Labor Unions

1.  Please Stop Helping Us, Jason L. Riley, 2014.  Here is an article that reviews the book and how awful the unions were toward blacks.

Author Jason Riley, in his recent book “Please Stop Helping Us,” says “when (politicians) moved to implement federal minimum-wage laws and Davis-Bacon statues … it is crystal clear that Congress passed these statues to protect white union workers from competition from nonunion blacks … We still have the transcripts.”

The solution is obvious. Just use unions who have a membership that reflects the surrounding area’s racial composition. In 1933 there were about 2.25 million union members. Two percent were black. In 1930, however, blacks were formally barred from union membership in 26 national unions. There goes that solution.

Responding to President Franklin Roosevelt’s National Industrial Recovery act, the NAACP in 1934 noted that, “Union labor strategy seems to be to form a union, strike to obtain the right to bargain … and close the union to black workers.” This act was later ruled unconstitutional, but to the blacks of the day, the National Recovery Administration (NRA) was commonly known as the Negro Removal Act. It was very effective.

2. Has There Ever Been a Time When the Unemployment Rate . . .
3.  Right to Work Law in Wisconsin, Gary North, February 27, 2015.
4.  1934 Minneapolis Strike.

5.  Power and Privilege: Labor Unions in America, Morgan Reynolds, 1984.
6.  More on Labor Unions.

7. “The Union Myth,” Tom DiLorenzo, 2004.
8. “Labor Unions Are Anti-Labor,” George Reisman, 2014.
9. “No, Unions Don’t Increase Everyone’s Wages,” Gary Galles, 2016.
10. “Labor Unions and the Freedom of Association,” Gary Galles, 2014.
11. “The Union Problem,” Murray Rothbard, 1991.
12.  “The Political Economy of Government Employee Unions,” Tom DiLorenzo, 2011.  
13.  “Public Labor Unions Are Getting Desperate,” Gary Galles, 2018.  
14.  “The Myth of Voluntary Unions,” Tom DiLorenzo, 2004.  
15.  “A Christian View of Labor Unions,” Gary North, 2018.  
16.  “Yet Another Way Unions Abuse the Tax Payers,” Gary Galles, 2018.  
17.  “Union Dues and the Free-Rider Problem,” Gary Galles, 2017.
18.  “Labor Unions, Thugs, and Storm Troopers,” George Reisman, 2013.
19.  “Labor Unions and the Minimum Wage: A Debate,” Walter Block, 2007.
20.

from “Unions or the Division of Labor,”

It was even the subject of the Cliché of Socialism number 11. In this short article, Hans Sennholz illustrates not only why the market would provide fair wages (based on productivity) but also why coercive unions are dangerous and harmful to the very employment they propose to want to help (as well as harmful to the economy as a whole). 

Hans Senholz skewers the myth that “Unions raise wages and the standard of Living.”

To believe that labor unions actually improve the lot of working people is to suggest that the capitalist economy fails to provide fair wages and decent working conditions. It is to imply that a free economy does not work satisfactorily unless it is “fortified” by union activity and government intervention.

The truth is that the unhampered market society allocates to every member the undiminished fruits of his labor. It does so in all ages and societies where individual freedom and private property are safeguarded. (The process works faster and more efficiently in our high-tech, information age with a labor force more mobile than ever before but it worked in previous times too, so long as individuals were free to accept or reject the offers of employers, or to leave one employer and work either for another or for himself–Editor.)

The reason your great-grandfather earned $5 a week for 60 hours of labor must be sought in his low productivity, not in the absence of labor unions. The $5 he earned constituted full and fair payment for his productive efforts—a voluntary contract he likely entered into because it represented his best opportunity. The economic principles of the free market, the competition among employers, a man’s mobility and freedom of choice, assured him full wages under the given production conditions.

“The Three Faces of Unionism,” Hans Senholz, 1985. 

“Socialists Argue About Labor Unions,” Hans Senholz, May 1984.

TEACHERS UNIONS

“Teachers Unions: Are the Schools Run for Them?” James Bovard, FEE, July 1, 1996.

Union Busted: Understanding the Relationship Between Democrats, Republicans, and Teachers’ Unions, Roman Motley, 2018.  The nice thing about this treatise is that it has an index of cited resources.  From the start, at the Introduction, the author identifies key mechanisms by which Democrats and Unions form, well, a union of politics in each state.  Motley writes,

I argue that four factors determine the relationship between political parties and teachers’ unions. First, the changing demographics of labor unions and public perception of teachers play a significant role in understanding this relationship. As labor unions changed demographically and became teacher 2 dominated, they also became less popular and more open to criticism. Labor unions have lost identification with the working poor, which has shifted how the public perceives them. Teachers’ unions now exist in an environment that is often resentful of unions. Second, the language of crisis in education has created a culture that justifies radical and intrusive education reforms. Politicians of both political parties are under significant pressure to enact tough accountability standards that are often at odds with teachers’ unions. This means that even allied politicians are often critical of unions and supportive of contrarian policies. Third, the Democratic Party electorally captures teachers’ unions. In other words, teachers’ unions must support Democrats, because the only alternative is the Republican Party, which is even more anti-union. This gives Democratic politicians an easy mechanism to take advantage of teacher union support. Fourth, campaign finance has undergone a drastic change in the last decade, which diminishes the influence of teachers’ unions. When combined these four factors paint a picture that explains the political relationship of national teachers unions. To ensure their electoral success the Democratic Party must be strategic about alliances, fundraising, and policy. This strategic political deal-making means that teachers’ unions do not always emerge as a policy winner. Democratic politicians actively take advantage of teachers union support to ensure their macropolitical success

My problem was that I was looking at the power structure of the state to the union to democratic party politics to be top-down, meaning from Sacramento to the local UTLA.  But where does UTLA, or any local union, take its policy orders from?  Page 2 of Motley’s Introduction sheds some light:

This thesis will focus on the two national teachers unions; the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), because they are highly influential political actors. The NEA and AFT are two of the largest political donors in the country (“Top Organizational Donors,” 2017). They are also the sixth and eighth largest organizational donors to the Democratic Party respectively. In 2016, The NEA and AFT spent approximately $60 million dollars on Democratic candidates (“Top Organizational Donors,” 2017). Combined that makes the NEA and AFT the second largest organizational political spender in the nation. That figure does not include the nearly $5 million dollars those organizations also spent on lobbying (“American Federation of Teachers,” 2017; “National Education Association,” 2017). This figure also does not capture all of the smaller donations made by affiliate organizations of the NEA and AFT (Cowen & Struck, 2014, p. 13). The NEA and AFT donated to the campaigns of 205 of the 248 Democrats in the House of Representatives (“American Federation of Teachers,” 2017; “National Education Association,” 2017). Even outside of merely spending, teachers’ unions are heavily represented as delegates in the
Democratic National Convention (Brill, 2010; DeBray-Pelot & McGuinn, 2009, p. 18).  Teachers’ unions also comprise an important cornerstone of the Democratic political organizing and get-out-the-vote efforts (Brill, 2010). This demonstrates the extent to which Democrats rely on teachers for support.

Teacher unions from The Mises Institute.

Teacher unions from Lew Rockwell.