VoyForums
GIVE FREE FOOD
www.TheHungerSite.com
-> Click Here <-
SAVE THE RAINFORESTS
www.TheRainforestSite.com
-> Click Here <-
Non-profit ad served by VoyForums...

[ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 12:21:24 10/06/06 Fri
Author: LB
Author Host/IP: pool-71-252-54-95.washdc.east.verizon.net / 71.252.54.95
Subject: The War Against Decent Wages for Workers>>

Paul Krugman: The War Against Wages

Should we be cheering over the fact that the Dow Jones Industrial
Average has finally set a new record? No. The Dow is doing well largely
because American employers are waging a successful war against wages.
Economic growth since early 2000, when the Dow reached its previous
peak, hasn't been exceptional. But after-tax corporate profits have
more than doubled, because workers' productivity is up, but their
wages
aren't and because companies have dealt with rising health
insurance
premiums by denying insurance to ever more workers.

If you want to see how the war against wages is being fought, and what
it's doing to working Americans and their families, consider the
latest
news from Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart already has a well-deserved reputation for paying low wages
and offering few benefits to its employees; last year, an internal
Wal-Mart memo conceded that 46 percent of its workers’ children were
either on Medicaid or lacked health insurance. Nonetheless, the memo
expressed concern that wages and benefits were rising, in part
“because
we pay an associate more in salary and benefits as his or her tenure
increases.”

The problem from the company’s point of view, then, is that its
workers
are too loyal; it wants cheap labor that doesn’t hang around too
long,
but not enough workers quit before acquiring the right to higher wages
and benefits. Among the policy changes the memo suggested to deal with
this problem was a shift to hiring more part-time workers, which
will
lower Wal-Mart's health care enrollment.

And the strategy is being put into effect. Investment analysts and
store managers, reports The New York Times, say Wal-Mart
executives
have told them the company wants to transform its work force to 40
percent part-time from 20 percent.Another leaked Wal-Mart memo
describes a plan to impose wage caps, so that long-term employees
won't
get raises. And the company is taking other steps to keep workers from
staying too long: in some stores, according to workers, managers
have
suddenly barred older employees with back or leg problems from sitting
on stools.

It's a brutal strategy. Once upon a time a company that treated its
workers this badly would have made itself a prime target for union
organizers. But Wal-Mart doesn't have to worry about that, because it
knows that these days the people who are supposed to enforce labor laws
are on the side of the employers, not the workers.

Since 1935, U.S. workers considering whether to join a union have been
protected by the National Labor Relations Act, which bars employers
from firing workers for engaging in union activities. For a long time
the law was effective: workers were reasonably well protected against
employer intimidation, and the union movement flourished.

In the 1970's, however, employers began a successful campaign to roll
back unions. This campaign depended on routine violation of labor law:
experts estimate that by 1980 employers were illegally firing at least
one out of every 20 workers who voted for a union. But employers rarely
faced serious consequences for their lawbreaking, thanks to America's
political shift to the right. And now that the shift to the right has
gone even further, political appointees are seeking to remove whatever
protection for workers' rights that the labor relations law still
provides.

The Republican majority on the National Labor Relations Board, which is
responsible for enforcing the law, has just declared that millions of
workers who thought they had the right to join unions don't. You see,
the act grants that right only to workers who aren’t supervisors. And
the board, ruling on a case involving nurses, has declared that
millions of workers who occasionally give other workers instructions
can now be considered supervisors.

As the dissent from the Democrats on the board makes clear, the
majority bent over backward, violating the spirit of the law, to reduce
workers' bargaining power.

So what's keeping paychecks down? Major employers like Wal-Mart have
decided that their interests are best served by treating workers as a
disposable commodity, paid as little as possible and encouraged to
leave after a year or two. And these employers don't worry that angry
workers will respond to their war on wages by forming unions, because
they know that government officials, who are supposed to protect
workers' rights, will do everything they can to come down on the side
of the wage-cutters.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Re: The War Against Decent Wages for Workers>> -- Matthew Villani, 17:20:30 10/07/06 Sat (cache-dtc-ad01.proxy.aol.com/205.188.116.195)

The Bush tax cuts should be undone, they've only helped out big businesses. It's tough to find a politician who does anything for the common man. Republicans are for big businesses and Democrats are for special interest groups.

[ Edit | View ]
[> [> The tax cuts have done nothing for the economy. We have the biggest deficit in history as a result of the war and these cuts. Whatever happened to the notion that Repubs are the party of fiscal responsibility? -- LB, 19:49:56 10/07/06 Sat (pool-71-252-54-95.washdc.east.verizon.net/71.252.54.95)


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> Agreed entirely. We need someone in office who isn't a NeoCon or a Liberal. -- Matthew Villani, 01:35:23 10/08/06 Sun (cache-dtc-ad01.proxy.aol.com/205.188.116.195)


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> I'm proud to be a liberal. -- LB, 09:27:58 10/09/06 Mon (pool-71-252-54-95.washdc.east.verizon.net/71.252.54.95)

"I'm Proud to Say I'm a 'Liberal'"

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people--their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties--someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

-- John F. Kennedy, September 14, 1960

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Love it! I would say that's my definition and I'm a liberal through and through. -- cyndi, 20:19:47 10/09/06 Mon (216-166-252-10.dsl.peknil.grics.net/216.166.252.10)


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm proud to be a liberal. -- Matthew Villani, 20:47:18 11/25/06 Sat (cache-rtc-ae07.proxy.aol.com/152.163.101.11)

I'm kinda weird, like an old fashioned Democrat. I'm fiscially liberal, but very socially conservative to almost an extremist level.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> the people in charge are RINO's - Republican in name only. They are not conservative in any sense. The GOP is supposed to stand for small government, fiscal responsibility - what a joke. The Bush corporation has abducted the Republican party and is holding it hostage. Moderates need to rise up and take it back. But in the meantime, they need to vote for Democrats and clean the crooks out of office -- Allegra, 10:16:01 10/10/06 Tue (12-205-154-74.client.mchsi.com/12.205.154.74)


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> Re: the people in charge are RINO's - Republican in name only. They are not conservative in any sense. The GOP is supposed to stand for small government, fiscal responsibility - what a joke. The Bush corporation has abducted the Republican party and is holding it hostage. Moderates need to rise up and take it back. But in the meantime, they need to vote for Democrats and clean the crooks out of office -- Matthew Villani, 20:39:47 11/25/06 Sat (cache-rtc-ae07.proxy.aol.com/152.163.101.11)

I agree mostly, except the last thing we need are "moderates" like John McCain and Lindsay Graham. We need the more libertarian type. Very good points overall.

[ Edit | View ]

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2012 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.