An Interview with Philip Dine: the Sate of the Unions and Higher Education

You may already know Phillip Dine’s work. According to his official biography, he “covered the labor beat for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch for two decades. “ Among his many achievements are two Pulitzer Prize nominations; more recently he won the 2007 National Press Club Edwin Hood Award for Diplomatic Correspondence and the 2007 Society of Professional Journalists Dateline Award for Investigative Reporting.

His first book, published this year, is called, State of the Unions: How Labor Can Strengthen the Middle Class, Improve Our Economy, and Regain Political Influence. Dine believes that unions need to play a more important role in the U.S. “What’s lacking,” he has written, “is not relevance but rather a way for labor to strengthen itself…” I was curious about Dine’s thoughts on labor and higher education and sent him a series of questions via his publicist. His answers were somethings brief– he has got to be a busy man!–but provocative nonetheless.

_________________________________________________________________

RW: Do you think higher education largely reproduces or challenges class structures in the United States? Has this changed as union membership has decreased? Would it change again if union membership rose?

PD: Higher education largely perpetuates class structure in this country, and that has not changed much as union levels have decreased. Why? Because unlike in countries such as France and Italy, labor in the United States never has challenged the class structure or the economic system. Rather, unions seek to increase the pie and provide a place at the table for their members. They aim to make the system work better and be more fair, rather than trying to dismantle it. There have been a few threads in the labor movement that have leveled more fundamental questions about the class system over the years, but they generally been short-lived. Ironically, the stronger unions are, the better the current system works, because it meets the aspirations of a broader segment of the population.

RW: Do you believe that the union movement in general has an interest in seeing higher education unionized?

PD: Clearly the union movement is interested in seeking higher education — academics, staff, even students — unionized, for the same rationale it wants other sectors of society organized. Moreover, doing so in the education sector would have even a broader impact, given the influence educators have and students will eventually have.

RW: How do you see the role of unionization in American Higher Education? Do professors need unions? If so, why? Professionals often resist unions because they are so vested in individual systems of merit. How can unions begin to change these entrenched attitudes, particularly in higher education?

PD: Complex questions. On one hand, academia doesn’t lend itself to what at times can be the lowest-common denominator, mass-production approach of unions whose emphasis can be on protecting workers who need it rather than rewarding those who merit it. At the same time, the problems created by administrators who are incompetent or worse can sometimes require that professors have some built-in recourse or collective clout to stand up for their rights. There already is pressure for unions to back off their tough stand against merit pay in secondary education, and the questions that poses are not dissimilar to those you raise here.

RW: Some researchers estimate that more than 60% of all university teachers are adjuncts. How might unions help to alleviate this situation?

PD: Good luck. This is happening in various forms in a host of industries or economic sectors, including two-tier structures for journalists. But unions might have more success in education, because the balance of power hasn’t shifted as much and the employers aren’t as profit-driven.

RW: Online proprietary schools are the fastest growing sector of higher education in the United States today, yet many have argued that they represent the ‘Wall-Martization” of the university. Do you see parallels between the rise of Wall-Mart and the more recent rise of proprietary schools such as Phoenix and DeVry? Is it possible for unions to be organized at online proprietary schools?

PD: There are definite parallels. The diffusion of personnel and impersonality of interaction involved here make organizing all the more challenging.

Labor Takes a Seat in the Classroom

The resources to teach students about America’s storied labor history are there. It’s up to educators to connect young people to a story that could have a lasting impact. “You want the people who read history, young people or people of any age, to recognize their own power and to recognize themselves in history,” says [Howard] Zinn. “After all, most of the people who are going to be reading and studying history are not going to be business executives. They are going to be working for a living.”

Labor Takes a Seat in the Classroom
By Adam Doster

When I taught in a ‘brick and mortar’ classroom I was alway searching for ways to teach my students to ‘see’ class. (I have included a few of these assignments in the ‘Teaching Materials’ section of this site.) I would get them to use the American Fact Finder, for example, to create an economic history of their families and the communities in which they lived.

I would also get them to interview their parents and grandparents about education and work. At least in the short term, I think many did start to see the patterns of class mobility and stasis over the course of the last twenty or thirty years. Almost every semester a student would tell me that he or she saw their family’s history in an entirely new light.

Introducing Labor history into the classroom is another, perhaps less individualistic, way to teach class awareness. Doster offers several other examples of how we can put labor back into circulation as an important part of our heritage. There’s now an “American Labor Merit Badge,” for example. The Boy Scouts have a wiki, MeritBadge.org, where you can find a description of the requirements.

Doster also mentions, “Hardball and Handshakes,” a set of classroom activities that explore the reasons behind unions in professional sports. That can be found on the American Labor Studies Center website, along with information about Women and Labor, and a special section on Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers. among other things. The ALSC is in Troy, New York.

Good News for Labor Unions

Anna Burger, chair of Change to Win, sees the labor movement in the happy if confusing position of picking among candidates who all see that “unions are the solution, not the problem.” Karen Ackerman, the political director of the AFL-CIO, sees labor’s opening as arising from “a new environment … coming off the Reagan years and the Bush years and a ‘you’re on your own’ trickle-down philosophy.”

Thus the paradox on Labor Day 2007: At a moment of organizational weakness, labor’s political influence and ideological appeal may be as strong as at any time since the New Deal. Every Democrat running for president seems to know this.

E.J. Dionne Jr.: A new dawn for labor

The EFCA [Employee Free Choice Act] would restore some meaning to the right to organize. The bill that has been passed by the House by is currently being blocked by a Republican filibuster in the Senate. While the EFCA is not likely to become law under this Congress (President Bush would almost certainly veto the bill even if it did pass), progressives should recognize the importance of legislation. The right to organize is not the concern of just a small special interest group; it is a basic right that should concern us all. In the same vein, all progressives have an interest in seeing a strong labor movement. For this reason, the EFCA and other measures that level the playing field between labor and management should be top items on the progressive agenda.

The Right to Unionize: Key to Democracy By Dean Baker

There’s always a gaggle of articles about unions just before, on, and then after Labor Day, for obvious reasons. So I have spent the last week reading some of them and I am happy to report that there may well be good news. Dionne makes the very good point that most new union members are in the public sector, which is for obvious reason tied closely to electoral politics.

In fact, while overall union membership has reached an all time low of just 7.4%, according to Baker, unionization in the public sector is up to 36%. Dionne makes the point that these public sector unions are well-organized and that they have so successfully made the case for reform that all of the current democratic candidates support legal changes (to one degree or another) that would make organizing easier.

Baker makes the case for the EFCA, for example, which would make it much easier to create unions. In fact, he estimates that if the polls are correct a simpler unionization process could quickly add more than 30 million union members. Baker also shows how so-called liberal trade drove primary manufacturing overseas, helping to undermine unions while creating a $700 billion trade deficit.

Baker also emphasizes that unionization is good for the economy as a whole. “In an industry with a strong union presence,” Baker writes, “non-union firms know they must maintain comparable wages and benefits if they are want to keep their workers from joining a union.” While it seems unlikely that the Bush administration would allow the EFCA into law, if the next administration is Democratic, which seems likely, it will be high on their agenda. Even before the elections, there are signs that labor unions’ long misfortunes are beginning to turn around.

Change to Win, for example, has been celebrating a recent Executive Order signed by Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York that will create a commission to try to address the “misclassification” of workers as independent contractors in order to avoid social security taxes and workers compensation insurance, among other things. It’s just a start, but maybe the wind is shifting in our favor.

362 Times as Rich

“Labor Day differs in every essential way from the other holidays of the year in any country,” said Samuel Gompers, founder and longtime president of the American Federation of Labor. “All other holidays are in a more or less degree connected with conflicts and battles of man’s prowess over man, of strife and discord for greed and power, of glories achieved by one nation over another. Labor Day…is devoted to no man, living or dead, to no sect, race, or nation.”

The History of Labor Day, U.S. Department of Labor

What happened? Some say it started in the early 80s after Ronald Reagan fired the nation’s air-traffic controllers for striking — something they had no legal right to do — and thereby legitimized a wave of corporate union busting. Others blame it on a more pervasive “greed is good” aggressiveness that engulfed corporate suites starting right about then.

There’s no question that, ever since, and with ever greater alacrity, companies have fired workers for trying to form unions, even though that’s illegal, and have used or threatened to use permanent replacements if workers go on strike — which is legal but was rare before the 80s.

Robert B. Reich | August 31, 2007
What Happened to Labor Day?

Just in time for the holiday, two liberal groups – United for a Fair Economy and the Institute for Policy Studies – have issued a gleefully malicious new attack on our CEO class. They point out that the CEOs of large companies earn an average of $10.8 million a year, which is 362 times as much as the average American worker, and retire with $10.1 million in their special exclusive CEO pension funds. They further point out that the compensation of US CEOs wildly exceeds that of their European counterparts, who, we are invited to believe, work equally hard.

Barbara Ehrenreich, August 30, 2007
It’s Not Easy Being Ultra-Rich

The UFE and IPS report can be found here.