Cracks in the American Way, as Labor Stands Strong in Europe

by Michelle Chen from Commondreams.org

The idea of American Exceptionalism has loomed large over the last half century, creating an air of national impunity while spreading a neoliberal capitalist model to every corner of the globe. Now the Great Recession has revealed American workers to be exceptional in the worst possible way: facing exceptional pain and exceptional weakness in the labor movement.

A report published by the International Trade Union Confederation (submitted, ironically, to that pillar of the postwar American hegemony, the World Trade Organization) takes a critical view of the U.S. workforce in the context of global human and labor rights. The ITUC's findings expose many of the cracks in the American Way, from a persistent gender wage gap to a failure to uphold child labor protections to a disturbing prevalence of human trafficking. One of the key systemic problems is the institutional weakness of the labor movement:

U.S. law excludes large groups of workers from the right to organise. These include agricultural workers, many public sector workers, domestic workers, supervisors and independent contractors. Moreover, for most private sector workers forming trade unions is extremely difficult and anti-union pressure from employers is frequent. The report notes that there is a $4 billion union-busting industry which aims at undermining trade union organising.
The U.S. worker certainly stands apart from her compatriots across the Atlantic. They're the ones in the news, mobilizing against the harsh austerity plans governments are imposing in
respose to an exceptional American export: the global economic crisis.

This week, worker demonstrations in France, England, Greece and other besieged economies rocked the continent with an old-school militancy seldom seen in the “developed” world and virtually unheard of in American communities.

In France, transit workers paralyzed the country's railways to show aggressive opposition to a proposed increase in the standard retirement age by two years. London's Tube went into a deep freeze on Tuesday, part of a timed-release chaos plan to strike at numerous points during the fall.

Greek truck drivers stopped traffic too, feeding into several days of protest in opposition to proposed anti-labor reforms. Workers countered a wash of teargas by lobbing stones, bottles and tomatoes at police. A day-long strike by healthcare workers left hospitals in disarray. Much of the rage was directed at the potential dismantling of the closed-shop system, which would undermine traditional labor protections and licensing regulations in trades like truck driving.
With plans for a major industrial action by public workers on October 7, the civil-service union ADEDY, Reuters reports, has called on workers to “massively participate in the rallies and demand the termination of all agreements that did away with rights to work and pensions.”
Spain, another blight on the EU's books, erupted in its first general strike in years this week.

Protesters hoped the strike would force the government to confront the political costs of austerity policies. Ignacio Fernandez Toxo, head of the Workers Commissions union, told the Associated Press: “The strike was not called to topple the government but it's up to the government if it wants to stay there.”

Activists in Brussels, meanwhile, stood their ground against riot police and smoke canisters, marching toward the buildings of the European Union as officials contemplated new penalties to impose on member states with swollen deficits.

Depending on how the public reacts to the chaos, the actions could either inspire solidarity or further polarize labor and the political establishment. Either way, unions have upped the ante in the battle against the austerity frenzy.

The U.S. labor movement's fight for relevancy

Labor on this side of the ocean, however, continues to grapple with its message and mission, barely keeping pace with American-style austerity in the form of the anti-spending, anti-government agenda of Washington's deficit hawks.

Unions hope to regain some relevance with this weekend's “One Nation Working Together” rally, which labor is coordinating alongside civil rights, antiwar and environmental groups, among others. The broad, and accordingly vague, agenda centers on “jobs, justice and education.” As Art Levine reports, organizers aspiring to Tea-Party caliber charisma may find that the biggest hurdle at this point is just getting people to show up.

The greater challenge looming over the One Nation campaign isn't just the optics—it's defining a weakened movement in an increasingly unstable political arena. And it's tapping into the public outrage that the right has shrewdly exploited in galvanizing new constituencies. So the groups carrying the “One Nation” banner might want to focus a bit less on projecting an aura of middle-class liberal harmony, and instead learn from the mass appeal of European union militancy.We're running into one of the most dangerous aspects of the myth of American Exceptionalism: the concept that American workers somehow operate outside historical class antagoisms. Folks are lulled into the belief that deep social crisis can and should be resolved by individual upward mobility and by negotiating within establishment institutions (like Election Day or corporate-controlled collective bargaining).

But as the ITUC's new report starkly reveals, America's labor crises often put its people in the same quagmire as their peers in other economies. So when workers around the world are roused to action—organized, passionate, and not afraid to get a little dirty—why should American labor be any exception?

© 2010 In These Times

Michelle Chen's work has appeared in AirAmerica, Women's International Perspective, Extra!, Colorlines and Alternet. She is a regular contributor to In These Times' workers' rights blog, Working In These Times. She also blogs at Racewire.org.

Sifting through the Draft EIS

Sifting through the Draft EIS

Posted: Dec 01, 2009 10:04 PM PST
by John Davis

Guam - As I continue to read and review the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, I continue to find unclear language that is a cause for concern. Today, let's talk about the DEIS VOLUME 4. Volume 4 explains the need, purpose and impacts of constructing a deep-draft wharf to support an aircraft carrier and Carrier Strike Group.

The purpose and need for the deep-draft wharf is to allow the Navy the ability to locate military forces to meet international agreements and treaty requirements to fulfill U.S. National security requirements to provide mutual defense, deter aggression and dissuade coercion in the Western pacific Region. Satisfying those requirements also include positioning forces to defend the homeland, including U.S. Territories and provide a location with a timely response range. This is probably why Guam is referred to by the Federal Government as the "Tip of the spear." However; I have a different opinion to why our island is referred to as the U.S. Military's Tip of the spear in the region. For example, if the Department of defense were as business and it was looking to branch out in our region, despite the fact they have satellite offices (military bases) all over the globe, Guam would be the best location to engage, show presence and deter aggression in the western pacific region.

With the prime location for the increase in U.S. Military presence already determined, let's focus on more DEIS language that raises more cause for concern. Allowing visiting and transient aircraft carriers and carrier strike groups to move freely through Guam and international waters throughout the region attempts to maintain regional stability, peace and security. Another goal of being able to support aircraft carriers and CSG's is to provide a powerful U.S. presence within the Western Pacific Region. Will the military only focus on beefing up the Western Pacific region? If the U.S. Military will only focus on increasing strength in the western pacific region with a population of billions of people, what about the millions of people living in the Atlantic Region?

According to DOD, the global perspective is to have aircraft carriers deployed world wide to support U.S. interests and commitments. On the other hand, I say DOD's DEIS is full of non-commitment. We have not received any guarantees related to cost sharing measures to fund the military buildup. In fact, the only commitment Guam has received from the U.S. military is that there will be 8 thousand Marines and about 72 thousand other support personnel on Guam by 2014. What OTHER U.S. interest requires a deep-berthing wharf for an aircraft carrier and strike group other than the war on terror? Is Guam under threat from China, North Korea, Russia, Malaysia or the Republic of the Philippines? I'm sure our people would like to know what kind of ride they're in for.

Furthermore, the DEIS states the employment of a CSG is integral to supporting U.S. interests and meeting treaty and alliance requirements globally and nationally. More gray area if you ask me. What the DEIS doesn't spell out is whether or not there is a risk for the U.S. to be in violation of a particular treaty? What about an alliance internationally or is the U.S. at risk of violating national interests? If not, why not build up Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands or American Samoa? With respect to global interests, why not have this buildup somewhere else around the globe, why does it have to be Guam? Is it because we as a people have not determined our political status? I think so, but it would be nice if the DOD admitted it.

After the construction of a deep-berthing wharf, the DEIS indicates the Aircraft Carriers mission will be to provide credible, sustainable, independent presence and conventional deterrence during peace time. What I would like the DOD to indicate is whether or not the Western Pacific Region is at peace now. There are several ongoing conflicts ongoing right now in the Western Pacific Region and other regions around the world. According to information in the DEIS the aircraft carriers mission is to provide a sustainable, credible presence. Are there any projections to this buildup ever being downsized? That would be nice to know too. Aircraft carriers and CSG's will operate as the cornerstone of JOINT/ALLIED maritime expeditionary forces in times of crisis. A time of crisis would be now considering the ongoing war on terror. If the aircraft carriers will serve as the cornerstone of JOINT/ALLIED expeditionary forces, what role will Guam play other than playing host to the U.S. war machine on our native lands?

Aircraft carriers and CSG's will launch and support attacks on enemies, protect friendly forces and engage in sustained independent operations of war. Who exactly are the "enemies" and what are independent operations of war?

When all is said and done, after all the construction and migration of U.S. military forces to Guam, the navy plans to adjust its force posture and basing to position at least 6 operationally sustainable carriers and 60 percent of its submarines in the pacific to support engagement, presence and deterrence. I understand these 6 carriers will be able to move around the Western pacific region, pulling in and out of port whenever they please, but can DOD or the navy confirm whether or not at least one aircraft carrier and CSG will call Guam its home port? If so, then I'm looking forward to an increase in Section 30 Revenues. On the other hand, aircraft carriers are deemed a sovereign U.S. Territory, which is why I think this is a potential out for DOD not to increase section 30 funding to GovGuam. I would also like to know if any nuclear submarines will call Guam their home port as well. If this is true, then how will the Navy or DOD ensure there isn't another radioactive material leak?

When the DOD says "support engagement, presence and deterrence, it that the order of priority? Does the DOD plan to engage enemies before showing presence and deterring engagement? I would like to think the humanitarian way would be to first show presence, second deter and third and lastly engagement.

Not to worry readers, I'm not quite done reviewing the 400 pages of volume 4, if you've read volume 4 or any other part of the DEIS, chime in, I'd like to read your comments.