USA Today: A broadly shared prosperity has been replaced by winner-take-all plutocracy.

FROM the 1940s to the 1970s, organized labor helped build a middle-class democracy in the United States. The postwar period was as successful as it was because of unions, which helped enact progressive social legislation from the Civil Rights Act to Medicare. Since then, union representation of American workers has fallen, in tandem with the percentage of income going to the middle class. Broadly shared prosperity has been replaced by winner-take-all plutocracy. 

Many vibrant industrial democracies, including Germany, have strong unions despite facing the same pressures from globalization. 

Polling has shown that a majority of American nonunion workers would like to join a union if they could. 

In fact, the greatest impediment to unions is weak and anachronistic labor laws.  It’s time to add the right to organize a labor union, without employer discrimination, to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, because that right is as fundamental as freedom from discrimination in employment and education. This would enshrine what the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. observed in 1961 at an A.F.L.-C.I.O. convention: “The two most dynamic and cohesive liberal forces in the country are the labor movement and the Negro freedom movement.  Together, we can be architects of democracy.” 

The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes that “everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.” The First Amendment has been read to protect freedom of association, and the 1935 National Labor Relations Act recognized the “right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations,” but in reality, the opportunity to organize is a right without a remedy.

Firing someone for trying to organize a union is technically illegal under the 1935 act, but there are powerful incentives for corporations to violate this right, in part because the penalties — mitigated back pay after extended hearings — are so weak. 

It is noteworthy that American workers in the airline and railway industries, which are governed not by the 1935 law but by a stronger statute, the Railway Labor Act, have much higher rates of unionization.

Past efforts to strengthen labor laws over four decades have gotten bogged down: Congress cannot pass reforms until labor’s political clout increases, but that won’t happen without labor law reform. 

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, has much stronger penalties and procedures than labor laws. Under our proposal, complaints about wrongful terminations for union organizing could still go through the National Labor Relations Board, which has expertise in this field. But the board would employ the procedures currently used by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which provide that after 180 days, a plaintiff can move his or her case from the administrative agency to federal court. There, plaintiffs alleging that they were unfairly dismissed for trying to organize could sue for compensatory and punitive damages and lawyers’ fees, have the opportunity to engage in pretrial legal discovery and have access to a jury — none of which are available under current law. 

Our proposal would make disciplining or firing an employee “on the basis of seeking union membership” illegal just as it now is on the basis of race, color, sex, religion and national origin. It would expand the fundamental right of association encapsulated in the First Amendment and apply it to the private workplace just as the rights of equality articulated in the 14th Amendment have been so applied. 

The labor and civil rights movements have shared values (advancing human dignity), shared interests (people of color are disproportionately working-class), shared historic enemies (the Jim Crow South was also a bastion of right-to-work laws) and shared tactics (sit-ins, strikes and other forms of nonviolent protest). King, it should be remembered, was gunned down in Memphis in 1968, where he was supporting striking black sanitation workers who marched carrying posters with the message “I Am a Man.” Conceiving of labor organizing as a civil right, moreover, would recast the complexity of labor law reform in clear moral terms.

Some might argue that the Civil Rights Act should be limited to discrimination based on immutable characteristics like race or national origin, not acts of volition. But the act already protects against religious discrimination. Some local civil rights statutes even cover marital status, family responsibilities, matriculation, political affiliation, source of income, or place of residence or business. 

Should organizing at work for “mutual aid and protection” not also be covered? 

While there are many factors that help explain why the nation has progressed on King’s vision for civil rights while it has moved backward on his goal of economic equality, among the most important is the substantial difference between the strength of our laws on civil rights and labor. It is time to write protections for labor into the Civil Rights Act itself.

Flint Michigan February 11, 1937 = let us never forget America!!! The Battle for who OWNS America rages on...

The middle class and the American Dream were born 75 years ago today, on February 11, 1937, the day the Flint workers won their struggle. And for the next 44 years, working people everywhere got to own their own homes, send their kids to college and never worry about going broke if they got sick. That belief, that life would be good if you were a good citizen and a hard worker, now seems out of reach for nearly half the country which is either living in or near poverty. Perhaps people wouldn't mind it as much if the burden were being evenly shared. But everyone knows that's not the case. In a time of record personal bankruptcies, record home foreclosures, record family and student debt, there are a group of people having the best years of wealth and profit ever recorded in human history. And it is those very people who have made the decisions to export our jobs, to decimate unions, to make college unaffordable, to start wars and to pay themselves with gluttonous joy while paying little or no tax -- this is the 1% that has created the burden so many Americans (and people around the world) now share. 

And so, 75 years after the victory in Flint, the battle is now being fought all over again. But this time it's not just about getting paid a dollar an hour, or having Sunday off, or reducing the chance of your hand being crushed in the metal stamping machine. This time, the stakes are even greater: Who is going to own America and control the basic functions of our democracy -- the richest 1% who buy the politicians to get what they want, or the 99% who don't have much these days and live in anxiety or fear of what's around the bend.

99% Our Priorities

Equality For All
We're working to make sure that individuals of every gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, and national origin aren't pushed to the margins.

Fair and Just Courts
Federal judges and Supreme Court justices -- appointed to lifetime terms -- play a profound role in safeguarding our rights. We're fighting to keep our courts free, fair, and independent.

Fighting the Right
The Radical Right is relentlessly pursuing cultural influence and power at every level of government -- and we're pushing back, exposing and countering their extreme agenda every step of the way.

Freedom of Speech
Democracy is a hollow promise if citizens aren't guaranteed freedom of expression. We're working to protect Americans' right to speak their minds without fear of reprisal.

Religious Liberty
We're fighting to preserve Americans' freedom to worship -- or not -- as they choose, without fear of coercion or government interference.

The Right to Vote
We work to tear down barriers to the ballot box for the elderly, minority communities, and students.

The Opportunity to Succeed
The American Dream is built upon the basis of everyone gets a chance to make it to the top.  Good education, an ability to find employment that is rewarding, challenging and offers the potential for growth, a social safety net, a vision for an America not 10 years but 10 thousand years from now = is what we will fight, get or die trying.

So while you suck that gimlet down your jowly flaccid face at Davos; know you're in our sights 1%...and there are 99% of US(A)!

President Obama wants to "Build the USA to last" which requires a prosperous middle class!!!

The President's themes -- tax fairness, help for homeowners, cracking down on U.S. financial crimes and unfair trade practices in China and investigating the lending practices that preceded the housing crisis -- are those he will be repeating as he campaigns for a second term.


He invoked the teamwork and selflessness of the U.S. armed forces to urge lawmakers toward agreement on changing the tax code for individuals and corporations, promoting energy development and improving job training and education. Still, he is unlikely to get any major legislation through Congress before the November election, which will also decide control of the House and Senate.

Unemployment at lowest level in 3 years!!!!

U.S. employment growth accelerated last month and the jobless rate dropped to a near three-year low of 8.5 percent, the strongest evidence yet the economic recovery is gaining steam.



Nonfarm payrolls increased 200,000 in December, the Labor Department said on Friday. It was the biggest rise in three months and beat economists' expectations for a 150,000 gain.


The unemployment rate fell from a revised 8.7 percent in November to its lowest level since February 2009, a heartening sign for President Barack Obama whose re-election hopes could hinge on the state of the labor market.


"The labor market is healing, but we still have a long way to go to recoup the losses we have endured. We may be close to a tipping point where gains can become more self-feeding," said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial in Chicago.

We are the 99%

When protesters under the banner “Occupy Wall Street” assembled last month in the heart of America’s business prowess, detractors dismissed them as a motley crew of disgruntled folks who would quickly run out of steam.


The detractors were wrong. Not only has Occupy Wall Street shown a great deal of staying power, it has triggered similar protests in more than 900 cities around the world.

Therein lies the chief difference between OWS and the tea party, to which it has been compared. One is a domestic movement aimed bringing about change in government through the ballot box. The other is an international push against what participants see as the cause of the global economic collapse: The major financial institutions that are not confined by national boundaries.

Tea party adherents believe government is too involved in the lives of Americans; Occupy Wall Street protesters argue that the absence of strong regulations and the lack of government oversight into the day-to-day operations of Wall Street companies led to an anything-goes attitude that ultimately brought down the American economy and the economies of most of the western world. To avoid a global depression, governments were forced to bail out the financial institution with huge amounts of public funds.

The result: Profits and bonuses are now booming for those on Wall Street and other financial centers, while the unemployment rates skyrocket, the Middle Class dwindles and cuts in public spending rise sharply.

The disparity of income and wealth has given rise to the “We are the 99%” slogan, which reflects the belief of the Occupy Wall Street protesters that wealth is now concentrated in the hands of 1 percent of the population. In addition, politicians who are perceived to be in the pockets of the corporate barons are also being targeted.

But all the protests and slogans won’t bring about the change in behavior on Wall Street and in Congress unless those assembled in Zuccotti Park in New York City and around the country do what the tea party has done: Become a credible political force for change.

Recent polls should provide some encouragement to the Occupy Wall Street movement. In general, a majority of the respondents agree with the premise of OWS protests.

A United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection polls shows that 56 percent of non-college educated whites back the protesters, according to the Washington Post. Thirty-one percent oppose them.

Overall approval

A Time magazine poll shows that 54 percent of non-college educated men, and 48 percent of non-college educated women, agree with the OWS protesters. That’s an overall approval rating of 51 percent.

The protests have attracted a wide array of Americans, from members of labor unions, to young people who can’t find jobs, to Hollywood types.

Actor Alec Baldwin made a brief stop at the OWS camp in the park and offered this observation on Twitter, the Post reports:

“Campaign Finance Reform should be the goal of Occupy Wall Street. Wealth is not the issue. It’s using wealth to buy the govt, that’s the issue.”

The need for a cogent plan of action to bring about the necessary changes is clear. So long as the disparate groups involved in OWS simply vent their anger and talk in generalities, the detractors will continue to dismiss them, and the decision-makers will continue to avoid them.

The ballot box is a powerful tool to force change in a democracy.

No Jobs Bill, No Ideas = Republican Party = Merry Xmas my fellow Christians!!!

It was all predicted, but the unanimous decision by Senate Republicans on Tuesday to filibuster and thus kill President Obama’s jobs bill was still a breathtaking act of economic vandalism. There are 14 million people out of work, wages are falling, poverty is rising, and a second recession may be blowing in, but not a single Republican would even allow debate on a sound plan to cut middle-class taxes and increase public-works spending.

The bill the Republicans shot down is not a panacea, but independent economists say it would have a significant and swift effect on the current stagnation. Macroeconomic Advisers, whose forecasts are often used by the Federal Reserve, said it could raise economic growth by 1.25 percentage points and create 1.3 million jobs in 2012. Moody’s Analytics estimated new growth at 2 percentage points and 1.9 million jobs. Those economists say that Republican ideas for increasing growth would have no measurable effects in the next year.

Stop the Machine!!!

The "Stop the Machine" rally organised by a group called "October 2011" echoed the demands of the "Occupy Wall Street" movement in New York that drew more than 5,000 people, including labour-union support, on Thursday.

"The poor are no longer patient," said one of the speakers, Ben Manski, a Green Party activist from Wisconsin, from a stage near the White House, decorated with the "We the People" preamble of the US constitution.

"It took us long enough, but we are no longer patient," Manski told the crowd, a mix of young people and veterans of protest movements of past decades who descended on the square with placards, drums and sleeping bags.

"This is a sacred struggle, on a par with the abolition of slavery, voting rights for women and civil rights," Manski said, "and just like those movements, we are going to win."

The protest - which has a four-day permit - got under way just as Barack Obama, the US president, called the Wall Street protests an expression of the frustration that Americans are feeling.

"I think people are frustrated, and the protesters are giving voice to a more broad-based frustration about how our financial system works," he told reporters at the White House.

Obama also used the opportunity to push forward his $447bn jobs bill, the American Jobs Act, saying it would ensure tougher oversight of the financial industry.

There must be a sensible balance between Socialism and Capitalism...and its not playing cards!

Each day, about 2,800 workers punch their time-cards in and out of Hindustan Cables Ltd.’s factories in India. They get paid, receive the occasional raise and eat in subsidized canteens, even though they produce nothing.

The state-owned company, based in Kolkata, hasn’t made any cable since 2004 and has lost $549 million after cellular technology made its telephone wiring obsolete. Labor laws which the World Bank says are among the most restrictive anywhere and tortuous bankruptcy procedures, a legacy of India’s Soviet-era plan economy, mean the government can’t fire idle employees or sell assets such as machinery or land.

While tolerance of unprofitable companies sits at odds with India’s status as the world’s second-fastest growing major economy, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s government, rocked by a spate of corruption scandals, may be wary of changing rules that keep many in jobs. About a third of India’s 249 state-owned firms that make everything from condoms to steel are losing money -- $3.4 billion in the most recent financial year -- just as the government misses a goal of raising $8.7 billion this year selling stakes in companies such as Oil & Natural Gas Corp., the nation’s biggest explorer.

“It is utterly crazy and everyone knows it’s crazy but there is nothing the government can do because of the labor laws,” said M. Govinda Rao, one of four members of India’s Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister, a panel which produces periodic reports for Singh’s administration. “The government is literally throwing money away.”


Kishore Rungta, chairman and managing director of Hindustan Cables, declined to comment.