Changing Times

There's an interesting law on the books in the United States that goes back to the early days of the labor movement in our country.

"The Anti-Pinkerton Act states: "An individual employed by the Pinkerton Detective Agency, or similar organization, may not be employed by the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia." 5 U.S.C. § 3108. The Anti-Pinkerton Act was enacted by Congress in 1892 in response to reports that businesses had employed various groups and individuals, including the Pinkerton Detective Agency, to disrupt or harass labor organizers during disputes in the 1880s and early 1890s." This description of the Anti-Pinkerton Act and a great deal more of its interesting history can be found in a recent legal decision. While my post of 6/1/2007 showed that the use of private armed forces-- to intimidate and disrupt labor activists-- hasn't disappeared from North America, it is now a seldom-used tactic.

Many employers now live in a world where the need to negotiate with any sort of union simply doesn't exist. They are free to dictate unilaterally to their employees nearly all aspects of their relationship. One reason for this current situation is that certain minimal standards, of decent treatment of workers, were accepted long ago by U.S. capitalists in the hope that abiding by these standards would gain for them considerable tolerance on the part of government and the larger society. Thus, if a company paid at least minimum wage, paid time and a half for hours over 40 in a week, and didn't violate too egregiously legal norms of safety in the workplace, there would be little public clamor for ensuring that workers had the added protection of a union devoted to promoting their interests. Over the last three decades, U.S. business interests have used myriad forms of carrots and sticks to make union membership a rarity in the private sector workplace.

Nonetheless, some unions survive. A good example is the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, with roughly 1.5 million members in the U.S. So what do you do if you're a highly profitable business, that derives a high percentage of its profits from the hard work of Teamster drivers and package handlers? The answer, if you happen to be UPS, is pretend to form a new union called the APWA! With a phony "rival union," promising the moon to gullible UPS employees, the company hopes to gain a slight advantage in the renegotiation of their Teamster's contract in 2008. Two North Carolina UPS drivers, Van Skillman and Danny Eason, were put forward as "organizers of a new union," and given funds to hire Francis (Tom) Coleman, a $900/hr. K Street lawyer to write their charter. And what qualifications are brought by Mr. Coleman to this enterprise of "forming a new union?" Well, he's been paid very handsomely his entire career for his work to destroy existing unions. As a matter of fact he is a longstanding, much-esteemed member of the Council for a Union Free Environment. A quick glance at their website makes it clear this is akin to asking Dr. Mengele to set up a Jewish Community Health Center!

The whole farce is ridiculous, yet it confirms an important point. Even companies (like UPS) who pay relatively high union wages, and contribute to generous benefit and pension packages for their drivers, have way too much money left over for playing silly games and stirring up mischief. This phony APWA will never be certified, or negotiate a contract, but it will harrass and distract a genuine union, the Teamsters, as they begin preparations for a new round of contract talks.

The saddest part of the story is that these charlatans have actually managed to convince several journalists, and even a handful of truck drivers, to take their "rival union" seriously as a legitimate labor group.