So Rick Newman wrote a kind of anti-labor wrapped up in the “these poor fools don’t know we’re powerless and should be ok with Walmart” kind of way.
So as you may have heard, Walmart is going ok strike on Friday, some aspects in the supply chain have already walked off the job this week, last week, and last month. They want these things we on the left call rights. Rights like the right to organize (or assemble as I call it in my inner monologue, accompanied by a mental image of the Avengers), a living wage, having a say in your schedule, and safe working conditions.
Newman wants to frame the Walmart discussion in terms of Hostess, which I don’t really get because all labor is not the same, and Hostess was running their company into the ground before they decided to blame the workers, but sure totes the same. Really, it boils down for me that Hostess though they could capitalize on some anti-labor sentiment (note unlike Mr. Newman), but they didn’t realize that people are more ok with labor now than they have been in decades. However, this is how Newman sees the Hostess situation:
“The debt-saddled company asked for union concessions on pay, benefits, and work rules to lower costs and become more competitive. Several unions agreed, but one, representing bakers, went on strike, shutting down two thirds of Hostess’s 36 plants. Now, Hostess says it may have no choice but to liquidate its assets, threatening the jobs of more than 18,000 workers.”Ok, so first, as of Monday, Hostess was willing to meet and mediate with the bakers’ union. So, this is awkward. Second, the poor corporation did this to itself. Third, with concessions on pay, etc, are these 18,000 jobs going to be the jobs desired? Probably not.
But in Newman’s interpretation, the Hostess situation should scare off Walmart employees. He also employs language as if the strike/protest isn’t actually going to happen on Black Friday. It is. I’m making cookies. Unfortunately, I don’t know if the Walmart where I’ll be in rural West Virginia is going on strike, but if they do there will be cookies.
As JJ pointed out here, Josh Eidelson has excellent coverage of all things Walmart, and I sincerely hope The Nation brings him on full-time to cover labor after all this. Anyway in Eidelson’s second most recent article, Walmart is so ok with the insignificant “walk offs” that they have filed a complaint with the NLRB. Way to blink Walmart.
Anyway, back to Newman, he argues that Walmart’s interest is to keep labor costs low and fend off unions because they push up costs. Liar. Walmart’s main concern and interest in a profit margin. And here is where Newman had my attention:
“But it’s the wrong decade—maybe even the wrong century—for workers protesting labor conditions to expect much for their efforts. Beyond that, old fashioned protests and pickets seem to completely miss the point in an era dominated by high unemployment, an underskilled work force and falling pay for menial work. What we really ought to be protesting is mediocre education, naïve worker expectations and faulty thinking about what it takes to get ahead these days.“Walmart epitomizes globalization and the cost-benefit tradeoffs that raise some people up and push other people down. The company obviously relies on cheap overseas labor and other cost-cutting innovations to keep prices remarkably low, which is great for consumers. The annual rate of inflation hasn’t been above 4 percent since 1991, due partly to Walmart and its may imitators.”Got all that? Protesting and strikes don’t work, please see Occupy, Greece, the others in the Walmart supply chain, the Chicago Teachers’ Union…I’m glad this man has a job with skills like these the only other place he would work is Fox News. Also, we need to stop bitching about fair and safe working conditions. Don’t we know there is unemployment out there? Looming and any job is a good job when there is the fear of unemployment. And everyone is unskilled, which definitely wasn’t a tactic used to undercut unions and workers. The real problem are workers who don’t know their place and think they deserve a fair wage and those damn teachers unions that are ruining education. I see what you’re doing here Newman. Finally, I don’t know how I missed this: Walmart is responsible for a lack of inflation, which is true. Prices have to remain low, people don’t make enough to buy things.
Newman is willing to concede that some of Walmart’s tactics are bad for workers, including that the pay is so low they have a hard time making anything. Though, Newman uses the generous wage of $9 per hour, which is the average, not the median. He also mentions Walmart’s use of part-time workers to get around benefits.
Newman argues that the power of unions comes not from solidarity, but from a lack of skilled workforce…I’m not sure that’s right. I’m pretty sure a general strike would work in forcing employers to pay a living wage and treat workers with respect, but I don’t think that is going to happen. While in today’s economy more people are willing to take work and shop even if it means crossing a line, I don’t think the surplus of available workers usurps power from unions.
I also agree with Newman, that Walmart keeps pay low because there is nothing forcing them to raise it, but I think collective action could be just the thing. Newman concludes by talking about how support for unions has dwindled to which I say look toward the Midwest. Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio fought back against anti-labor legislation, and while not all victories Ohio kicked Kasich’s ass on the subject. There were also several labor victories in the last election. During my thesis interviews, though I didn’t ask about the Ohio repeal of anti-labor measure, all of my participants who brought it up were pro-labor though none of them had ever held employment with union protections. Newman also invokes the old “unions are corrupt and abusive” train of thought. To which I say, please see the photo I took, here, of a bumper sticker that reads “My President is Jimmy Hoffa” next to an Army bumper sticker.
Newman concludes with this gem:
“Many Walmart employees seem to feel that tougher rules or pressures from outraged customers will help them get higher pay and better treatment. But you don’t have much bargaining power when you have indistinct skills shared with millions of others. A better way to get ahead is to gain new skills that employers want and other workers don’t have. Instead of attending union rallies, take a class. And above all, don’t get in the way of penny-pinching shoppers who need those Black Friday bargains.”Well, I would argue that those unskilled masses are exactly the power you need. I’ve complained to my family about Walmart for the better part of a decade and was at times mocked for it. However, I sent an email asking my family not to shop there this year and in the very least not cross a line. The response was one of indignation. How could I ever think that any of them would cross a picket line? Also, this notion of taking a class and not organizing is completely ridiculous. It is a distraction; you see you as the worker is the problem, not the system, not the corporations that get rich as you get poorer and poorer. I dare someone to say something to me about blocking their way into buy cheaply made goods, from poorly paid employees. They’d have quite some explaining to do on the rationalization behind the exploitation of hundreds. So the only thing I need clarification on is chocolate chip or peanut butter?
