Hey folks! I’m filling in for Tula’s weekly labor column this week. Today, I wanted to talk about a new report out this week on the demographics of the labor movement.
As you might suspect, with an increase in corporate power came a decrease in the number of union members in the country. In the last couple decades, as corporations became increasingly ruthless towards their employees’ rights – and our government increasingly blind to those wrongs – the number of union workers dropped sharply.
According to CEPR’s new report, The Changing Face of Labor, the overall decline of labor has actually led to a reversal of the traditional image of labor as “male, pale, and stale.” Indeed, just 38% of union members are white men, Latinos are the fastest growing demographic in labor, and by 2020 the majority of union members will be women.
On the flip side, as you can see from the chart at the top of this post, the labor movement’s biggest drop has been in private companies, notably manufacturing. Steven Greenhouse at the New York Times elaborates:
According to the study, “The Changing Face of Labor, 1983-2008,” just 11 percent of union members work in manufacturing, down from nearly 30 percent in the 1980s. Indeed, for the first time since the National Labor Relations Act was passed in 1935, the percentage of factory workers who are in unions, 11.4 percent, has fallen below the percentage of all workers who are in unions — 12.4 percent last year. That is down from 35 percent in the 1950s. The membership of the U.A.W. has fallen to less than 500,000, from 1.5 million in 1979.
Public sector unions have held steady; state governments don’t bust their unions, can’t outsource or offshore their workers, and, as such, those union workers are relatively safe. But as union companies send factories to Mexico, and foreign companies move to the US with union-level pay, sans union, we see manufacturing unions plummet.
For more findings from the report, SEIU has a good breakdown of some of the statistics:
Education:
- Nearly 40 percent percent of all union workers have college degrees. Almost half (49.4 percent) of union women had at least a four-year college degree.
- More educated workers were more likely to be unionized than less-educated workers, a reversal from 25 years ago.
Public Sector & Growth
- Just under half of all union members come from the public sector, up from just over one-third in 1983.
- Union ranks have increased slightly over the past two years, and members now represent 12.4 percent of the nation’s work force.
Diversity:
- Latinos are the fastest growing ethnic group in the labor movement.
- About one-in-eight (12.6 percent) of union workers is an immigrant, up from one-in-twelve in 1994
- In 1983, the majority (51.7 percent) of all union workers was white men; by 2008, white men were only 38.1 percent of the unionized workforce.
- The typical union worker was 45 years old, or about 7 years older than in 1983. The most heavily unionized age group was in the age range of 55-64.
No matter what, the labor movement’s growth needs a shot in the arm. Given how thoroughly corporations have manipulated the current law, the best prescription is the Employee Free Choice Act. It’s a sure-fire way to give employees the tools they need to hold corporations accountable, and needs to be taken up as soon as Congress is done with health care.
Until then, we can expect a dwindling – though diverse – labor movement.



22 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Michael Whitney is THE coolest!
under the corporate marketing model they have succesfully turned the term “union” into a perjurative, we can turn that around with a little education;
in no other industry does the buyer tell the seller what they are going to pay for a product they neewd
when I company wants to buy steel the steel industry sets the price not the buyer, the buyer then tries to negotiate so both will enjoy a profitable partnership
yet when it comes to labor, for some reason they buyer sets the price instead of the seller, a union sets up the proper scenario whence the buyer and seller negotiate for a profitable partnership
that’s what has to be pointed out for us to win the argument becaues I’ll tell you, most people have actually been convinced by corporatists that unions are bad for the economy
we have to document and demonstrate the reverse, and point out it’s simply corporate propaganda that makes the claim not the facts
you forgot “first!” eddie
btw
you know how hard it is to find “made in the usa” label?
or made anywhere…what happened to the laws that said origin of manufacturer must be prominently displayed?
I’ll tell you what we can do to help market the benevolent purpose of unions;
if we create “a label” that does not say “made by a union” but rather says “made without child labor, indentured labor, criminal labor, forced labor, unsafe machinery, made without pouring cancer into your moms water and bronchitis into your kids air”
we need to market a concept like that and add the label free of charge for those companies that treat their labor with a fair hand
if we
I don’t have anything to add. Spot on.
If it wasn’t so pathetic, I’d laugh at how the Chamber of Commerce advocates against Made in USA products. I mean, really.
Thanks for this Michael. But don’t forget – although state governments may not be able to out-source to overseas, many of them do out-source things like IT, prisons, etc for the express purpose of avoiding dealing with the public sector unions.
oh crap we’re still doing that?
Yep, they’ve won the PR war and successfully vilified unions.
I don’t know how you combat that, since stupid appears to me to be a life long affliction. And it’s just plain stupid for working people to have bought that PR, hook, line and sinker; especially since it goes against their own self interests.
There’s a whole lot of stupid in this country. If there were a market for stupid, we’d be recession proof.
I’m sorry, I just can’t be nice about it. The stupid act and vote against their own self-interests all the time, and can even be convinced to go to rallies and protests on issues that are against their own self interests. I’m sorry, but it’s just plain stupid when I see a man who doesn’t have a pot to piss in railing against the Estate Tax, as an example. I guess I’m not politically correct, cause I call it like I see it.
you’re very right about that. it certainly happens though not to the extent that it does in the private sector. it’s something about which we should be vigilant in any job.
And to some extent the Democratic Party has let that go unchallenged. If it ever got its act together and passed the Employee Free Choice Act, we could being to reverse that trend.
Here we are in the (21st century?) Where does the US Government stand on workers rights and safety? If we had a government we ‘probably’ wouldn’t need a union. Member for 28 years, fired twice for trying to start one. Thrown to the dogs while the government stood by laughing in 1991.
One downside of the delay in passing health care, which the GOP has worked to its allies’ advantage, is that there is much less time for Congress to take up other pressing matters. I will always wonder what a successful health care bill in August might have done for gubernatorial prospects last week. But we’ll never know, will we?
And as long as the GOP can stretch out the process, the less gets done. Going into a midterm election year soon, when even less will get done. It’s one of the only workplaces where the employees perform less well when they are up for promotion or re-hire, have you noticed?
Jobs bill, Stim2.0, EFCA, All The Gay Stuff, Energy/Environment — there’s not a lot of time to get a great deal done.
There will always be a need for collective action, thus, always a need for a union.
I work for a Union – IUOE, Stationary Local 39, and represent public sector employees, cities, counties, state of CA and a water district. My State Workers have been HOSED by Der Gropenfuehrer and the public has been so conditioned to hate and villify state workers to the point of cruelty.
Men and women who dedicate their working years in service to others deserve so much better. They ensure that the most vulnerable in our institutions have an opportunity to live dignified lives, despite their infirmities. They ensure that our Veteran’s live out their lives in dignity. They ensure that the bad guys in prison do not escape. And for all this they ask for little in return – a living wage to support themselves and their families. In these times, far too many would deny them that.
Actually “complicit in those wrongs” would be more correct.
correct.
The leadership of the AFL-CIO certainly haven’t helped unions over the last 30 years or so. When union leaders are in bed with the bosses it’s hard to accomplish anything. Much like some the veterans’ groups at the national level, e.g., VFW, coziness and access trumps action benefiting members. Local chapters pretty much have to fend for themselves. The same is true of organizations like Planned Parenthood, NOW and NARAL. What’s the old saying, “familiarity breeds contempt?”
So what’s the solution to this “changing face of union members”? How do you force companies to keep their plants in the US when they can get labor so much cheaper overseas? And would you rather keep the jobs from Toyota, Honda, Mazda, et al out of the US because they are not union jobs?
I believe in unions with my entire soul. I come from a family of union men and women going back 4 generations. But I just can’t see a solution to this one that can be effected from the US, short of serious protectionist trade policies. Though I’m deeply suspicious of “free trade” and the worship of the free market, I just don’t see protectionist policies doing more than just a little bit of good, and maybe a lot of bad for the lower 2/3 of wage earners.
Card Check would be a good start, but I don’t see our weak-ass Democrats going for it, and I don’t see us on the left doing much convincing. We can take down a few of the worst offenders in Congress, maybe, but can we convince the rest that it’s in their best interest when the focus is on job creation at any price?
As the chart clearly shows Union Busting started under Reagan who was nothing but a fucking puppet for Big Money/Power Brokers of the RightWingosphere!
Down hill ever since he broke the Air Controllers strike, from then on it was a free for all on unions with a wink wink nod nod …
Welcome to globalization. The NYT is correct. US workers competing with workers in less and barely developed nations in a free capitalistic market are forced to accept lower wages. That’s why I refused to vote for Bill Clinton both times.
Remember the giant sucking sound?
That’s an excellent point about public-sector unions. Those union members are not “safe” from out-sourcing or union-busting in any sense of the word.
Hey Michael – What happened to your deliberations on a title for your new working/labor blog?
Did I miss it? Did you debut the new blog already?