Gnslngr

From Salon, by EEdward McClelland:

Let me tell you the story of an “unskilled” worker in America who lived better than most of today’s college graduates. In the winter of 1965, Rob Stanley graduated from Chicago Vocational High School, on the city’s Far South Side. Pay rent, his father told him, or get out of the house. So Stanley walked over to Interlake Steel, where he was immediately hired to shovel taconite into the blast furnace on the midnight shift. It was the crummiest job in the mill, mindless grunt work, but it paid $2.32 an hour — enough for an apartment and a car. That was enough for Stanley, whose main ambition was playing football with the local sandlot all-stars, the Bonivirs.

Stanley’s wages would be the equivalent of $17.17 today — more than the “Fight For 15” movement is demanding for fast-food workers. Stanley’s job was more difficult, more dangerous and more unpleasant than working the fryer at KFC (the blast furnace could heat up to 2,000 degrees). According to the laws of the free market, though, none of that is supposed to matter. All that is supposed to matter is how many people are capable of doing your job. And anyone with two arms could shovel taconite. It required even less skill than preparing dozens of finger lickin’ good menu items, or keeping straight the orders of 10 customers waiting at the counter. Shovelers didn’t need to speak English. In the early days of the steel industry, the job was often assigned to immigrants off the boat from Poland or Bohemia.

“You’d just sort of go on automatic pilot, shoveling ore balls all night,” is how Stanley remembers the work.

Stanley’s ore-shoveling gig was also considered an entry-level position. After a year in Vietnam, he came home to Chicago and enrolled in a pipefitters’ apprenticeship program at Wisconsin Steel.

So why did Rob Stanley, an unskilled high school graduate, live so much better than someone with similar qualifications could even dream of today? Because the workers at Interlake Steel were represented by the United Steelworkers of America, who demanded a decent salary for all jobs. The workers at KFC are represented by nobody but themselves, so they have to accept a wage a few cents above what Congress has decided is criminal.

ADVERTISEMENT
The argument given against paying a living wage in fast-food restaurants is that workers are paid according to their skills, and if the teenager cleaning the grease trap wants more money, he should get an education. Like most conservative arguments, it makes sense logically, but has little connection to economic reality. Workers are not simply paid according to their skills, they’re paid according to what they can negotiate with their employers. And in an era when only 6 percent of private-sector workers belong to a union, and when going on strike is almost certain to result in losing your job, low-skill workers have no negotiating power whatsoever.

Granted, Interlake Steel produced a much more useful, much more profitable product than KFC. Steel built the Brooklyn Bridge, the U.S. Navy and the Saturn rocket program. KFC spares people the hassle of frying chicken at home. So let’s look at how wages have declined from middle-class to minimum-wage in a single industry: meat processing.

Slaughterhouses insist they hire immigrants because the work is so unpleasant Americans won’t do it. They hired European immigrants when Upton Sinclair wrote “The Jungle,” and they hire Latin American immigrants today. But it’s a canard that Americans won’t slaughter pigs, sheep and cows. How do we know this? Because immigration to the United States was more or less banned from 1925 to 1965, and millions of pigs, sheep and cows were slaughtered during those years. But they were slaughtered by American-born workers, earning middle-class wages. Mother Jones magazine explains what changed:

“[S]tarting in the early 1960s, a company called Iowa Beef Packers (IBP) began to revolutionize the industry, opening plants in rural areas far from union strongholds, recruiting immigrant workers from Mexico, introducing a new division of labor that eliminated the need for skilled butchers, and ruthlessly battling unions. By the late 1970s, meatpacking companies that wanted to compete with IBP had to adopt its business methods — or go out of business. Wages in the meatpacking industry soon fell by as much as 50 percent.”

In Nick Reding’s book “Methland,” he interviews Roland Jarvis, who earned $18 an hour throwing hocks at Iowa Ham…until 1992, when the slaughterhouse was bought out by a company that broke the union, cut wages to $6.20 an hour, and eliminated all benefits. Jarvis began taking meth so he could work extra shifts, then dealing the drug to make up for his lost income.

Would Americans kill pigs for $18 an hour? Hell, yes, they would. There would be a line from Sioux City to Dubuque for those jobs. But Big Meat’s defeat of Big Labor means it can now negotiate the lowest possible wages with the most desperate workers: usually Mexican immigrants who are willing to endure dangerous conditions for what would be considered a huge pile of money in their home country. Slaughterhouses hire immigrants not because they’re the only workers willing to kill and cut apart pigs, but because they’re the only workers willing to kill and cut apart pigs for low wages, in unsafe conditions.

In Rob Stanley’s native South Side, there is more than one monument to the violence that resulted when the right of industry to bargain without the interference of labor unions was backed up by government force. In 1894, President Cleveland sent 2,500 troops to break a strike at the Pullman Palace Car Factory. On Memorial Day, 1937, Chicago police killed 10 striking workers outside the Republic Steel plant. The names of those dead are cast on a brass plaque bolted to a flagpole outside a defunct steelworkers’ hall. They were as polyglot as a platoon in a World War II movie: Anderson, Causey, Francisco, Popovich, Handley, Jones, Reed, Tagliori, Tisdale, Rothmund.

I first saw those sites on a labor history tour led by “Oil Can Eddie” Sadlowski, a retired labor leader who lost a race for the presidency of the USW in 1977. Sadlowski was teaching a group of ironworkers’ apprentices about their blue-collar heritage, and invited me to ride along on the bus. Oil Can Eddie had spent his life agitating for a labor movement that transcended class boundaries. He wanted laborers to think of themselves as poets, and poets to think of themselves as laborers.

“How many Mozarts are working in steel mills?” he once asked an interviewer.

In the parking lot of the ironworkers’ hall, I noticed that most of the apprentices were driving brand-new pickup trucks — Dodge Rams with swollen hoods and quarter panels, a young man’s first purchase with jackpot union wages. Meanwhile, I knew college graduates who earned $9.50 an hour as editorial assistants, or worked in bookstores for even less. None seemed interested in forming a union. So I asked Sadlowski why white-collar workers had never embraced the labor movement as avidly as blue-collar workers.

“The white-collar worker has kind of a Bob Cratchit attitude,” he explained. “He feels he’s a half-step below the boss. The boss says, ‘Call me Harry.’ He feels he’s made it. You go to a shoe store, they got six managers. They call everybody a manager, but they pay ’em all shit.”

The greatest victory of the anti-labor movement has not been in busting industries traditionally organized by unions. That’s unnecessary. Those jobs have disappeared as a result of automation and outsourcing to foreign countries. In the U.S., steel industry employment has declined from 521,000 in 1974 to 150,000 today.

“When I joined the company, it had 28,000 employees,” said George Ranney, a former executive at Inland Steel, an Indiana mill that was bought out by ArcelorMittal in 1998. “When I left, it had between 5,000 and 6,000. We were making the same amount of steel, 5 million tons a year, with higher quality and lower cost.”

The anti-labor movement’s greatest victory has been in preventing the unionization of the jobs that have replaced well-paying industrial work. Stanley was lucky: After Wisconsin Steel shut down in 1980, a casualty of obsolescence, he bounced through ill-paying gigs hanging sheetrock and tending bar before finally catching on as a plumber for the federal government. The public sector is the last bastion of the labor movement, with a 35.9 percent unionization rate. But I know other laid-off steelworkers who ended their working lives delivering soda pop or working as security guards.

Where would a high-school graduate go today if he were told to pay rent or get out of the house? He might go to KFC, where the average team member earns $7.62 an hour — 57 percent less, in real dollars, than Stanley earned for shoveling taconite. (No hourly worker at KFC earns as much as Stanley did.) The reasons given for the low pay — that fast-food work is an entry-level job that was never meant to support a family or lead to a career — are ex post facto justifications for the reality that KFC can get away with paying low wages because it doesn’t fear unionization. It’s a lot harder to organize workers spread across dozens of franchises than it is to organize a single steel mill.

As Oil Can Eddie pointed out, a class consciousness discourages office workers from unionizing. There’s a popular discounting company in Chicago called Groupon, where the account executives — who are all expected to have bachelors’ degrees — earn $37,800 a year. Adjusted for modern dollars, that’s about Stanley’s starting wage, without overtime. Because they’re educated and sit safely at desks, they don’t think of themselves as blue-collar mopes who need to strike for higher pay and better working conditions.

The fact that many of today’s college graduates have the same standard of living as the lowest-skilled workers of the 1960s proves that attitude is wrong, wrong, wrong. If we want to restore what we’ve traditionally thought of as the middle class, we have to stop thinking of ourselves as middle class, no matter how much we earn, or what we do to earn it. “Working class” should be defined by your relationship to your employer, not whether you perform physical labor. Unless you own the business, you’re working class.

“The smartest people I ever met were guys who ran cranes in the mill,” Oil Can Eddie once said.

They were smart enough, at least, to get their fair share of the company’s profits.

HEART Loc: God's Country - COLORADO

As the new year unfolds, trust you'll clearly see what "Obysmalcare" will do to this nation. By the time the 29 hour work week becomes inevitable, employers dump employee health insurance polices, people see their insurance premiums/deductibles skyrocket, and employers dump the 50th employee to avoid insuring the rest, and the youth fail to sign on to Obsymalcare, you will see the collapse of many businesses. Won't have to worry about "minimum wage"; there won't be a company standing that won't be trimming people, salaries, and benefits.

Thank you, liberals.

But, continue with your diatribe.....something about wages, the middle class, fairness, etc., etc., etc.???

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Got an idea for you GNSLNGR.... Why don't you go out and buy for yourself an assload of KFC's, Wendy's, McDonalds, and Burger Kings and pay all your employees $20 to start...

Problem solved!

Gnslngr

The two posts above this are not worth responding to, but I will take this opportunity to note that with attitudes like those expressed above, it is no wonder the middle class is disappearing.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Just out of college I worked in restaurant management for a little over 10 years... I understand their operating statements and I would say that comments like yours are completely out of left field. The thing that kills me about folks like you is that you will mandate crippling policies on businesses that you know nothing about.... Like I said, you and all your rich liberal buddies should go out and purchase those restaurants and then effect your social policies... you would lose your butts but that should matter little, you would have done your part to restore the middle class even if your failed attempt resulted in even further set back... Put your money where your mouth is, start buying businesses and start paying your workers what you consider to be a living wage, stop trying to effect your brand of social justice with other people's money and financial security... You folks are a wrecking ball, yes, maybe it is time to consider a raise in min wage, but the crap that you are talking about is destructive and many of those fast food restaurants would not survive...

You don't understand the economics of those restaurants nor do you understand the market history that has determined the prices that they charge for their food, it is somewhat fragile, if they could simply raise their prices they would have done so a long time ago, they have reached an equilibrium that is determined by a multitude of market considerations, but being a liberal that is not something that you take into consideration, for you it is all about power to the people no matter the real world considerations....

Why don't you focus on the thieves in DC... it would be a better use of your time.

Gnslngr

If you had actually read the article I posted, we could have a decent discussion. This is nonsense.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I don't have the patience to read all the nonsense in that article, as I begin to read it I am reading a history of a time and a world economy from which we are long removed, if you want to bemoan the fall of the middle class maybe you can start with the American consumer who is not willing to support union wages. Secondly you might take a moment to consider that when you raise the price of labor in this country that you will also be raising the prices of goods produced accordingly. Labor unions distort segments of our economy, their members benefit but if they were to gain strength across the broad economy the distortion would be removed and what you would see is that the prices of all goods and services would be raised to the point that you would find yourself exactly in the same condition in which you started... Unions only benefit their workers when they are localized to segments of the marketplace and not the entire market, once they gain that kind of strength then their effect is neutralized.

What is best for the economy and the middle class is a growing and productive economy, growing the pie so to speak.. Reducing the government's foot print in the economy is also important to the middle class, when you have a government feeding Wall Street, as they currently are, the middle class suffers while the uber-rich prosper a phenom clearly evident under the Obama administration, here you are decrying the destruction of the middle class while the Dow sets record after record all because of the government supplying their Wall Street buddies with free money supplied by the depreciation of the savings accounts of the middle class.... Beyond that when the government with its insatiable appetite for spending is competing in the marketplace for America's savings accounts, the same money that should be going to finance capital goods is being consumed by the federal government in the form of bonds and treasury instruments....

You have no real answers, the reasons that the unions failed is that they destroyed industries and they did not serve their members well in the end... that and their underhanded tactics, there are those of us who when given the choice will not associate ourselves with unions.

Gnslngr

I feel the same way about your post. Reading and understanding the point of the article could have saved you a lot of pointless timing. Let's drop it, okay? The highlighted statement says everything I need to know about your willingness to see another side.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I read most of your article, it premises itself on a bygone era, the world economy is not what it was when the unions were strong and made a difference in this country, our economy is not what it was when all those changes took place. The unions failed to adapt to the changing landscapes, they took themselves and their employers down with them, you will not capture that bygone era, if you increase wages without increasing productivity you will do little more than destroy jobs in this current free trade economy, you will only worsen what is increasingly bad situation. The best thing that can happen to the middle class is a growing economy, were the truth to be told our unemployment is over 10% when you count all the able bodied workers who have either dropped out of the work force, are grossly under employed, or have transitioned over to SSDI. The fact of the matter is that labor as a commodity is in abundance and our economy is not in a growth mode that can support or absorb it... What is needed here is growth, if we could again grow our economy and reach full employment causing a scarcity in labor then you would see compensation rise across the board as businesses would have to once again compete for quality employees, as it is currently there is no competition for labor as it is over supplied... No union can fix that all they will do at this point is prolong the suffering.

PrairieSeasons Loc: Red River of the North

Perhaps you could enhance our understanding of McClelland's article. He makes great points, but misses the bigger picture.

I would venture to say that I understand it very well, in fact if you change the names of some of the companies and unions, I lived it. It describes a hypothetical world of unions and employment that no longer exist.

The fact that this world no longer exists is neither caused by greedy companies nor by over-reaching unions. It's caused by the fact that there are other workers willing to do the same job and make the same goods for less money. That's the same dynamic that happens in restaurant labor and has the same basic result.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I read the couple of paragraphs that I did not finish earlier and the article offers nothing, are you really that naive to believe that turning workplaces all over the country into an us vs them environment is going to solve anything?

It will just make the working day that much more miserable and less enjoyable while diminishing opportunities for growth and new opportunity... Of course you are a committed far left guy so as far as you are concerned I am talking geberish but I can tell you that I have worked in different environments goal and team oriented that were wonderful, and other's that were not so much, and I much prefer the team environment where a manager is little different than any other team member, where goals are defined, discussed, agreed upon and the team moves forward with the same vision.. Seems that in those environments people are happier, have a better sense of accomplishment, and grow and prosper more so in those environments where management and team members can't seem to get on the same page and are distrustful of each other. You live in a world of us vs them, it is clear in your approach to politics and clear in those things that you seem passionate about, you tend to see the worst in humanity and somehow think that there is a war that must be waged, be it with government against big business and the rich, or the saving the environment from the capitalistic destroyers, or now somehow rebuilding the middle class with this romantic notion of pitting workers against their evil employers when the truth is that for most businesses their major concern is remaining profitable in an increasingly uncertain market place.. Most employers are concerned with the welfare of their workforce, the world is not the evil dark place that you perceive it to be...

Like I said earlier, the current conditions and structure of our economy will not support your nostalgic dream of the return of the labor unions, the structures of the American workplace and the reality of global supply of goods will not support it, America has to work to reinvent itself and its economy to prosper in the years to come, it is not going to do that by setting itself at war with itself.... Us vs. them is not the answer.

Its funny how your article points to the public sector and the growth of unions in the public sector, the same public sector that is under funding its pension programs to the tune of trillions while cutting services and borrowing against future revenues to pay benefits caused by overly generous union negotiated contracts, even our president continuously bemoans the lack of teachers, firemen, and police but he does not talk about what has caused these conditions in our local communities... It should be illegal for public sector employees to unionize as they exercise far too much control over the political process, even FDR was against public sector unions.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I have to question whether $2.32 was enough for an apartment and a car in 1965. In 1967 or 68 I worked as a laborer for the City of Pontiac on a Park and Recreation crew. I was entry level and made $2.78/hr. I lived at home and borrowed my parents car. Believe me, I was not rolling in dough.

shagbat Loc: London

Excellent writings, reminded me of Grapes of Wrath and In Dubious Battle, Steinbeck books I read in my youth. i have a problem in defining 'middle class', surely, anyone who has to work to survive is working class. Certainly in the UK many people who consider themselves middle class have delusions of adequacy.

rayford2 Loc: New Bethlehem, PA

I worked for an aircraft company as an electrician in 1971 for $3.08/hr. It was a UAW union job. When the overpaid autoworkers in Michigan opted to strike for more money and benefits we were asked to "donate" to their strike fund.
Don't bring up unions to me. Their management is as corrupt as anything else.

Ka2azman Loc: Tucson, Az

We have had differences in the past, different people, different ideas. But with this I totally agree with you.

I saw the decline in industry during my working years. I have many stories to tell about the railroad. Most would not be very complimentary.

In 1917 the Southern Pacific RR killed men, women, children in Bisbee Arizona with their private police force, Pinkertons, and just hired thugs. Its in the history books. and most who hear this pass it off as I can't believe that. This of course was before my time. But things that I have been involved in and not but just knew about, is nothing more than the same, can't rule out killing, of the ramrodding the railroad does to not only its employees but others that are not.

In 1917 those were not SP employees, but the local copper mine workers who were on strike and the RR wanted the copper mines business so they went in and did the dirty deed. By the way - no one was punished for it.

1980's SP gave Congress of the United States a set of accounting books for something they were asking for. Upon noticing they gave the wrong books they took back the one and gave them another set. Two set of accounting books? One had to be cooked. No one got into trouble for having two sets of books. Funny IRS didn't even look into it especially being so blatant and duping the Congress of the United States.