July 1, 2011_nWLP 6/28/11 10:10 AM Page 11
Oregonian newspaper attacks state
senator for (gasp!) standing up for workers
By SCOTT MOORE
On June 18, the Oregonian editorial
board blasted State Sen. Richard De-
vlin (D-Tualatin) for daring to stand up
for the rights of workers to organize.
What “crime” did Sen. Devlin commit
to cause such a tongue-lashing? He
sent out a letter reminding agencies and
service providers to not spend public
funds to discuss the pros or cons of a
unionizing effort by Service Employ-
ees International Union Local 503.
“[T]he good senator has no business
throwing his weight around in the mid-
dle of a union organizing drive,” the ed-
itorial clucked.
The opinion piece followed a front
page article on the same issue, which
was dressed up as a damning exposé.
Here’s the news article headline, which
was printed in large bold font on Page
One above the fold: “Lawmaker ac-
cused of helping out union drive.”
Every day, politicians go to work
trying to figure out how to give more
money to the banks, insurance compa-
nies, and big oil. They hand out tax
breaks to move jobs overseas. And they
try to weaken protections for the mid-
dle class. So when lawmakers like De-
vlin stand up to balance the scales in fa-
vor of workers, we should applaud
them and hope others will follow.
But there’s a blatant double standard
at the state’s largest newspaper that
should be alarming to every Oregonian.
While the Oregonian reserved its front
page for this hit piece on Devlin, here
are the stories from this legislative ses-
sion that the paper buried or ignored
entirely:
• Republican Co-Speaker Bruce
Hanna killing the ban on BPA — a
dangerous chemical l— in children’s
products. Why is Hanna on the side of
poisoning children? He’s the president
of the Roseburg Coca-Cola Bottling
Company, and Coca-Cola is one of the
nation’s largest proponents for the use
of BPA.
• Rep. Matt Wingard, the Republi-
can Co-Chair of the House Education
Committee, cashing personal checks
from Connections Academy, a for-
profit corporation that runs online char-
ter schools. Wingard spent most of his
time on the committee pushing for bills
Corporate profits soar 81 percent, but few jobs created
By TULA CONNELL
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Profits of
the 500 largest U.S. corporations soared
81 percent ($318 billion), the third
largest percentage gain in list history,
Fortune magazine reported.
Walmart holds the number one spot
for the second year in a row. Exxon Mo-
bil leads profits with $30 billion, for the
eighth year in row.
The stunning leap in profits is so ex-
cessive even Fortune writers are
writhing in their leather chairs:
“We’ve rarely seen such a stark gulf
between the fortunes of the 500 and
those of ordinary Americans. The prof-
its derived partly from productivity
gains, including workforce reductions.
And many 500 companies are growing
faster overseas than in the U.S.”
So what are Wall Street CEOs do-
ing? Screaming for more tax breaks.
Listen to them holler about how the
United States has one of the highest cor-
porate tax rates in the world. And then
read on to see why these corporations
actually pay less — if anything — in
corporate taxes than their counterparts
in other nations.
“By taking advantage of myriad
breaks and loopholes that other coun-
tries generally do not offer, United
States corporations pay only slightly
more on average than their counterparts
in other industrial countries. And some
American corporations use aggressive
strategies to pay less — often far less —
than their competitors abroad and at
home,” the New York Times reported.
A Government Accountability Of-
fice study released in 2008 found that
55 percent of United States companies
paid no federal income taxes during at
least one year in a seven-year period it
studied, the Times noted.
As the AFL-CIO Executive Pay-
Watch site points out, U.S. corporations
held a record $1.93 trillion in cash on
their balance sheets in 2010.
But they are not investing to expand
their companies, grow the real economy
or create good middle-class jobs. Cor-
porate CEOs are literally hoarding their
company’s cash — except when it
comes to their own paychecks.
Something to think about, with more
than 25 million still be unemployed or
underemployed.
(Editor’s Note: Tula Connell writes
for the AFL-CIO NOW news blog.)
that would expand online charter
schools, diverting more taxpayer dol-
lars to his employer in what most sane
people would agree is a stunning con-
flict of interest.
• Republican State Sen. Chris Telfer
pushing a bill that would specifically
benefit a cigar shop owned by her busi-
ness partner by exempting it from in-
door smoking laws.
Unfortunately, this has become par
for the course for the Oregonian since it
was taken over by N. Christian Ander-
son III, the libertarian former publisher
of the Orange County Register.
Anderson’s anti-union animosity is
well-documented. When the pressroom
at the OC Register attempted to union-
ize, Anderson brought in one of the na-
tion’s most notorious union-busting
O PEN
F ORUM
firms to run an intimidation campaign
against the workers.
Among the tactics allegedly em-
ployed in the union-busting effort:
physical assault, vandalized cars,
mandatory anti-union meetings, and
threats of termination and pay cuts. A
few months later, Anderson fired 41
pressroom workers, ensuring that they
couldn’t vote to unionize.
Talk about “throwing his weight
around in the middle of a union organ-
izing drive.”
(Editor’s Note: Scott Moore is com-
munications director for Our Oregon,
a non-profit, progressive coalition
working for social and economic jus-
tice.)
Buy union-made Franz
Bread, but not at Walmart
To The Editor:
Bakers Local 114 was astounded by
the sudden advertising blitz in which
Franz Family Bakeries is endorsing
Walmart. We all know the devastation
Walmart has wreacked upon the lives of
workers and communities around the
nation, and the destruction Walmart has
brought to manufacturing jobs through-
out the United States.
Our Bakers Local 114 does not sup-
port Walmart and opposes all efforts of
the Walmart expansion into the north-
west. Our union bakers do produce the
highest quality breads at Franz and our
other union bakeries (Oroweat, Kroger
Clackamas Bakery, Safeway Clacka-
mas Bakery), but we have no control
over where our good products are sold.
We do appreciate that we, the work-
ers, can successfully negotiate with
Franz Family Bakeries to provide good
family wage and benefit jobs, and we
recognize Franz Family Bakeries as a
good union employer. But we also say:
NO to Walmart!
Terry W. Lansing
Secretary Treasurer
Bakers Local 114
Portland
‘Labor law still matters,’ NLRB chairwoman says
By BARB KUCERA
While collective bargaining is under
attack in many parts of the country, it re-
mains one of the few effective ways to
preserve the American middle class, the
chairwoman of the National Labor Re-
lations Board (NLRB) said.
The NLRB administers federal law
safeguarding the rights of private sector
workers to organize unions and bargain
contracts. Wilma Liebman, with nearly
14 years on the Board, is one of its
longest serving members. President
Obama named her chairwoman in 2009.
Liebman spoke earlier this year at the
University of Minnesota Law School,
where she discussed the history and role
of the NLRB. Noting the turmoil that
has erupted from Wisconsin to New
Hampshire over the question of worker
rights, she wished the debate “were less
rancorous,” but added, “It has brought
[collective bargaining] back into the
public eye, the public discourse.”
While hundreds of thousands have
JULY 1, 2011
mobilized for rallies and other events
sparked by the current debate, the con-
flict over worker rights is nothing new,
Liebman said.
The NLRB is no stranger to contro-
versy. The law is the product of fierce
battles, some of them quite bloody.
In 1935, when Congress passed the
National Labor Relations Act and cre-
ated the NLRB, most workers had no le-
gal right to a voice on the job. During
the worst economic depression in U.S.
history, millions marched in the streets,
occupied factories and some died in the
struggle to win collective bargaining
rights.
It’s worth remembering why Con-
gress did what it did at that time. The
Act was seen as a means of restoring the
country to economic prosperity by
restoring the purchasing power of wage-
earners.
The law really worked for the first
few decades. Millions of people
achieved a middle-class way of life
through collective bargaining in major
industries.
Workers’ ability to achieve gains be-
gan to unravel, however, first through
Congressional action and later through
economic change. In 1947, Congress
passed the Taft-Hartley Act, weakening
some of the labor protections contained
in the NLRA.
And in recent decades, the growth of
a global economy, overseas competition,
new technology and deregulation have
created new pressures on both manage-
ment and labor, leading to major drops
in union membership and ramping up
employer opposition to unions.
Today, many types of workers, such
as independent contractors, now fall out-
side the protections offered under fed-
eral labor law.
It’s fair to say the law did not keep up
with all these changes.
Despite efforts “to reinvigorate the
law” in the 1970s and more recently
through the Employee Free Choice Act,
NORTHWEST LABOR PRESS
it has not been amended since Taft-Hart-
ley. Each attempt gets bogged down in
partisan and ideological division.
At times, the five-member NLRB
has been nearly immobilized as ap-
pointments were held up in Congress or
left unfilled. For 27 months during the
Bush Administration, Liebman and one
other board member issued rulings and
tried to carry on normal business, de-
spite three vacancies. The U.S. Supreme
Court later decided they did not have the
authority to act, and the board — now
with four members — has to revisit
many of those decisions.
Even though the National Labor Re-
lations Act states it is national policy to
encourage the practice of collective bar-
gaining, “I don’t think there is really a
consensus of what the statute is all
about,” Liebman said. “There are still
people in the business and legal com-
munity who never accepted the legiti-
macy of this law in the first place.”
In recent decades, many NLRB and
related court decisions have focused on
individual — as opposed to collective
— rights, she said.
Despite being told that labor law is
“dead, dying, ossified, neutered,” Lieb-
man holds out hope.
“My answer to it all is, ‘I’m not dead
yet.’ ”
She said the board is making modest
gains in keeping the law “relevant and
dynamic” by issuing a new rule requir-
ing all employers to post worker rights
notices in the workplace — something
never mandated before — and by mak-
ing use of tools such as injunctions to
prevent the most serious abuses.
“I think that labor law still matters
very much in this country. The rights
contained in this statute are enduring
values. They are now recognized around
the world . . . [and are] critical to a fair
economy,” Liebman said.
(Editor’s Note: Barb Kucera is edi-
tor of www.WorkdayMinnesota.org.)
PAGE 11