# Βιομηχανικά συνδικάτα στις ΗΠΑ, αμερικανικό και γερμανικό μοντέλο



## Costas (Feb 15, 2014)

*Volkswagen Vote is Defeat for Labor in South*
By STEVEN GREENHOUSEFEB. 14, 2014
(ΝΥΤ)
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. — In a defeat for organized labor in the South, employees at the Volkswagen plant here voted 712 to 626 against joining the United Automobile Workers.

The loss is an especially stinging blow for U.A.W. because Volkswagen did not even oppose the unionization drive. The union’s defeat — in what was one of the most closely watched unionization votes in decades — is expected to slow, perhaps stymie, the union’s long-term plans to organize other auto plants in the South.

A retired local judge, Samuel H. Payne, announced the vote results inside VW’s sprawling plant after officials from the National Labor Relations Board had counted the ballots. In the hours before the votes were tallied, after three days of voting at the assembly plant, both sides were predicting victory.

The vote this week came in a region that is traditionally anti-union, and as a result many said the U.A.W. faced an uphill battle. The union saw the campaign as a vital first step toward expanding in the South, while Republicans and many companies in Tennessee feared that a U.A.W. triumph would hurt the state’s welcoming image for business.

Frank Fischer, chief executive and chairman of Volkswagen Chattanooga, left, and Gary Casteel, a regional director for the United Auto Workers, spoke to the press after the announcement of the vote. Erik Schelzig/Associated Press

Standing outside the Volkswagen plant, Mike Jarvis, a three-year employee who works on the finishing line, said the majority had voted against U.A.W. because they were persuaded the union had hurt Detroit’s automakers.

“Look at what happened to the auto manufacturers in Detroit and how they struggled. They all shared one huge factor: the U.A.W.,” said Mr. Jarvis, who added that he had had bad experiences with other labor unions. “If you look at how the U.A.W’s membership has plunged, that shows they’re doing a lot wrong.”

The U.A.W. lost the unionization campaign even though it took place with one highly unusual — and highly favorable — circumstance. Unlike most American companies, Volkswagen pledged to remain neutral, in some ways offering quiet support to the union.

Nevertheless, Republican politicians in Tennessee as well as some outside conservative groups made sure that the plant’s nearly 1,600 workers heard plenty of anti-union arguments.

Governor Bill Haslam, a Republican, warned that auto part suppliers would not locate in the Chattanooga area if the plant was unionized, while Senator Bob Corker said Volkswagen executives had told him that the plant would add a new production line, making SUVs, if the workers rejected the U.A.W. In a series of interviews this week, Mr. Corker, a Republican and a former mayor of Chattanooga, asserted that a union victory would make Volkswagen less competitive and hurt workers’ living standards.

To step up the pressure, State Senator Bo Watson, who represents a suburb of Chattanooga, warned that the Republican-controlled legislature was unlikely to approve further subsidies to Volkswagen if the workers embraced the U.A.W., a threat that might discourage the company from expanding.

Volkswagen officials had urged “third parties” to remain neutral and stay out of the unionization battle. Grover Norquist, the anti-tax crusader, helped underwrite a new group, the Center for Worker Freedom, that put up 13 billboards in Chattanooga, warning that the city might become the next Detroit if the workers voted for the union.

Frank Fischer, chief executive and chairman of Volkswagen Chattanooga, rushed to respond after Mr. Corker said VW officials had told him they would expand the plant if the U.A.W. was defeated. Some legal experts said that if Volkswagen officials made such a statement, it might be construed as an illegal intimidation or inducement to pressure the workers to vote against the union.

In a statement, Mr. Fischer said, “There is no connection between our Chattanooga employees’ decision about whether to be represented by a union and the decision about where to build a new product for the U.S. market.”

“We’re obviously deeply disappointed,” said Bob King, the U.A.W.'s president at a news conference. “We’re also outraged by the outside interference,” he added, noting that a United States senator, Tennessee’s governor and various leaders of the state legislature attacked his union’s efforts.

Mr. King said he thought the pressures from Tennessee’s politicians were what swung the election. Last fall, the union said a majority of the plant’s workers had signed cards saying they favored joining the U.A.W.

The United Automobile Workers' loss is expected to slow, perhaps stymie, the union’s plans to organize other auto plants in the South. Tami Chappell for The New York Times

“We’ll look at our legal options over the next few days,” he said, presumably meaning the union might consider filing a complaint with the N.L.R.B. about improper actions to influence how workers voted.

Volkswagen did not oppose the U.A.W. partly because its officials were eager to create a German-style works council, a committee of managers and blue-collar and white-collar workers who develop factory policies, on issues like work schedules and vacations. Volkswagen, which has unions and works councils at virtually all of its 105 other plants worldwide, views such councils as crucial for improving morale and cooperation and increasing productivity.

Mr. Watson, the state senator, attacked Volkswagen for taking a neutral-to-positive stance toward the U.A.W. saying its approach was “unfair, unbalanced, and, quite frankly, un-America in the traditions of American labor campaigns.”

Many legal experts say it would be illegal to have a works council unless workers first voted to have a union. If the Chattanooga gets a work council, it will be the first factory in the United States to have such a council.

After the results were announced, Mr. Fischer said the vote was not against having a works council. He said Volkswagen would now seek to determine the best method to develop such a council for the plant.

Mr. Fischer said Volkswagen looked forward to working with state and local officials for future growth for the plant.

Republicans said the U.A.W. badly needed a success at Volkswagen to gain members and dues money after its membership had fallen to less than one-third of its peak. Mr. King has long said one of his main goals was to unionize some transplants, or foreign-owned auto companies with plants in the United States, partly to prevent the transplants from pulling down wages and benefits at Detroit’s automakers.

Sean McAlinden, chief economist at the Center for Automotive Research, said, “Bob King has been very open that if they don’t organize the transplants, their future as a large automotive union is in jeopardy.” He said the transplants account for 30 percent of auto sales in the United States, while Detroit’s automakers account for 45 percent and imports the remaining 25 percent.

Andy Berke, the mayor of Chattanooga and a Democrat, voiced dismay with the threats of cutting off subsidies to VW and the warnings that a union victory would undermine the area’s business climate.

“Whatever is going on politically, the most important issue is jobs, and we shouldn’t let the politics of the situation interfere with bringing good middle-class opportunities to Chattanooga,” Mr. Berke said.

Mike Burton, a VW worker who led the anti-union drive, said many workers felt that they were paid well and treated well without having a union and thus saw no need to have one. He said many workers objected to the U.A.W. having initially sought unionization based on what it said was having a majority of cards signed favoring a union.

“We don’t need the U.A.W. to give us rights we already have,” he said. “We can already talk to the company if we have any problems.”


----------



## Costas (Jul 3, 2014)

Αυτό δεν είναι για βιομηχανικά συνδικάτα, αλλά για δημόσια συνδικάτα:

The War on Workers
The Supreme Court Ruling on Harris v. Quinn Is a Blow for Unions
By CYNTHIA ESTLUND and WILLIAM E. FORBATH (ΝΥΤ)
(...)
On Monday a 5-to-4 majority of the Supreme Court fired its own salvo in the war on unions. Though its decision in Harris v. Quinn was narrow, saying that, in some cases, unions could not collect fees from one particular class of public employees who did not want to join, its language suggests that this may be the court’s first step toward nationalizing the “right to work” gospel by embedding it in constitutional law.

The petitioners in Harris were several home-care workers who did not want to join a union, though a majority of their co-workers had voted in favor of joining one. Under Illinois law, they were still required to contribute their “fair share” to the costs of representation — a provision, known as an “agency fee,” that is prohibited in “right to work” states.

The ability of unions to collect an agency fee reflects a constitutional balance that has governed American labor for some 40 years: Workers can’t be forced to join a union or contribute to its political and ideological activities, but they can be required to pay for the cost of the union’s collective bargaining and contract-administration activities.

The majority in Harris saw things differently. Making workers pay anything to a union they oppose is in tension with their First Amendment rights — “something of an anomaly,” in the words of the majority. But the real anomaly lies in according dissenters a right to refuse to pay for the union’s services — services that cost money to deliver, and that put money in the pockets of all employees.

Once selected by a majority of workers in a bargaining unit, a union becomes the exclusive representative, with a duty to fairly represent all of them. That is the bedrock of our public and private sector labor laws.

Unless everyone is required to pay for those services, individual workers can easily become “free riders,” taking the benefits of collective representation without paying their fair share of the costs. Not only dissenters but any employee who wants to save a buck can “free ride.” The net result may be that the union cannot afford to represent workers effectively, and everyone suffers. 
(...)


----------



## Costas (Jul 16, 2014)

A Push to Give Steadier Shifts to Part-Timers
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE / ΝΥΤ
Unpredictable hours and on-call shifts have kindled a nationwide movement to give part-time workers more rights.


----------



## dharvatis (Jul 19, 2014)

10 Reasons We're Against Unions


----------



## Costas (Aug 14, 2014)

Working Anything but 9 to 5
Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos (NYT)
Με πάρα πολλές φωτογραφίες (νέο στιλ για την ΝΥΤ;)


----------



## nickel (Aug 14, 2014)

Costas said:


> Με πάρα πολλές φωτογραφίες (νέο στιλ για την ΝΥΤ;)


Θα δούμε ποιες νέες προσεγγίσεις επιβάλλει ο ανταγωνισμός. Πάντως, οι πολλές φωτογραφίες σε ένα άρθρο που δεν τις έχει ανάγκη μπορεί να αυξάνουν υπερβολικά το κόστος του άρθρου χωρίς να βελτιώνουν την αναγνωσιμότητά του. (Εγώ πάντως προτιμώ να περνάω κάτι τέτοια στο Κιντλ με εντολή που αφαιρεί όλα τα γραφικά...)


----------



## Costas (Sep 8, 2014)

Δεν έχω καιρό να το διαβάσω, αλλά:

Some Retail Workers Find Better Deals With Unions (ΝΥΤ)

By now, the hardships endured by retail workers at clothing stores across New York City are achingly familiar: the frantic scramble to get assigned enough hours to earn a living on painfully low wages; the ever-changing, on-call schedules that upend child care arrangements, college schedules and desperate efforts to find second jobs.

Workers and government officials around the country are increasingly pushing for change. But for an example of more humane workplaces, there is no need to jet to Sweden or Denmark or Mars. We need look no farther than Midtown Manhattan, no farther than Herald Square.

Ladies and gentlemen, step right onto the escalators and glide on up to the sixth floor. Allow me to introduce you to Debra Ryan, a sales associate in the Macy’s bedding department.

For more than two decades, Ms. Ryan has guided shoppers in the hunt for bedroom décor, helping them choose between medium-weight and lightweight comforters, goose-down and synthetic pillows, and sheets and blankets in a kaleidoscope of colors.

But here is what’s truly remarkable, given the current environment in retail: Ms. Ryan knows her schedule three weeks in advance. She works full time and her hours are guaranteed. She has never been sent home without pay because the weather was bad or too few customers showed up for a Labor Day sale on 300-thread-count sheets.

This is no fantasy. This is real life, in the heart of New York.

“I’m able to pay my rent, thank God, and go on vacation, at least once a year,” Ms. Ryan said. “There’s a sense of security.”

So what makes this Macy’s store so different? Its employees are represented by a union, which has insisted on stability in scheduling for its members. (Union workers enjoy similar scheduling arrangements at the Bloomingdale’s, H&M and Modell’s Sporting Goods stores in Manhattan.)

Now, I know the term “union” is a dirty word in some circles, even in this city, where labor still has considerable clout and has catapulted many workers into the middle class. But no one can deny that these union workers savor something that is all too rare in the retail industry right now: guaranteed minimum hours — for part-time and full-time employees — and predictable schedules.

This is no accident.

“The biggest issue for workers today is scheduling,” said Stuart Appelbaum, president of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, which negotiated contracts for workers at the Macy’s, Bloomingdale’s, H&M and Modell’s stores.

“It’s not just about how much they’re paid per hour,” Mr. Applebaum said, “but how many hours a week they get to work.”

To envision what life is like when you do not have those guarantees, just walk across 34th Street to the Zara clothing store, where Sonica Smith has worked as a sales associate for nearly two years.

Ms. Smith is a 26-year-old single mother of two who loves working in retail. She loves clothes. She loves dressing customers. But her unpredictable work schedule and the relentless struggle to get enough hours wreak constant havoc on her life.

Some weeks, she is assigned 24 hours of work; other weeks, she gets only 16. There is never a guaranteed minimum and there are never enough hours to get close to full time.

“At work, all I’m thinking about is: How am I going to pay the rent for the month?” said Ms. Smith, who earns $11 an hour. “How am I going to pay the person who is caring for my kids today?”

She said her last check amounted to only $396 for two weeks of work. “I nearly cried,” she said.

This is no surprise to anyone who works in retail. In a report scheduled to be released on Monday, Stephanie Luce, an associate professor of labor studies at the City University of New York, and the Retail Action Project, a workers’ advocacy group financed by foundations and Mr. Appelbaum’s union, surveyed 236 retail workers in Manhattan and Brooklyn and found that only 40 percent had set minimum hours per week.

The good news is that some retail companies are promising to do things differently. Last month, Starbucks vowed to improve the “stability and consistency” of the work schedules of its 130,000 baristas. (The company was responding to a New York Times article chronicling the enormous strains that unpredictable scheduling places on workers.)

At Zara, where employees have demanded more predictability, the company has given workers more notice of coming shifts, though workers are still pressing for guaranteed minimum hours. Government officials, meanwhile, are increasingly trying to curb the harsh scheduling practices.

Ms. Ryan, the sales associate at Macy’s, hopes the movement will spread. She knows from personal experience that satisfying, sustainable careers can be built in retail. After 27 years in the business, she earns about $40,000 a year — nearly $20 an hour — and never has to worry from week to week about her pay.

“Thank God, I work for Macy’s,” she said.


----------



## Costas (Oct 31, 2014)

Zero-hours contract workers turned away by some of UK’s biggest landlords
As well as high rents, workers with no fixed hours or income face problems finding a landlord who will agree to house them
(The Guardian)


----------



## Costas (Dec 12, 2014)

The Vanishing Male Worker: How America Fell Behind
(NYT)
(...)
José Flores, 45, who lives in St. Paul, said that after losing a job as a *translator* for the University of Minnesota’s public health department in 2011, he struck a deal with his landlord to pay $200 a month instead of $580, in exchange for doing odd jobs. He has a cellphone that costs $34 a month and an old car he tries not to drive, and “if I really need clothes or shoes, I go to the thrift store.” He picks up occasional work translating at hospitals, but he has not looked for a regular job since August.
(...)
After waiting two years for work as an electrician, Mr. Walsh took a job in April 2012 at a Home Depot. He was fired a few months later, he said, after he failed to greet a “secret shopper” paid by the company to evaluate employees. (...) This time he was fired on Dec. 13 — like many who have lost jobs, he remembers the date immediately and precisely — after he asked for a vacation day, he said, to care for his dying mother.

“If for some reason I cannot live in the apartment where I live anymore, then that will be basically a wake-up call for me to wake up and say for sure I need a full-time job,” Mr. Flores said. He added, “If I start working full time the rent will increase” — because he would no longer be available for odd jobs.


----------



## Costas (Dec 16, 2014)

As Robots Grow Smarter, American Workers Struggle to Keep Up (ΝΥΤ)
Μου άρεσε που το όνομα που έδωσε η IBM σ' ένα εξελιγμένο σύστημά της είναι Watson!


----------



## Costas (Dec 25, 2014)

10 σημεία για ένα νέο εργατικό κίνημα [στις ΗΠΑ], του Στάνλεϋ Αρόνοβιτς
(Ενθέματα)


----------



## Costas (Feb 10, 2015)

Illinois Governor Acts to Curb Power of Public Sector Unions
MONICA DAVEY and MITCH SMITH / ΝΥΤ
Gov. Bruce Rauner's executive order would ban unions from requiring all state workers to pay the equivalent of dues.


----------



## Costas (Mar 7, 2015)

Wisconsin Votes to Limit Collection of Fees by Unions
MONICA DAVEY / ΝΥΤ

The State Assembly approved legislation barring unions from requiring workers to pay the equivalent of dues. Gov. Scott Walker has said he will sign the measure.


----------

