State of the Union(s): A Labor Day Follow-Up, With Questions

A handful of union-related items today, a week after Labor Day.

First:

The New York Times notes that there was no Labor Day parade this year in the Big Apple, where it all began in 1882:

If you wanted to see labor in action on Labor Day, you’d have done well to visit a hospital’s obstetrics wing. You certainly weren’t going to find much of consequence in New York yesterday that involved unions.

In this city where Labor Day parades got their start, in 1882, workers haven’t strutted their stuff on the holiday for quite a while. For them, as for everyone else, it has long been a day for beaches and barbecues. Besides, it is nearly impossible to compete with the blockbuster West Indian American Day Carnival Parade in Brooklyn , which absorbs the day’s energy, not to mention many politicians [linked page includes parade video].

But at least organized labor usually shows the flag on the Saturday after Labor Day, with a march along Fifth Avenue. Not this year. The New York City Central Labor Council called off the 2007 parade, replacing it with a rally on Saturday at the World Trade Center site, focused on health issues affecting those who toiled there after 9/11.

With all the union members there must be in NYC, there weren’t enough who cared about tradition — and the importance of making a showing of strength — to do the traditional parade? Come on. That’s just plain lame. Or would the parade be pointless anyway?

Next item:

While the UAW and Detroit’s Big Three are down-to-the wire in critical negotiations, facing a September 14 deadline, there’s news of renewed union organizing efforts at foreign-owned auto plants in the South:

• The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers has begun a new campaign to organize workers at the Mercedes-Benz assembly plant in Vance, Alabama. (“Their campaign is taking place at the same time the United Auto Workers is seeking to organize workers at the Honda plant in Lincoln [Alabama].”)
• The UAW is trying again to organize workers at Toyota’s Georgetown, Kentucky plant. (“The UAW has never collected enough signatures to force a vote by all 7,000 Georgetown workers. And even if it gets a vote, that is only the first step. Workers at Nissan’s plant in Smyrna, Tenn., have voted twice on UAW membership and rejected it.”).

It’ll never happen. Those workers know they owe their jobs to the UAW — because of the way the UAW has hamstrung Detroit over the years. They know Honda and Toyota have a competitive advantage precisely because they are union-free and thus pay wages and benefits that, while generous for factory labor, are much closer to market rates than the market-busting levels UAW has coerced out of Detroit over the years. Am I wrong?

Finally:

A Labor Day reflection on union-management relations from St. Louis’s own Bill McClellan, a columnist of wide-ranging interests. Here Bill has some excellent insights:

Although there were parades on Monday and the grocery store workers ratified their new contract on Wednesday, don’t be misled about the condition of organized labor. The world is changing, and not in a way beneficial to unions. Just ask Bob Triplett.

He’s president of Teamsters Local 50 in Belleville. His union has been without a contract with Illinois Distributing Co. since May. . . .

A veteran labor guy like Triplett — he’s been a Teamster for 26 years — will readily admit that there’s nothing unusual about negotiations being tough and dragging on for several months. But Triplett also would tell you that the atmosphere has changed. Companies used to be more like families.

For instance, when Triplett got married, his best man was Tony Joynt, the president of IDC. . . .
“Those days were different” . . . . Ralston Purina used to celebrate Checker Days. Employees would gather in the auditorium and cheer while managers ate dog food.

The Post-Dispatch was family. Old-timers tell stories about new hires being invited to Joseph Pulitzer’s house. All over town — all over the country — it was the same sort of thing. Companies promoted the idea of family. Companies valued stability in the work force.

That seems old-fashioned now. Quaint.

The family thing was a double-edged sword for unions. On one hand, why have a union if you’re family? On the other hand, if you did have a union, the relationship between labor and management was often pretty good. When people stayed at one company forever, people were promoted from within, and that meant that management was filled with former union guys, and those former union guys did not think of the union as the enemy. Quite the contrary. . . .

All that has changed. Companies have become less interested in the concept of family, and more interested in the bottom line. Interested? Obsessed. . . .

What do you think? Is Bill right about this trend or nostalgic for a past that never existed? What are the implications of the loss of a sense of “family” for the unions? For companies?

UPDATE: “Honda tells workers union not necessary; Letter says organizing would harm team “ Honda letter to employees says:

In recent years, many of our unionized competitors have closed plants, lost thousands of jobs and posted staggering financial losses . . . . Meanwhile, by working together as one team, Honda’s North American auto operations have managed to avoid even a single layoff for nearly 30 years – a claim none of our unionized competitors can make.