down South, since labor is cheaper there and most workers aren’t organized.  What was unique about this campaign was that Volkswagen and the union both signed a neutrality agreement.  Volkswagen, which is used to dealing with workers who have strong union representation in Germany, agreed not to pressure workers against joining the union.

Here in the United States, particularly in the South, trying to organize working people is extremely difficult.  Companies constantly break the law by threatening and intimidating workers against joining a union.  Untold numbers of men and women have been fired simply for supporting unionization efforts.  As someone who did organizing in the South, I saw this kind of intimidation firsthand.  I spoke to people working in nursing homes in Georgia, making poverty wages as they cared for the most vulnerable, terrified to talk about unions because they feared being fired.  I heard law enforcement tell us we couldn’t stand in front of work sites and talk to people about the union, threatening us with arrest if we didn’t leave.

Many believed that with VW not actively trying to dissuade its workers from joining the union, the UAW would have a fighting chance to organize its first foreign-owned auto plant in the South.  As the campaign began it was clear there was a good chance the employees at the VW Chattanooga plant would vote in favor of joining the union, since the overwhelming majority had previously signed cards signaling their support for union representation.  Then something shameful and downright evil occurred.  Local politicians from the governor to members of the legislature to a U.S. Senator all threatened that if the VW workers voted for the union, the company would not expand in Tennessee and it might also lose further state subsidies.  In addition, right wing, anti-union groups put up billboards throughout the area to discourage support for the UAW, insisting that if workers voted for the union what happened to Detroit—bankruptcy—would also happen in Chattanooga.  As a result, the UAW lost by a narrow margin.  What we saw in Tennessee has gone on all over the country for decades: a ferocious assault on the rights of workers, going to great lengths to cripple or destroy unions.

  • The Central Fight Is Described

In an important issue of the journal The Right of Aesthetic Realism to Be Known, Ellen Reiss describes the underlying cause of what led to the UAW loss:

In 1970 Eli Siegel [the founder of Aesthetic Realism] explained that the profit system had reached the point at which it was no longer able to succeed. Though it might struggle on for a while, it would do so with increasing pain to humanity. And that is what has occurred. As production has been taking place in more and more nations, it has become harder and harder for US companies to haul in big profits for stockholders. They can do so now only by making the people who actually do the work become poorer and poorer—be paid less and less. That means crushing unions, because it is unions that have enabled working people to earn a dignified wage and be treated with respect.

. . . As big a fight as any going on in the world—indeed, as big a fight as any in the history of humanity—is the fight now taking place between the profit system and unions….It is a fight that even most union leaders have not seen clearly. We need to see it clearly, because the fight is really a sheer one: For the profit system to continue, unions must be defeated.

Ms. Reiss, who is the Aesthetic Realism Chairman of Education, continues, describing the chief reason that “the UAW–with all its historic grandeur, kindness and power,” narrowly lost the VW election:

The furious meddling by government officials came because certain [anti-union] persons do see that if workers get paid well, the profit system won’t be able to go on. If unions prevail, profits will go to those who earn them—the workers—instead of persons who don’t do the work. And so those protectors of the profit way will fight against unions with every vicious weapon and sleazy trick they can. The UAW thought it had an amicable agreement with VW; it didn’t see that it was fighting the profit system as such, and so it was, perhaps, somewhat blindsided. (There’s VW itself. One can question how much it’s really for unions. You don’t set up a plant in a right-to-exploit state like Tennessee because you want a union.)

The story is not over in Chattanooga or the rest of the South, where many working people are demanding justice for themselves and their communities.  In fact there is a UAW organizing campaign going on at the Nissan plant in Oxford, Mississippi.  And it is clear that workers are ready to fight for their rights to be in a union.  For example, Chip Wells, an 11-year veteran working there, said, “People think that [the Volkswagen vote] derailed us, but we think it made us stronger…. Here labor rights are civil rights, actually human rights.” (Labor South blog Feb. 28th by Joseph B. Atkins)

Millions of Americans who are suffering—unemployed, struggling to make ends meet, worried about their future—are depending on a strong and vibrant labor movement.  So now is the time for union officials, activists, and rank and file members to be clear about what we are fighting for, and fighting against.  I’ve seen firsthand that  Aesthetic Realism is the knowledge that makes for that much needed understanding and meets the hopes of people, including every member of a union.  Ellen Reiss writes:

And if unions and the economic justice they represent succeed, the profit way will be done in, finished, kaput. When that happens it will be (as the idiom goes) good riddance to bad rubbish. There will be a way of economics different from any that has been. It will be based, neither on profit for a few nor on “collectivism,” but on an honest answer to the question Eli Siegel said was the most important for humanity: What does a person deserve by being a person?”

photo

Unions, Norma Rae, & the Victory of Ethics!

January 30, 2014

Norma-Rae

By Steven Weiner

As Friends of Labor has described before on this blog, the unrelenting efforts by corporations (backed by some state governments) to decimate collective bargaining agreements and destroy unions have arisen because the successes of the American labor movement have cut into companies’ profits.   Ellen Reiss, Aesthetic Realism Chairman of Education, describes this victory in The Right of Aesthetic Realism to Be Known:

The greater justice for which [unions] fought, and which they increasingly achieved, has helped to disable profit economics. That’s why there has been such a fierce effort these decades to do away with unions in America, and why so many companies are having their work done overseas by “cheap” labor…

And she continues:

[T]he present difficulty of unions is really a sign of their strength: by the 1970s, unions were able to accomplish so much, get such a better life for American workers, that employers have found themselves unable to come away with the profits they desired. Unions, making work more ethical, have weakened a way of economics based on bad ethics. Seeing this fact should bring pride and encouragement to the American labor movement.

I, Steve Weiner, am thankful that my family was a direct beneficiary of that “greater justice” unions achieved for American workers and their families.  My father worked hard, holding down two consecutive union jobs.  As my brothers and I were growing up in Brooklyn in the ‘50s & ‘60s, our family was able to live comfortably on my father’s salary.  Since his death, my mother receives his monthly pension.

And I, as a computer specialist (now retired) for a New York City agency, earned a decent salary, and today my retirement is secure—something that every working person has a right to have.  However, vast numbers of America’s workers today have no such security, as the awful phrase “food insecurity” makes horribly and painfully clear.  Working long hours for low pay—what often amounts to “starvation wages”—means that breadwinners cannot provide enough for their families, and all too many households feel they are one paycheck away from homelessness.

Meanwhile, the hardships inflicted on working men and women in recent years have made for something that has been brewing for a long time: people are more conscious and more outspoken, objecting fiercely to their labor being used to make profit for a few corporate executives and shareholders. The demonstrations by fast food workers clearly showed this.  I despise profit economics and feel passionately that all workers should own their own jobs.  “Labor,” Eli Siegel stated, “is the only source of wealth; there is no other source except land, the raw material.”  It’s the labor of millions of working people that has made this country the richest in the world, and the wealth this nation produces rightfully belongs to the people who create it.

Recently, I was vividly reminded of how important unions are as I attended a cinema lecture given by the Emmy award- winning filmmaker Ken Kimmelman.  He has produced important, groundbreaking films for social justice: against racism, prejudice, and homelessness, including “The Heart Knows Better,” and “What Does a Person Deserve?”  In a class entitled “Films Criticize the Profit Motive—or, Good Will vs. Ill Will,” Ken Kimmelman discussed the ethics of several films important in the field of social justice, including one many people respect, learned from, and love: “Norma Rae.”

Based on a true story, “Norma Rae” takes place in North Carolina in the 1960s and ‘70s. Crystal Lee Jordan, the inspiration for the title character, worked for a major textile manufacturer, the J.P. Stevens Company.  From the time the textile industry began moving out of the North in the 1880s into the deep South, it was notorious for having some of the worst working conditions.  As the movie begins, we witness some of the awful environment that Norma Rae and her fellow employees are forced to endure, resulting, for example, in her mother’s deafness from the screaming blare of the textile machinery.  She objects, but to no avail.  Alone, she is powerless.  But then she hears a union organizer describe the benefits of unionization; she listens intently, and works courageously to unionize her fellow factory workers, meeting intense and frightening opposition from management, including being jailed and later fired.  In his talk, Ken Kimmelman quoted Sally Fields, the actress who superbly portrayed Norma Rae: “You live there and you become one of them…. You learn to appreciate how difficult their lives are—and chances are you’re never getting out.”

In the end, after an intense and determined campaign, the union drive prevails, and the highlight of the movie, the final scene, is one of the most dramatic and iconic in American cinema.  As Norma Rae is being escorted out of the mill, she quickly writes out the word “UNION” on a piece of cardboard, stands on a work table, and slowly turns around for all her co-workers to see.  One by one, each worker stops their machine!  I remembered this image, and was glad to know more why I was so moved.  Ken Kimmelman explained, “The way the scene goes from motion and the ear-deafening whirr of the machinery to silence represents the power and unity of the workers.  And during most of the scene, we look up at Norma Rae, which represents the admiration her co-workers—and we—have for her.”

This film stands for the courage, determination, and pride that’s in people today who are fighting for their right to live decently, and who see their cause as the cause of all workers.

Ellen Reiss explains in The Right Of:

What the American people need to be told clearly is who, or what, is really to blame for America’s economic suffering, job losses, government deficits. They’re being told unions are to blame, because unions have been able to negotiate for their members some of what all people deserve, including pensions and health care. If unions thrive, all Americans can have these, and more. Unions stand for all of us.

YES!

INCOME INEQUALITY; OR, “WHAT DOES A PERSON DESERVE?”

December 27, 2013

UM-FF-pic4

At the end of 2013, Friends of Labor has been very much stirred about a matter widely talked about these days—income inequality: the inability of  men and women to earn enough to provide for themselves and their families because the wealth they produce goes mainly to persons (and corporations) who are already exceedingly wealthy.  The alarming rise in income inequality means that while a few people are getting steadily richer, most of the rest of us are getting poorer.

While the stock market goes up and corporations continue to show profits—sometimes massive—on their balance sheets; and while these corporations give their officers bloated bonuses, and pay dividends to their shareholders, the ability of working people to pay for the necessities of life such as food, shelter, clothing, is steadily and ruinously eroding.  Millions of people—our brothers and sisters—are struggling just to make ends meet, put food on the table, and pay for shelter and clothing, and many are no longer succeeding.  Representative of what one out of five New Yorkers are made to endure is Betty, who frequents the New York Food Bank.   She says:

I have a college education….I work for a health care agency, but it’s not enough. And I’m getting too old to work. I go grocery shopping about once a month. I buy the essentials I need for nutrients. What I need to survive.  I come [to the Food Bank] twice a week.  I couldn’t get by without this.

The Attacks on America’s Unions–Why They Are Taking Place

As union members well know—despite efforts to mask the facts—the cost of living has outstripped wage increases for years.   And there’s also been a relentless effort by corporate America and some state governments to cripple the ability of unions to negotiate contracts that include better wages and benefits.  Millions of good-paying, full-time jobs have disappeared, replaced by part-time work, often paying minimum wage and no benefits.  And the one reason for the unrelenting efforts to destroy unions is because of their great success in getting better wages and benefits for their members.  Clearly, every dollar paid to a person working is that much less for corporate America and its shareholders.

The expanding divide between the wealthiest 1% and everyone else has aroused concerns that we believe are new in America.  For example, Janet Yellen, the nominee for the Federal Reserve, recently said about rising income inequality: it’s a “very serious problem….For many, many years, the middle and those below the middle [have been] actually losing absolutely.”  Nobel economist Robert Shiller described income inequality as  “the most important problem that we are facing today.”  And, in his courageous Apostolic Exhortation, “Evangelii Gaudium,” Pope Francis stated unequivocally that income inequality kills, and asked: “How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?”

The Central Cause of Rising Income Inequality

What has caused the rise in inequality of income?  Globalization and its shipping of American jobs overseas, slashing taxes for the very wealthy, deregulation, the decline of unions: each of these is a factor.  But we believe the underlying cause is described by Aesthetic Realism, the education founded by Eli Siegel.  Income inequality is the inevitable by-product, the direct result of an economic system based on profit, in which a person is seen solely in terms of how much money can be extracted from his or her labor.  To see a human being this way, we’ve learned, is contempt: it denies a person’s fundamental humanity, robs them of their right to be seen with respect—which includes being paid well and treated with dignity.

In the 1970s Mr. Siegel gave a series of lectures in which he showed that an economic system based on contempt had irrevocably failed.  In the years since, we’ve seen all kinds of tricks to prop it up, mostly by callously firing millions of workers.  They are seen as disposable commodities, while profits are zealously pursued at the expense of these hardworking men and women.  Despite these efforts, we’ve learned that annual sales are nevertheless flat or down for such huge companies as Kelloggs, FedEx, Best Buy, and McDonalds.

 The Hoped For Solution

In the periodical The Right of Aesthetic Realism to Be Known, Chairman of Education Ellen Reiss writes:

 Aesthetic Realism makes clear the big, underlying question of economics.  It is hidden by various elaborate economic terms, though present in some fashion in all of them.  It is: Should our economy be based on contempt, on the seeing of people’s labor and needs as means for someone else’s profit, or should it be based on good will, on having the people of our nation get what they deserve?

And she describes what needs to replace contempt-driven profit economics:   

 …a way of seeing people, products, work, finance, earth, that is different from anything which has been before.  The economics people are hoping for, the only kind that will work, is aesthetics: the oneness of opposites—including the opposites of freedom and justice; the expression of each individual and fairness to all people.  This way of economics will also be ethics: it will be based on a true answer to the question, articulated by Mr. Siegel, “What does a person deserve by being a person?”

So we conclude this post with our fervent hope that in answering this question in 2014, our economy becomes ethical, is based on good will as Aesthetic Realism describes it.   When the jobs of America, from fast food chains to the automotive industry, are owned by the people doing the work, our nation will have an economy that is at last fair to all people!

by Carol Driscoll for Friends of Labor

BLACK FRIDAY PROTESTS BY WALMART WORKERS–WHAT THEY MEAN!

December 5, 2013
photo by B. Kestenbaum

photo by B. Kestenbaum

As a person who wants justice to come to the American worker, I was proud to stand with Walmart employees in Secaucus, NJ, on November 29, one of 1500 “Black Friday” protests held across the country.  The solidarity of  labor backing the Walmart workers was expressed by AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka:

The AFL-CIO has committed the full weight of the labor movement to support these brave, determined Walmart workers.

In actions that are unprecedented in Walmart history, its low-wage earners are showing their justified outrage at being made to work for pay that no person can survive on.  For example, Elaine Roizer, one of the protesters, told me:

I have a family to support.  I could barely make ends meet.  Fifteen dollars an hour is not asking for too much.  I went on strike for a day. So they fired me.  It’s hard.  It’s very hard.  I’m out here protesting not just for myself.  I’m here for all the people who come after me.

I respect Ms. Roizer’s courage, and her showing that she has true fellow feeling is admirable.   She speaks for a growing number of women and men in America who, this past year, have taken part in demonstrations and strikes against the titans of the fast food industry including Burger King, KFC, and Taco Bell.  These huge corporations have made billions from the very people who are paid wages below the poverty level, forcing them often to take second jobs and resort to food stamps to feed their families.   Recently,  on their company website, McDonalds had this chilling advice for their underpaid workers:  “Breaking [your food] into small pieces often results in eating less and still feeling full.”  It was recommended that their employees find a second  job if they are unable to live on their salaries. And in a Canton, Ohio Walmart, there was a bin with a sign for its own employees, inviting them to “Please donate food items here so Associates in need can enjoy Thanksgiving Dinner.”

Men and women, rightly furious at their miserable pay, represent a long history of protests by American workers.  They include miners who toiled twelve hours a day underground digging coal, farm workers bent over from tilling and harvesting in the sweltering sun, men who did the back-breaking labor building our nation’s railroads, and women in sweatshops who slaved  for pennies a day.   As industries in America were unionized, workers in America were able to earn more than subsistence wages; in fact, unions gave rise to a prosperous middle class.

What the Walmart workers are now insisting on is in keeping with what every human being deserves: a chance to earn a decent, livable wage; to put nourishing food on the table for one’s children; to educate and clothe them; to pay for medicine; and to provide a comfortable home.

Walmart, McDonalds and other fast food chains will not willingly raise the pay scales of their employees because every additional nickel they pay a worker takes away from their profits.  These companies are in the business of making money for their top executives and shareholders, not making sure they pay their workers well.

I’ve learned that the thirst for profits is the driving force behind every corporation in America, and it has made for massive injustices.  In an issue of The Right of Aesthetic Realism to Be Known, Chairman of Education Ellen Reiss explains:

Eli Siegel showed that the profit motive—the seeing of a hoping, feeling human being in terms of how much you can get out of him and how little you can give him—is contempt.

People’s discontent about work includes, along with the sheer pain of not making enough money, a terrific anger at being seen with contempt.  People hate being seen as mechanisms to squeeze as much profit as possible from and to eliminate if the squeezing doesn’t fare so well.   There is this feeling across America, “I am more than that, for God’s sake! A human being is more than that!”

Mr. Siegel showed that the most important question in economics—one which must be answered with thorough honesty—is this: “What does a person deserve by being a person?”   Workers at Walmart, in fast food, and elsewhere are saying, no morewhat we deserve is a living wage!  That is why they are out in the streets demonstrating, and we hail them!

By Barbara Kestenbaum

The Solution to America’s Job Crisis; or, What Is Real Job Creation?

November 8, 2013

Persons in line waiting to be interviewed

In America today this question is insisting: at a time of record profits, why are so few jobs being created by the so-called “job creators”?  Many progressive politicians are calling on our federal government to do more to get people working by bringing back manufacturing jobs.  In previous decades, unions in the building trades, the auto industry, steel, mining, and more, negotiated—and, when needed, struck—for good wages with steady increases, in addition to health benefits and pensions.  Their achievements made for a security that was new.  Union families were able to buy homes, send their children to college, and greatly expanded America’s middle class.  Today, as we all know, unions are being brutally attacked, with states taking away collective bargaining rights, pensions, and benefits.  Hardly anyone can be sure they’ll have a job next month, let alone next year.

Calling unemployment a “national crisis,” the AFL-CIO, America’s largest labor organization, writes about the dismal job outlook: 

photo by Getty

photo by Getty

Years into the recession, millions of America’s workers remain unemployed or underemployed, even as U.S. corporations are sitting on trillions of dollars in cash, refusing to create jobs. The share of unemployed workers who have been jobless for more than six months shot up from 17.6 percent in the first half of 2007 to more than 45.6 percent by spring 2010, and it remains near that percentage today.

Friends of Labor fervently believe the answer to why so few jobs have been created was given with clear logic by Eli Siegel, founder of the philosophy Aesthetic Realism.  He asked this crucial question:  “What does a person deserve by being a person?”  It follows that if a person, a worker, does get what he or she deserves, then that cuts into profits.  In a commentary published in The Right of Aesthetic Realism to Be Known, Ellen Reiss, Chairman of Education, explains:  

 Every one of the checks on profit economics [mostly brought about by unions] was a check on bosses’ and stockholders’ freedom to pocket the wealth that workers produced.  After all, as Mr. Siegel put it, it’s mathematical: each penny that people’s labor brings in, beyond the money needed to have production continue, will go either to those whose work creates the wealth or to owners who don’t work for it.  Every curb on the profit system’s injustice—from mandated ventilation to an employer-paid pension plan negotiated by a union—interfered with the profit system itself.  It was money used in behalf of what workers deserve, and thus cut in on how much profit could go to persons who did not do the work….

That’s why there has been such a fierce effort these decades to do away with unions in America, and why so many companies are having their work done overseas by “cheap” labor.  I said this some years ago, based on what I learned from Eli Siegel—the present difficulty of unions is really a sign of their strength: by the 1970s, unions were able to accomplish so much, get such a better life for American workers, that employers have found themselves unable to come away with the profits they desired.  Unions, making work more ethical, have weakened a way of economics based on bad ethics.  Seeing this fact should bring pride and encouragement to the American labor movement.

As a person who had the good fortune for more than 20 years to work for unions, and retired with a good pension from I.B.T. Local 1205 on Long Island, I’m forever indebted to the union movement for enabling my husband and myself to have a secure retirement.  I firmly believe that when the jobs of America are owned by the people doing the work, and the profits are coming to them—not to some shareholder—we’ll have a thriving, ethical economy in which everyone benefits.

Carol Driscoll

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 166 other followers

%d bloggers like this: