So as Sen. Ted Cruz stands on the Senate floor talking, but not filibustering, federal workers prepare to strike.

I give exactly zero fucks about Sen. Cruz’s last stand against Obamacare…until the next one. When I first read about it on Tuesday, I thought it was a joke, and that it is. However, on my way home from work and before I began working on my super awesome fall project, I read this little number by my dream boyfriend Josh Eidelson, or as I’m sure he prefers, professional journalist.

According to Eidelson, cleaning and concessions workers in federal buildings are protesting their taxpayer funded jobs with poverty wages. They are marching on the White House today. They will demand President Obama use executive authority to raise labor standards for their job. The organizers expect a larger than the initial walk out back in May.

Delano Wingfield will strike for the third time today, and feels the federal government should take responsibility because they own the building where he makes only $9 per hour. The group Good Jobs Nation, backed by the SEIU, organized the walk out back in May. Instead of targeting the companies that employ the workers, they are targeting the federal government whose agreements and contracts facilitate the laborers’ work.

The labor movement is employing two tiered responses to the oppression through one day walkouts/strikes and targeting the “real bosses” who facilitate the oppression. Good Jobs Nation hasn’t laid out a specific play for Obama.

The estimate is that about 2 million workers make $12 per hour or less, while doing jobs funded by taxpayers. The walkout last May attracted the attention of some Democrats who wrote to President Obama in July to take action.

The protest today includes plans for: a morning march with members of Congress, a prayer vigil, an attempt to deliver a letter to the White House, and a press conference. The strike will include workers from Union Station (owned by Department of Transportation), Smithsonian Museums (owned by the federal Smithsonian Institution), and the Ronald Reagan Building and Old Post Office (owned by the General Services Administration).

The workers allege that their employers do not pay a living way and some have committed wage theft.  Good Jobs Nation also alleges workers face illegal punishments for past involvement in strikes. These allegations have triggered an investigation by the Department of Labor over wage theft. Workers met with GSA administration Dan Tangherlini, which asked the agency to audit all the contracts for potential wage theft. The workers believe GSA is unlikely to assist them.

Alright, keep an eye out, and DC peeps support the workers obviously. I miss living in DC.

Happy Labor Day, the service industry is in revolt

I go to Panera too much. There is this one guy who works there that gives me hell for it. He’s awesome, and as such should be my best friend, but instead we talk about man problems. He also doesn’t support the service industry strikes. I asked him about them last Thursday. I told him I partially expected to walk over and see McDonalds and Panera shut down due to a picket line. Both chains are across the street from the university. This employee told me he hadn’t heard anything about the strikes, but that they were paid ok and that fast food workers are teenagers. I respect his opinion, but fast food workers aren’t teenagers. The average age is 35, most are women, and people of color.

Thursday, fast food workers (and some retailers) went on strike in 60 cities (including in Cleveland, according to my parents). They want a living wage of $15 per hour from the large corporations making money off of low-wage workers. This minimum wage would be more than double the national minimum wage of $7.25. Allison Kilkenny, as always, had an excellent piece for The Nation, entitled, “Courage is contagious: Fast food workers expected to protest low wages nationwide.”

You may remember low-wage workers walking off the job last November in New York as a one day protest. However, by the summer the movement expanded and included thousands of workers across the country. This included Detroit, Chicago, New York, and Kansas City. It is important to remember these workers have no labor protections; they don’t have a union. Every time they walk off they lose money and possibly their jobs (because of retaliation). However, on Thursday, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, Memphis, and Raleigh joined this list with the backing of SEIU.

According to Kilkenny, there have already been benefits to the strikes. Some strikers in New York and Chicago saw their wages increase after the strike. Additionally, these benefits have encouraged other workers to protest for living wages. Some workers are calling for a union in addition to the living wages. The goal of action such as these strikes it to send a message to the corporations employing low-wage workers.

A few things to remember: these workers aren’t covered by a union so they have few protections, which makes this all the more amazing and inspiring, and these workers are “special populations.” Special populations usually refers to marginalized populations like women, people of color, immigrants, young people, the elderly, etc. Additionally, because these workers don’t have a union this movement is union driven (though it is union backed). Also, this being Labor Day, this isn’t the only labor fight going on right now. Wal-mart’s workers are still fighting their fight, domestic workers, immigrants, LGBT workers and trans workers specifically, teachers in Philly and Chicago, and right there in Washington DC where retail workers are fighting to increase the minimum wage with possible the help of the Council.

UFCW is considering rejoining the AFL-CIO next month

I know. I read that and went what? But it looks like it is true. Mike Elk had the exclusive for In These Times. I know what you’re thinking, wait they are separate to begin with? Just kidding, I make my own fun.

The UFCW (United Food and Commercial Workers) broke off from the AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations) back in 2005, but UFCW frequently cooperates with the AFL-CIO because that’s kind of how things have to be done to get anywhere. However, Elk’s sources within the AFL-CIO say the UFCW are in talks to rejoin the AFL-CIO bringing its 1.3 million members with it. The UFCW are expected to vote at the annual convention in Chicago this August, and it is expected to pass because of the support from leadership.

So back in 2005, several large unions split from the AFL-CIO including the UFCW, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the Brotherhood of Carpenters, the Laborers’ Union, Unite Here, and the United Farm Workers of America to form Change to Win, a rival federation. There is some controversy over the split including allegations an underlying motivation was to cut down on dues; Change to Win charges about half the dues per member as the AFL-CIO does.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka has pushed for the reunification of the labor movement (and its 14 million members) since his election in 2009 so this would be a pretty big victory for him. Change to Win has lost some of its membership including Unite Here, who voted to rejoin the AFL-CIO. However, the UFCW would be the largest to come back. Elk rightly points out this begs the question: will any of the other members, the SEUI, the Teamsters, or the United Farmworkers, enter talks to rejoin the AFL-CIO? Elk’s requests for comment went unanswered.

Trumka has courted the UFCWs for a while; memorably back in March when he joined the UFCW in criticizing the Obama administration public relations event emphasizing jobs for returning veterans with Wal-Mart. UFCW launched Our Wal-Mart.

The details of the potential union aren’t known yet. Elk expects the AFL-CIO to offer some kind of deal like discounted dues, as motivation. Other discussions to be had are about leadership, where UFCW officers will fit in and if the AFL-CIO will take on issues the UFCW cares about.

The Wal-Mart question is where this all gets the most interesting. The AFL-CIO have vast resources, which could be used to really take on Wal-Mart, but at this point we don’t know how much of their resources will be devoted to that. All that said, Wal-Mart isn’t going down without a fight, and it will probably be bad. As we've seen with before and most recently with their threats to the DC Council.

I go back on forth on labor unification. Part of me thinks labor (like everyone) is more powerful when acting as one. Of course, this can happen through coalition building. There is also a history of a power struggle within organized labor with special populations not getting much attention, recognition, or power. Of course, at this point everyone recognizes that low-wage women and people of color are the future of organized labor. But that means, old labor is going to have to be more inclusive, and while they are running to embrace the low-wage retail and service industry, I haven't seen them do quite as much in other highly gendered and raced fields such as home health aids and domestic care work. The later of which has been scoring some pretty huge victories in recent years with the Domestic Workers' Bill of Rights (New York, Hawaii, and Oregon have passed it with California still trying, I think). I’m looking forward to what is going to happen.

WalMart Supports Workers' Right to Health Insurance Now

Walmart now supports workers' right to health insurance. This is a pretty drastic change for a corporation which used to hand our federal assistance forms to new employees.

Specifically, Walmart has come out in support of requiring companies to provide health insurance/coverage to their employees. The mandate requiring health coverage and benefits is largely contested by just about every business association in DC, including, but not limited to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business.

Walmart wrote a joint letter with SEIU and the Center for American Progress...yeah, you read that right. This could mean a variety of things, and trust me I'm running through all the devious scenarios that Walmart could be up to. The article implies, Walmart could be attempting to mend fences with the liberals and make friends in Washington. Walmart has expanded benefits for workers in the recent past, but it has also been successfully fighting and winning lawsuits on the state evel which would have required companies to provide insurance.

The typical arguments apply on each side for and against the mandate: it is essential for health care reform and it is an unnecessary burden for small businesses. The letter composed by Walmart, SEIU, and the Center for American Progress calls for varying degrees of contributions by different size companies.

I'm still scratching my head over this one...