DRAFT: This module has unpublished changes.
User-uploaded Content
DRAFT: This module has unpublished changes.

JUDICIOUS INTERVENTION BY GOVERNMENT

 

 

     As the balance of power between organized unions and corporations break, the government has an ethical responsibility to fix the power balance for the long term health of the economy. Historically, the government has taken active roles in providing checks and balances in the economy. So, when should today’s government provide checks and balances for the current global economic crises? And how can the government achieve this goal? The answer to this question might lie in its history when organized unions were at the brink of death and the socio-economic health of the country was brought to its knee and almost collapsed, the Great Depression. This chapter will analyze historical events that occurred around the time of the Great Depression to provide possible government solutions to the union crisis and the global economy crisis. It will look at the Roosevelt’s administration’s active role in fixing the country's economy and the consequences as a result of the government's judicious intervention. Then, the chapter will incorporate the ideas and approaches conducted by the Roosevelt's administration back to the country's current state of affair. Finally, the chapter will attempt to provoke government actions through logic and reasoning.

 

     Today’s economic situation is similar to the situation that occurred during the Great Depression in the 1930s, when the country’s economy was falling apart and government intervention was necessary. Workers had faced job insecurity; standard of living had been poor and stagnant while an ineffective government had been taking a passive role in resolving the problems. The interests of businesses, banks, and corporations were un-righteously put ahead of the interest of the public, leading to capitalist exploitation of workers and a drop in labor unions membership from 5 million in 1920 to 3 million in 1933, thereby weakening workers’ ability to defend themselves. To combat the trend, the Roosevelt’s administration took an active role and enacted legislations aimed to reorganize the economy and bring back the balance of power between businesses and unions. The current poor state of the country’s economy can be similarly improved by the government’s proactive stance in favor of organized unions against businesses contributing to the imbalance of power between the two parties. That is, in order to correct the mistakes, today’s government should learn from the Roosevelt’s administration and should play the role of an objective and just intermediary in the interest of the public and to preserve and protect the country’s economy. 

 

      During the 1930s, without government’s critical and justifiable actions against businesses in favor of organized unions for the public interests, the United States might have seen a total collapse of the country’s future social developments. The Roosevelt administration backed a series of legislations as part of President Roosevelt’s New Deal. The New Deal brought about progressive programs such as the Rural Electrification Administration, the Public Workers Administration and the Federal Housing Administration, providing a foundation for future social programs in the United States (Cox, 2002; p.1). Many of these social programs provided underprivileged families with affordable housing through the government’s Federal Housing Administration and much needed employments through the government’s Public Workers Administration. These two social programs alone helped to nurture the people, which ultimately contributed to the well-being of the country’s economy. Additionally, most of the social programs developed by the government are supported, run, and improved by organized unions and related charitable organizations. However, if organized unions were to face with a decline of resources and supports, many of the social programs implemented by the government would have failed or lacked the momentum to succeed. These social programs justifiably provided underprivileged families with the necessary tools to secure a better future for themselves and their family members. Without continuous improvements and supports of these social programs, the country’s foundation, the people, would have suffered and contributed to the collapse of the country’s economy as seen during the early stage of the Great Depression.

 

        The National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), passed under the Roosevelt's administration in 1933, allowed workers to collectively bargain with employers which led to significant increases in employee influences on the labor market. In 1933, the Roosevelt administration passed the National Industrial Recovery Act which shifted the dynamic of the United States economy. The NIRA was a justifiable tool used by employees as a foundation to defend against corporate exploitations. It also provided a foundation to the 1935 National Labor Relations Act which is also known as the Wagner Act of 1935. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) required businesses to bargain with any union that was supported by the majority of the employees in their company (Cox, 2002; p.2). The NIRA and NLRA helped increased organized union memberships by 33 percent from 1933 to 1935, contributing to the stabilization of power between employers and employees (Wachter, 2007; p.5). The NIRA and NLRA gave employees the necessary power and tools to dictate their own fate rather than powerlessly fight against businesses. The government’s actions against businesses could be criticized as harmful to businesses, but even if we agree with that argument, the laws were necessary evils to preserve, protect and promote worker rights for the long term health of economy.  

 

      Although the circumstance is slightly different, today’s organized unions are facing exploitative actions by businesses for higher corporate profitability similar to what happened 80 years ago. Prior to the Roosevelt administration's pro-union stance, organized unions were heading to an inevitable death and dangerous work conditions became increasingly common, resulting in tragic events. The exploitation of workers was widely practiced by businesses across the United States, which often led to disasters and deaths. The 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire was one instance where workers exploitation led to a national outcry for changes. Francis Perkins, Franklin D. Roosevelt’s secretary of labor, recalled the tragic event in a 1964 lecture at Cornell University and stated that “as I have thought of it afterwards, seems in some way to have paid the debt society owed to the those children, those young souls who lost their lives in the Triangle Fire (Allen, 2011; p.3). The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire was the deadliest workplace disaster in New York City’s history in the 20th century with the unnecessary death of 146 garment workers. According to Allen, many garment workers were burned alive or were forced to jump to their death when the fire broke out in the factory because the “plant’s managers had locked doors to some exits and stairwells to prevent pilferage and unauthorized breaks from work.” After the fire, the employer of the garment workers stated that he locked the employees in the factory without any method of exiting to ensure high business profitability and incurred fewer losses by reducing workers’ breaks and accessibility to the outside. These types of worker exploitation were common in a business dominated society, where an uneven distribution of power led to abuses. This is a cautionary tale of the negative consequences associated with an imbalancement of power between employers and employees. Before similar disasters of the same magnitude occur today, the government should take an active role in preventing the probability of such event’s occurrence.  

 

       The significant shift in the United States economy and labor policies have unfairly promoted the shift in income from wages to profits which have resulted in weakening of organized unions and the labor forces’ ability to fairly defend themselves against capitalist exploitation and unjustifiable treatments. Many argue that the decline of organized union memberships and American wages today are inevitable due to globalization and low-wage foreign competition. However, statistics from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics stated otherwise. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, most job growth between 2010 and 2020 will be in cashiers, childcare workers, home health and personal care aides, food prep and fast-food workers, and retail sales workers. Surprisingly, the Bureau of Labor Statistics projected that 30 percent of 2010 - 2020 job openings will have a median wage of around $20,000 (Meyerson, 2012; p.2). The jobs mentioned above are all domestic services jobs which are not subjected to foreign competition but yet the country sees stagnant in wages and benefits. Currently in the private sectors, employers have increased the unjustifiable firing of union supported workers while unfairly avoiding any accountability for their illegal actions (UAW, 2013; p.2). According to UAW, if the employers are found to illegally fired the employees, then the guilty employers only need to offer the illegally fired workers his or her job back which will dissolved the employers’ responsibility with no financial obligation or social and legal consequences. These unfair tactical practices are common among businesses who wished to stay non-unionized, greedily maintain high corporate profitability, and unjustly prevent workers from obtaining collective bargaining rights to increased wages and improved working conditions. It is the government’s ethical and moral responsibility to offer protection and security for all workers’ rights to express frustration and organized against exploitations.

 

       The lack of organized unions’ present across the country through government’s suppressive actions against unions has unjustly incurred additional expenses to society’s economy. Today, conservatives are unfairly but justifiably blaming organized unions for drops in state and city tax revenues. According to conservatives, organized unions’ public employee benefits are too excessive and unaffordable for taxpayers (Wolff, 2013; p.2). However, the decline of organized unions’ memberships has a positive correlation to government spending. From 2008 to 2012, federal welfare spending has grown by 32 percent to offset the lack of incomes from workers’ wages and benefits (Dinan, 2012; p.1). As workers’ wages and benefits remain stagnant or even decline, the government is ethically responsible to offset the differences to ensure a healthy socio-economy, resulting in greater government spending. In 2013, the United States reached the point where Welfare benefits pay more than minimum wage employments in 35 states (Roy, 2013; p.1). This is a frightening fact that can be associated back to the decline of organized unions. With a lack of organized unions movements and government’s support in the country, workers are unable to fairly bargain for better wages and benefits but instead are unjustly forced to give up some of the current benefits and wages in order to maintain their jobs. The shameful decreased in employees’ wages and benefits for greater corporate profit have foully resulted in large bloc of welfare recipients. For an example, workers at non-unionized Wal-Mart constitute in many states are the largest bloc of food stamp and Medicaid recipients (Lu, 2013; p.2). Additionally, social trends and statistics from the United States Department of Labor and United States Bureau of Labor Statistics have shown that with declines in organized unions, workers are justifiably and defenselessly seeking out the federal government to fill the void left behind by the lack of organized unions’ present. Additionally, the numbers of complaint charges filed with the United States Department of Labor’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have increased by 19.63 percent from 2000 to 2012 contributing to the ineffective but necessary increases in government’s spending (Charge Statistics, 2012; p.1). As of a result of increased public dissent, the federal government has incurred and absorbed additional expenses with increases in lawsuits and complaints from the lack of organized unions’ representation in many areas around the country. In other words, it is in the government and public interests to support organized unions and stabilize the balance of power between businesses and workers to preserve, protect and promote a healthy socio-economy for the country.  

DRAFT: This module has unpublished changes.