![]()
(Please welcome author Les Leopold in the comments -- jh)
"A compelling personal narrative set against the history of organized post-World War II labor." I can already see people heading under their desks, or deciding now would be the right time to alphabetize those spice racks. Sounds like something good liberals think they should consume, like Castor oil or stewed prunes, for the good of the movement.
Ahem.
Only it's not.
The Man Who Hated Work and Loved Labor is the story of Tony Mazzocchi, the visionary labor leader who was way ahead of his time, working with everyone from Karen Silkwood to Ralph Nader to Bruce Springsteen in his attempts to strengthen the labor movement, fight for environmental as well as health and safety standards and bring about progressive change. Along the way his streetwise smarts and personal integrity helped navigate a path that avoided the pitfals of McCarthyism, union corruption, and co-option by the CIA and corporate culture. At the end of his life, he had grown disillusioned with the Democratic party and their fealty to corporate America, and devoted his energies to building a Labor Party. He died in 2002 at the age of 76.
With the three frontrunning Democratic presidential candidates all affirmatively speaking in pro-labor terms after decades of disempowerment, it's an interesting time for this book to appear and there are many lessons for progressive organizers to to take from it. As Paul Krugmann has argued, a strong union movement means a strong middle class. Mazzocchi's story is inspirational for many reasons, but for me anyway it was largely due to his vision of working from a bedrock conviction of progressive ideals.
Mazzocchi was born in Bensonhurst in 1926, grew up in a union household with a strongly anti-fascist family. "[In] our family, opposing racism against blacks was a matter of trade union principles," said Tony. "My father made it clear to us that racism was used as a tool to divide working people. I internalized that."
He got a chance to put those principles to the test as President of Local 149 while working at the Helena Rubenstein company in the early 50s. Only two black people worked there at the time -- as janitors. Mazzocchi insisted that the company change its hiring practices, but the company balked -- feeling, rightly, that he probably didn't have the support of his own workers:
"One of my big supporters, a steward, came to me and said, 'Look the people said, if we have to share lockers with them, we're gonna refuse to do it.'"...But...Mazzocchi stood firm.
"I said, if you don't like the policy, you can give up your job. It's a union policy and it's a union shop and we made the decision because it's the right thing to do."
In the end, "The company started hiring blacks. No one quit their job and after a while, the whites accepted them. And we crossed that bridge long before the civil rights revolution broke out into the open."
He likewise stepped out on an unpopular limb in 1953 when Operation Upshot-Knothole exploded eleven thermonuclear devices in Nevada, and Mazzocchi wanted to launch a protest. Along with Norman Cousins, Henry Abrams and Linus Pauling he became one of the founders of the Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy (SANE). They were red-baited for their efforts by Senator Tom Dodd and the pressure broke the group apart, although they were later credited with the success of the treaty banning atmospheric testing signed by Kennedy in 1963. That he did this from within the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers (OCAW) union, with which his Local 149 merged in 1955, was no mean feat.
Mazzocchi's most impressive and memorable achievement, however, was probably spearheading the fight that lead to the passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). It was his ability to use worker health as a starting point that enabled him to unite forces that might otherwise have found themselves at odds with each other -- namely, labor and environmental interests:
Mazzocchi's conceptual breakthrough was that pollution always starts in the workplace, and then moves into the community and the natural environment. Workplace pollution, therefore was the source of environmental degradation, and only strict workplace controls on pollutants and toxic substances could adequately protect us from hazards. Mazzocchi tied the environment to the workplace by calling his road show "Hazards in the Industrial Environment."
Mazzocchi had a powerful, inclusive frame in his "Precautionary Principle," which stated that "workers' health, not chemicals, should be given the benefit of the doubt." It was the sentiment that brought environmentalists to the side of OCAW in 1973 for the strike against Shell Oil, as they attempted to hold the company to the union's standards of workplace safety. One headline read, "Archie Bunker Meets The Sierra Club."
Because Shell's production line was largely mechanized and could be operated by management, there was no ability to shut them down so the battle had to be fought in the PR sphere. Among other tactics, Mazzocchi commissioned a national ad campaign signed by 29 leading doctors and scientists:
"Workers have long served as unwitting 'guinea pigs', providing useful toxicological data which helped to protect the public," read the ad...."The effects of most environmental pollutants, such as carbon monoxide, lead, mercury and also of most human carcinogens were first detected in workmen." The signers concluded, "the success of the OCAW strike is critical to both labor and the public....The demand to participate actively in protecting health and safety of workers is basic and inalienable and cannot be sacrificed to narrow economic interests."
The strike ended when Shell agreed to many though not all of the union's demands, though Mazzocchi believed that it was a success in that they had "embarrassed the company into a settlement," and helped strengthen the anti-corporate movement. But he was well aware that the relationship between environmentalists and labor was fraught with landmines and could quickly come apart when jobs were at stake if the issue was framed wrong.
When Greenpeace and local mothers joined together to protest the Ciba-Geigy facility in Toms River, New Jersey and their dumping of toxic waste into Ortley Beach, the workers sided with the company and led a counter-demonstration against the mothers. One of the Greenpeace workers told the New Times that her car had been driven off the road and she had been beaten by workers.
This was the stuff of Mazzocchi's proto-fascism nightmares. He had warned environmentalists again and again that workers would "eat them for lunch" if they failed to address the jobs issue. When fundamentally threatened, he told them, workers could go right or left, depending on how they were organized and how the issues were framed. Without alternative leadership and new ideas, they could even march against mothers and beat up environmentalists.
This is a minor episode in the book, which has many dramatic narratives including Tony's role in the Karen Silkwood story (his character was played by Ron Silver in the movie) and his heartbreaking defeat as head of the OCAW in 1979. But I bring it up because Mazzocchi wrote this after four years of Jimmy Carter:
When Carter got elected, the AFL-CIO was saying: We'll make the change we need to make in labor law, health and safety laws, to give us the power we need, by electing a veto-proof Congress. And we elected a veto-proof Congress. We had a Democratic House, Democratic Senate, and a Democratic president. And we couldn't even get a mild labor reform bill...That's why I left DC -- because this was not the way to go. Lobbying your friends was not enough.
Sound familiar?
Mazzocchi's fear was that in selling themselves out like whores to corporate money, Democrats risked losing workers to a right-wing working class movement organized around xenophobic issues of race, immigration and nationalism (hence his late-in-life focus on building a Labor Party). It's no less a threat today than it was 30 years ago, and we're seeing it happen as we speak in the faux-populist candidacy of Mike Huckabee and the nativist movement inspired by Lou Dobbs and the Minutemen. Rather than seeking to inspire people with the hope of inclusiveness and new ideas, the always-wrong Rahm Emanuel is trying to emulate that within the Democratic Party. And he's playing with fire.
Todd Gitlin was here a few weeks ago, arguing that the netroots suffer from a "born yesterday" perspective and did not learn the lessons of progressives from the past. And while I'm sure that there are strains of that within a group that includes millions of people, I think that argument is largely horseshit, something that might make Grandpa feel a bit superior but isn't really rooted in fact.
One of our strengths is actually the ability to synthesize lessons of the past into our evolving counter-narrative of the current political landscape, and we're well aware of the need to work together with the labor movement both to strengthen it and organize around issues of progressive change. Tony Mazzocchi's story, his vision and his experiences have many important lessons we can extract in that quest, and Les Leopold has written a strong and compelling book recounting them.
And it's extremely entertaining. No bitter medicine here.
Please welcome Les Leopold to the book salon.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Zed!
Les welcome to the Lake.
Welcome Les!
Loved the book. Could not put it down. And I notice people are raving about it on Amazon. Have you encountered anybody who had a different version of events?
BTW, if anyone wants to go OT, please take it to the previous thread (sorry, Ian.)
So far the reviews have really been good. A couple of folks have contacted me with different versions of specific events, but nothing major at all.
Hi, Les! Hi, Jane!
I see an over arching message that highlights the strategy of divide and conquer here.
Something that is all too prevalent right now.
Hello PhysioProf.
Mazzocchi was an expert in avoiding divide and conquer tactics. He had a very interesting trait. Although he took very strong positions he constantly reached out to new groups and never shut the door to those that disagreed with him.
What was it about Tony Mazzocchi that caught your eye and compelled you to write a book?
Welcome to the Lake, Les. Right off the bat, this sounds like a book I want to read.
I was involved with labor-environment contacts and conferences in the 1970s in Canada and the US and briefly met Tony Mazzocchi at one of those events, I think it was at the UAW Education Center in Black Lake, Michigan. He was very supportive of efforts to build linkages and saw occupational and community health as a way to build connections and common ground.
Interestingly, even back then (about 1974) the UAW had solar panels to heat the pool at Black Lake and Swedish made cars that were all electric and were powered by windmills. The environmentalists there were thoroughly impressed. This was long before the UAW came to resist improving CAFE standards on fuel efficiency.
Compelled is the right word. I had worked closely with Mazzocchi for many years and I knew he couldn’t write a lick. So when he came up with pancreatic cancer I knew I would have to give it a try. Once I started the story dragged me along. I felt like it was writing itself. He was such an amazing movement maker that we just had to get him on the record or it would never happen.
In what arenas of the modern labor movement would you most strongly see Mazziocchi’s legacy?
Another thing is that Labor unions need to be/remain honest. There were a number of labor bosses in recent history that sold out much to the detriment of workers. To the contrary, SEIU has been truly extraordinary - and has been very politically active (helping to elect Ma. Gov Patrick for example).
I remember those heady days with the UAW at the head of the progressive movement. It’s really a shame they went the other way on CAFE.
The Nursing unions success in Las Vegas last year was very encouraging. 30 years of nursing and fighting for livable wages, shifts and staffing has been an an issue day one BUT using nurse to patient ratios as the core of the battle brought it home to the general public.
It wasn’t about the money grubbing nurses(ya right) but do you want that nurse to take care of your granny PLUS 10 other patients?
It’s a very tough time for labor unions. The pressure to give back is very, very great, especially in the manufacturing sector which jobs are so mobile.
sorry: “where” jobs are so mobile
That’s an excellent struggle and the nurses are one of the very bright spots in the labor movement. There’s a section of the book with a short profile of Rose Ann DeMoro, exec. dir. of the California Nurses Association. She’s a live wire and is doing her best to push hard for social change.
Hi Les.admire what you have done with my father’s legacy. Excellant job. Carol
Carol, thanks for joining in and for all your support.
Thank you Les. I come from a pro-union family that goes back several generations. I think I am the only one left in this family line believing in the effectiveness of unions.
My question is, what changes do you see unions needing to make in this century where jobs are heading out the door to other countries? What can be done to stop the bleed and what suggestion do you have for some immediate practices to slow it down?
Mazzochi was around when Reagan go elected and busted PATCO, right? What did he see as hope for organized labor during and after Reagn? Was he resigned to labor never having membership levels or influence as in the 40’s-50’s?
True but I was thinking of the 70s and that era. Those were relatively “good” times.
How do you feel about the future of a Labor Party? I know that at the end of his life Mazzocchi thought that the Democrats were pretty hopeless. Do you think he would still make that assessment?
Welcome Les!
I haven’t had a chance to read your book yet but I can’t wait.
Thanks for bringing this important story to us!
Welcome, Carol.
It was a long book though a fast read (coming in at over 500 pages) but I have to admit that I wanted more of the personal story, which seemed like it was also quite compelling.
Can you add anything?
;)
Let me try to tackle the last two very good and important questions. Mazzocchi saw the PATCO strike a pivotal. Labor’s response was so weak that he almost cried. 850,000 people showed up in DC for a demo and the AFL-CIO leadership told everyone to vote for Democrats in the next election. Mazzocchi wanted to shut down National Airport. Tony said, “labor met the crisis eye to eye and blinked.” It became open season on labor — rust belt, runaway shops etc. Could it have been stopped? Mazzocchi certainly believed it could have been slowed down with effective capital controls. That was still possible in the early 1980s. Now it’s more difficult. It will probably require a new form of smart protectionism in the form of WTO-legal border adjustment taxes to help support new green industries in wind and solar. Mazzocchi believed a turn around also required a new political direction in the form of an alternative political party. Until there was more of a mass political movement, he argued, organizing would continue to fall behind the number of union jobs lost.
On medical and other unions, I expect that with the push to get better medical that the hospitals, doctors, and bigPharma will bring into play the high salaries of nurses. Any new move is likely to rub up against the union. I was pleased that Patrick in Ma. acknowledged the strong union support that brought him into office and didn’t push back in this way.
Mazzocchi always understood that the Labor Party was a very difficult project and that would require a generation of careful organizing. Right now it has moved into South Carolina of all places, where the AFL-CIO — a very integrated and militant group down there — has a Labor Party ballot line. We’ll see where that goes. But what Mazzocchi feared most was a Lou Dobbs-type workers party that would fight immigrants and the like. It remains to be seen how well the Democrats can speak to workers needs.
Siun,
Thanks.
Jane, I agree, a very fast read. So much to say but where to begin. Les did an outstanding job and I, along with my brother and sisters and children learned alot about the details of his life thru this book.
Looking forward to reading your book and thank you for being here. Were Saul Alinky and Mazzocchi friends?
1,718 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Leopold and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
Welcome to this little subversive corner of the blogosphere, Les, it is great to hear from folks like you about folks like Brother Mazzocchi.
Have you come to the conclusion (as this old Scandinavian has) that in this time of extraordinary crisis, that we need new, revolutionary ideas in technology and a return to some very revolutionary old political ideas like democracy, strong unions, regulated capital and economic justice?
I am afraid that people today are ready to throw the mother out with the bath water but will save the fascist baby…two of the three Democratic front runners are wholly owned products of the corporate oligarchy and the likely fascist party nominee is a home-grown krypto-Nazi with a big smile. How do we get labor justice and an end to the war into the election debate?
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, THE WAR IS COMIN’ HOME WITH EVERY BODYBAG!!
I’m very glad to hear that folks thought it was a good read. We really worked hard on that. Tony was so lively and interesting it would have been tragic if his book was boring.
I believe Alisnky and Mazzochi knew each other. I don’t know if they were friends. I do know that Mazzocchi thought Alinsky’s organizing style was too limited and local — that it refrained from working on the big picture which Tony saw as the massive rise of corporate power.
That’s interesting. Did you feel like there were aspects of his life that were not available to you during his lifetime?
What to do about the fact that so many people have no memory of the good things that unions can do? I have a clerical union job, and when friends bitch about their jobs, I point out that their real problem is no union, they look at me like I have three heads. Being allowed to bring a union rep along to any meeting where negative job performance will be discussed may be “red tape” to some, but it really cuts way down on ego-driven management BS.
People who grow/grew up in the suburbs really only know about unions from horror stories. How do we build a new model, based on the modern workplace?
Jordan Barab was going to be here today but he hasn’t poked his head in yet. When I went out to find a labor columnist for FDL I asked Jordan because I felt like his perspective on labor, from a health and safety standpoint, was a very strong and uniting one. I was happy to read the book and feel like I was on the right track.
Tony was open with me. As many biographers I probably knew too much and had to use discretion. I didn’t want to hurt anyone and he didn’t want me to. He trusted my judgement. But the real problem was that Tony had such a full life that no one could possible keep up with all his political contacts and relationships. That was the most frustrating part. I’d have a feeling there was another important story just around the corner that I might be missing. Unfortunately, the first draft was 900 pages so I had to stop and hack it down.
I’d be interested in getting Les’ perspective on where OSHA stands today. I assume like other Washington regulatory programs, it’s been completely corrupted in this regime, but was it functioning much better under Clinton?
Very true and very difficult. But this is not the first time. Unions were decimated in the 1920s. And then came the Depression and a massive upsurge in labor action. And Tony’s life disproves the idea that the suburbs are the problem. He built perhaps the best local union in the country on the north shore of Long Island — deep in the heart of suburbia. It can be done.
Tony always saw OSHA as limited. It did work much better in the 1970s because Tony was pressuring it with a mass movement — the new occupational and safety movement which he spearheaded. Without such a movement OSHA was sure to retreat toward the corporate side. It can only be a good as the labor movement that pushes it.
Jordan is a mensh — a true labor fighter for health and safety. Jordan is the kind of person who built the health and safety movement. Let’s hope more of him appear.
Nine hundred pages! I hope you kept sharp objects away from your editor when you delivered it.
I didn’t even bother to deliver the 900 pages. I cut and cut until I got it down to about 500. Many Tony stories are lying around my office.
OT I assume you are ‘on tour’ in support of this book which looks like an excellent read and which I now have on my progressives must read list.
Are you in fact on tour and if so are you headed to the SF bay area. I ask because I am co-chair for Drinking Liberaly, Oakland chapter and we have a time honored history of ’stealing Jane and FDL’s picks to come speak to our chapter if that is something you would be interested in doing?
Jane can put you in touch with me if you’re interested. We can turn out 50 to 100 folks usually.
I’ve gotta run but will check back later.
I’m really looking forward to reading this as I am of George Santayana’s opinion about history.
ACitizen, I’ll pass your email along to Les.
I’ll be in the Oakland area next week — Jan 13-16. Please contact me. It would be a pleasure to speak to your group. You can reach me a LesLeopold@aol.com
I am going to love reading this, I think.
We tried to get the hospital I worked at in about 1980 to go union, and while it was unsuccessful, it was a very good experience.
The NLRB were such wimps and very unfair, I thought.
We had a firebrand of an organizer from Boston…I wish I could remember his name.
Mr. Leopold, a great honor to have you here.
I’m emailing him now Jane! Thanks.
Tony used to say that just when you think that it’s all a lost cause, working people surprise you with bursts of energy. Although it looks bleak for unions it’s hard to imagine the status quo going on. Inevitably, employers will continue to squeeze more out of their employees. At sometime it will snap — not by magic, but by hope. You never know what might be unleashed if the idea of change catches on again.
Les one of the things that interested me in the book was the story of the CIA’s attempt to infiltrate labor. Did Tony have experiences with that which didn’t appear in the book? Anything hit the cutting room floor?
But the passage of NAFTA seems to be such a crushing blow, and when faced with the threat of losing their jobs completely to off shoring, it makes organizing exceedingly difficult. You didn’t really explore it in the book so much, but how did Tony see that situation righting itself?
Les, thanks for a great book. It’s long, but well worth the time. The stories about Tony are fascinating.
ACitizen, please also contact Allison at Chelsea Green; I think you guys have talked about other authors, too.
Not really. That’s a story that has yet to be researched and told. The papers are just getting declassified. The CIA and the AFL-CIO were pushing each other to fight the Cold War. George Meany and his Jay Lovestone from the AFL pushed the CIA to be more anticommunist. It’s a hell of a story.
Trying not to be a bother, Les, but I often ask questions people would rather not answer. I was born with this defect. I would really appreciate if you would give me some insight into my question @23. Thank you for putting up with me.
I lived in other countries and saw firsthand factory conditions. In Indonesia women were sold to Chinese factories producing low cost products that sold at high prices in the US. Also, do you see any progress in the role of women in unions? Not just as members but as heads of unions. I still see predominantly males negotiating for the rights of workers. Perhaps you can shed some light on this development, as well.
Unions often were not kind to women.While I appreciate the history of unions I really don’t want to go back to the bad old days, either. Thank god for the Emma Goldman and Dorothy Day’s of the world.
Tony worried a great deal about NAFTA. But he never expected the ship to right itself. He thought that NAFTA would finally prove that the Dems were bought and paid for by industry. What Tony didn’t anticipate was 9/11 and the rise of militarism. He wanted more Dems in power because he was sure they would continue to screw workers and make more room for a new politics.
Not a problem. More of us need your birth defect. As for women in labor leadership, please look up Rose Ann DeMoro of the California Nurses. She’s the wave of the future. That union is one of the most dynamic in the country and growing rapidly. I wouldn’t spend too much time worrying about the white men running things when she’s around.
As I tried to say earlier, I don’t think it will be easy for unions to alter globalization in any significant way until a new politics emerges. It can’t just be a union issue. When it starts to impact everyone, something can be done. As the toxic toys come home, as globalwarming accelerates, there will be a call for significant change.
Well workers certainly have continued to get screwed. But that will all right itself if we just elect a veto-proof majority, right?
/snark
From Jim Hightower’s eulogy in The Nation in 2002:
I’m wondering what Tony would think about today’s debate about universal health care — and last night’s confusions and evasions about “mandates.” How did Tony see health care reforms unfolding?
I forgot to mention that although our hospital did not vote for the union, a while later, a hospital a few blocks away did. Yeah!
It’s been my experience in the construction industry that employers take it very seriously, because lower accident rates translate into lower insurance premiums. If you can’t demonstrate a good record, you don’t get contracts. It’s all about liability.
Tony was a leading voice in labor for single-payer health care. He fought very hard to get labor to push it in the early 1990s instead of Clinton’s Rube Golberg contraption. He thought the kind of mandates that were being proposed not no chance of working because they left the private health insurance industry in tact. Price couldn’t never be controlled without single payer. They all know it but fear being called tax and spenders and socialists.
I agree especially for the larger construction jobs. But more and more of the industry is going non-union with pick up crews and I think the stats show an up-tick in accidents and injuries. If they make enough money with cheaper labor they can afford the extra insurance. But I’m not sure.
Ok. What do you think? Will Obama be good for working people?
No I just can’t seem to trust him. He already been bought by corporate money!
I’m wondering if it could turn out more like 1960. Wave of hope, rising expectations, unforseen consequences.
If there are too many “accidents” no one will insure, no insurance no contracts. Smart people don’t wnat to be liable for contracters with no insurance.
There hasn’t been a new nuke built in the US in 30 years. Back in the late 70s, in California, we tried through a state agency to get a state handle on health and safety standards for new nukes, but eventually lost in federal courts on preemption. But then nothing was built. At the time, work crews tended to be unionized. Since deregulation in electricity in larger states, many of the nukes have been spun off to unregulated subsidiaries and it’s not clear they’re still unionized.
You note that Tony saw union/worker safety tied to public safety. Now new nukes are being proposed as solutions to the needed displacement of coal plants (greenhouse gases), and the industry has pushed very hard to get NRC to accept standardized design. I’m wondering who, if anyone, can ensure adequate H&S standards, without strong unions, states preempted, and NRC subject to crony appointments. It seems a really bad mix.
The Carter WH similarly enticed Ralph Nader and dropped him on his ass also, did Tony and Ralph work together at all?
I hope you’re right. I think he’s better for working people than any of the others.
Tony must have know that NAFTA was already entrenched. It got its name under Clinton but it began with Ronald Reagan in 1981. That date lives forever in infamy to me. I had a small business in the apparel iindustry. I supplied US manufacturers with silk (out of China through Hong Kong) to small manufacturers and design companies. I had over two hundred clients. My QA people in Hong Kong warned me of a change in US trade policy and I would be paying 600% more for my fabric. They sent me articles from the Hong Kong papers.
Sure enough. Ronald Reagan made a trade deal with China that if US large corporations (IBM, Coca Cola) could explore and enter the China market, China could have the US apparel industry. The purpose was to encourage US apparel manufacturing companies to manufacture offshore. Even the Hong Kong people got shafted. Sewers were bussed from China into Honk Kong taking away jobs from the Hong Kong people. It was all about very cheap labor cost. Prices remained as high as ever in the US.
It was at this point that you saw mass manufacturing and mass marketing take over the US apparel industry. By 1985 all my clients were out of business and almost every label said “made in Hong Kong” on the clothes you bought. Those were American worker jobs. Like dominoes industries fell one by one. When Clinton came to power manufacturing was just a shell of itself.
NAFTA couldn’t begin one day and be off and running the next. It had a twelve year history when Clinton signed on.
Nader and Tony worked very closely together. The partnered in the passing of OSHA and a host of enviro and consumer issues.
Hi Les,
Tony’s niece here (Sam’s daughter).
Thanks so much for writing the book. My uncle was an amazing man, never ceased to amaze me. In all the time that he spent at our house we had a difficult time leaving the dinner table, talk was so vibrant and entertaining! We miss him and are sorry our kids will never know him well.
Nina
Very good point and telling story. I think the problem started with the decontrol of capital flows as far back as 1970. Labor had a chance to do something about it,, or at least slow it down,, but they thought it wouldn’t be that big a thing. They saw themselves as partners with big gov’t and big business in the grant fight against commmunism. Boy did they call it wrong. By the time the Wall fell the big boys didn’t need big labor and they cut it down to size.
I used to work for a national company that was a conglomerate of smaller mechanical contractors. They took OSHA compliance very seriously, because their workers comp insurance premium was over a million dollars a year. Also, General contractors will not award contracts to subs with poor safety records, because they don’t need the potential liability issues. If a company can demonstrate a low recordable incident rate, their premium goes down, it’s good for business. The same holds true for my current employer; they have over 800 people, most of them on jobsites. Neither of these companies is union.
Homebuilding is a whole other animal, though.
Nina, great to hear from you. All of us will never forget those raucous meals and conversation. be well.
He can’t be any worse than Bush!
I honestly don’t know that much about construction. I do work with refineries and they are a mess. The explosion at BP in Texas was preventable. I think the economics of liability is somewhat different in that industry.
One of the most compelling threads of the book is how awful health and safety standards were before they started pulling scientists into the workplace to be able to monitor them, something that industry of course fought and there was no regulatory arm to either require or enforce.
I can’t imagine that under the Bushies, things haven’t regressed significantly.
“Will Obama be good for working people?”
Obama will be better than most, but none will be worth their salt if we don’t hold their feet to the fire.
Les, what are you (or what will you be) working on next?
Actually I’m just writing an op-ed about your point. Last month Bush pressured the EPA to roll back part of the Right to Know requirements of the Toxic Release Inventory — a way to find out what toxics corportions use and release, facility by facility. Mazzocchi coined the idea — Right to Know. It was a hotly contested issue that he brought up as OSHA was passed. He campaigned for the idea for more than a decade and it finally became law in 1986.
Mining industry springs to mind.
We also need a heavily Democratic Congress.
About the 400 pages that got cut — sounds like another possible book. Any plans for that? This is important history.
Well, I’m sure looking for another writing project. Right now I’m concentrating on a series of op-eds that tee off from various ideas in Tony’s life –Right to Know — Single Payer Health Care — Free Higher Ed. But I’m hoping to come up with a new book idea soon. I’m addicted.
Don’t think there is a book in what I cut. A lot of it was more contextual history. But some of it is leading me to new topics. Soon, I hope soon.
>I’m addicted.
I’m glad to hear that–you’re a great writer and storyteller, and I don’t say that just because I used to work with you!
Mahalo, Les for writing the book and for being here at the Lake! 8-)
Mahalo, Les for writing the book and for being here at the Lake! 8-)
Hmmm… Database error! Sorry folks…
Shops are required to keep MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets) on file where every worker can access them, usually in the supervisor’s office. They detail hazard, recommended protection, fire safety details, etc, of any material that is used in the workplace. It’s a good idea.
The only reason for rolling that back would be so a contractor could use a cheaper, more dangerous alternative, which would find it’s way out into the wider world. An example would be insulation in air conditioning systems. That’s immoral.
Let this history be a lesson to all of us. Never trust the Big Man. Even if we elect someone who is pro labor, we are going to have a hell of a fight on our hands to make labor viable again. It has to come from the people. Than we need to be ongoing watch dogs and keep our witness to history in text books, front page, books as you have written. Thank you for bringing history alive.
Les is trying to log back in and be right back
Thank you all for your kind and generous comments. I’d appreciate any help you can provide in spreading the word on this book. Many, many thanks Les
Les is trying to log back in and be right back
Thanx for the Full Disclosure… ;-)
Thank everyone for your comments. If you get a chance spread the word. There’s also a website www.tonymazzocchi.org with more info on the book and talks etc. Again many, many thanks Les
Les — thanks much for the book and for coming by today. Good luck with the next project.
Les thank you for coming to the Lake and sharing your book with us.
Obama and labor. Let’s hope he remembers the terrible treatment of workers from his childhood in Indonesia and may his Mother’s spirit stand in front of him to remind him from whence he came. Sometimes memories are hurtful and a person runs away from them. If Obama can tap into his past I think he will take up the labor mantle. We have to assist him and be his conscience.