Church Teaching on Unions

[tommcguire]

Sorry, I made a mistake that made my statement unclear. Unions must be involved in politics. Politics impacts workers so the union must be where the power to impact workers is. I meant it is interesting that some people think that unions should not be involved in politics. I know the teaching of the Church warns about unions being involved in politics. I do not think that means that unions cannot be engaged with the political process. Are unions too close to politicians? Yes, just as are corporate interests are sometimes too close to politicians.

DePaul University law professor Terry Smith says that, "Dismantling bargaining rights will disproportionately affect African Americans."9

I had not given much thought to unions and racism in the United States. What chance would most African American workers have had to get justice in the work place without unions. Unions continue to be an important part of the process of moving beyond racism in the workplace.

 

[Ender]

DePaul University law professor Terry Smith says that, “Dismantling bargaining rights will disproportionately affect African Americans.”

It is hard to parody this stuff but I’ll try:

Scientists discover a planet killer asteroid will hit Earth in three days. The headline in the next day’s NYTimes: End of the World: Women and minorities to suffer most.

Ender

 

[bbarrick8383]

It is hard to parody this stuff but I’ll try:

Scientists discover a planet killer asteroid will hit Earth in three days. The headline in the next day’s NYTimes: End of the World: Women and minorities to suffer most.

Ender

LoL

 

[white_sheep]

Sorry, I made a mistake that made my statement unclear. Unions must be involved in politics. Politics impacts workers so the union must be where the power to impact workers is. I meant it is interesting that some people think that unions should not be involved in politics. I know the teaching of the Church warns about unions being involved in politics. I do not think that means that unions cannot be engaged with the political process. Are unions too close to politicians? Yes, just as are corporate interests are sometimes too close to politicians.

DePaul University law professor Terry Smith says that, "Dismantling bargaining rights will disproportionately affect African Americans."9

I had not given much thought to unions and racism in the United States. What chance would most African American workers have had to get justice in the work place without unions. Unions continue to be an important part of the process of moving beyond racism in the workplace.

This doesn’t even remotely make sense. Most union members are in the North, where the population contains fewer blacks. And for so many other reasons it isn’t even worth considering.

 

[tommcguire]

Detroit is more than 80% African American. We are strong union supporters here.

This is a recent statement from the International Commission of Labor Relations on the legality of what is taking place to destroy collective bargaining…

The opening paragraph of the ICLR statement reads:

“As workers in the thousands and hundreds of thousands
in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio and around the country
demonstrate to protect the right of public sector
workers to collective bargaining, the political battle
has overshadowed any reference to the legal rights to
collective bargaining. The political battle to prevent
the loss of collective bargaining is reinforced by the
fact that stripping any collective bargaining rights is
blatantly illegal. Courts and agencies around the
world have uniformly held the right of collective
bargaining in the public sector is an essential element
of the right of Freedom of Association, which is a
fundamental right under both International law and the
United States Constitution.”

The farmers of Wisconsin, driving their tractors, are now involved in taking back their government from those who would take away collective bargaining. This is a sign of a struggle of major consequences for labor relations.

As Catholics, we have Social Doctrine of solidarity and subsidiarity that is based on the dignity of the human person. How can Catholics apply these teachings to the present struggle?

 

[pnewton]

Sorry, I made a mistake that made my statement unclear. Unions must be involved in politics.

And the Holy Father said this is dangerous. Oh well. I’ll stick with the boss on this one. If what you say is true, then such a union does not enjoy the support of the Catholic Church. It becomes more of a PAC than a true labor union.

 

[Ender]

“As workers in the thousands and hundreds of thousands in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio and around the country demonstrate to protect the right of public sector workers to collective bargaining, the political battle has overshadowed any reference to the legal rights to collective bargaining. The political battle to prevent the loss of collective bargaining is reinforced by the fact that stripping any collective bargaining rights is blatantly illegal. Courts and agencies around the world have uniformly held the right of collective bargaining in the public sector is an essential element of the right of Freedom of Association, which is a fundamental right under both International law and the United States Constitution.” (International Commission of Labor Relations)

This ICLR statement is nonsense. There is no constitutional right to collective bargaining for public sector unions. I’m not sure of the details but I don’t believe that federal employees have the collective bargaining rights that state workers in Wisconsin had. I’m quite sure that other states did not allow collective bargain of all the areas included in Wisconsin and I believe that several states allow no collective bargaining at all (for public employees).

Stripping some (or even all) collective bargaining rights is quite legal. The ICLR allegation is egregiously wrong.

Ender

 

[tommcguire]

March 11.2011, Jeanne Mirer, LCLR, wrote:

. Workers’ rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining arise from
the 1919 Constitution of the International Labor Organization (ILO), a United Nations agency of which the
United States is a founding member. The ILO elaborated these rights in 1949 in ILO Conventions 87 and 98, and
declared that they were “fundamental” human rights in 1998. In 1948, when the countries of the world adopted
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they recognized the rights of people to form and join trade unions as
a fundamental human right. As the ILO held in 2007, in a case involving North Carolina’s laws against collective
bargaining, these conventions apply to all workers, both public and private sector, without distinction. The
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the United States in 1992, likewise provides that
“Everyone shall have the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade
unions for the protection of his interests.” This right applies to all workers except in very limited situations, e.g.
the armed forces.
Courts and agencies around the world have held the right of collective bargaining in the public sector is
an essential element of the freedom of association, which is a fundamental right under both international law and
the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Catholic Doctrine does not call for destruction of Unions; it calls for participation in and development of unions using Catholic Social principles, like solidarity and subsidiarity.

Federal Employees do not have collective bargaining rights. I do not know why that should not be of concern to Catholics.

 

[Abu]

MarcoPolo
Father Sirico on Unions.

Great article.

How strange that the commonsense displayed there has been disregarded by some here.

After confirming the staggering state and federal overspending and debt, Fr Sirico explains how difficult it is for anyone to work for the public sector without being a member of the union which collects dues which seem to function like taxes. He says that these unions are against freedom of association and the alternatives open to workers and taxpayers – one former union member declare to Fr Sirico that his objections were ignored and he was forced to pay dues whether he joined the union or not, while monies endorsed pro-choice political candidates.

Such an anti–Catholic stance thus eliminates any pro-union conscientious support.

 

[tommcguire]

Labor unions, governments, political parties, media organizations reflect the hearts of men and women who are in them. Non of us humans is free of sin. There is plenty of blame to go around on all sides. The obligation of Catholics is is not to destroy these organizations, but to work for application of principles of justice within them.

Catholic principles of justice of human dignity, solidarity, subsidiarity, human rights, and the position of the Catholic Social Doctrine on labor unions flow out of the Catholic belief in the Most Holy Trinity. The perfect community of equality in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is the foundation of all Catholic Social Teaching. It is not outdated!

In our discussion of unions it would be of great benefit to look for ways of applying the principles of Catholic Social Doctrine, rather than repeating the political rhetoric presented to us in the media.

Yes, the unions did not strategically prepare for the advances in science and technology that made the high school graduate worker unemployable. How do we now apply the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity to help the massive population of a city like Detroit to exercise their right to work?

Yes, there may be, and I am not convinced of this, too much power in public employee unions. One place to start would be the true facts about public employee salary, benefits, and their unions. The truth is hard to agree on, but essential for the resolution the issues. What are the reliable resources we all can trust?

Catholic Social Doctrine over and over again teaches the worker has a right to a living wage–enough to provide for a family’s necessities of life. What must be done to bring about the kind of solidarity for the workers who are not making a living wage or are unemployed?

Technology is the cause of great transformations in the workplace that has brought loss of jobs, but so are the unscrupulous practices of financial markets and manufactures that do not place any importance on the common good. How do we bring about the critical focus on the common good, and pay special attention to the needs of the must vulnerable in our society?

 

[Ender]

Labor unions, governments, political parties, media organizations reflect the hearts of men and women who are in them. Non of us humans is free of sin. There is plenty of blame to go around on all sides. The obligation of Catholics is is not to destroy these organizations, but to work for application of principles of justice within them.

Specific unions and union practices are no more shielded from criticism - or even elimination - than specific governments. The Church recognizes that governments are essential to human societies, but that generic observation surely offers no protection for specific governments which abuse their authority. Think Church opposition to Nazi Germany. Individual unions, like individual governments, are not justified simply because the Church recognizes in general their rights. This is not a discussion of “the Church’s position on labor unions”; it is a debate about whether the public sector unions in some states have abused their positions and, because they have become inimical to the health of the state, need to be reigned in … if not eliminated.

Catholic Social Doctrine over and over again teaches the worker has a right to a living wage–enough to provide for a family’s necessities of life.

The worker may have a right to seek a “living wage” but no one has an obligation to pay him one.

Ender

 

[tommcguire]

Nothing I have read proves to me the States financial problems are caused primarily by public workers salaries and benefits. There is no doubt states have serious financial problems. Everyone, including wealthy people, must sacrifice to fix the problem. The political agenda of some seems to be not reform, not balance budgets, but to destroy public sector unions. The battle has started and will continue for a long time to come. The most vulnerable among us will suffer the most. For example, some of the most stable families in Detroit are public sector workers, most are women. Any reduction in their income will have serious negative consequences on families and whole communities. It would seem not just union leadership, but also employers, and politicians have a responsibility to be in solidarity with those who suffer the most to solve the problems. Catholic social doctrine is emphatic about the obligation on the part of employers to pay a just wage.

 

[Abu]

tommcguire
Catholic social doctrine is emphatic about the obligation on the part of employers to pay a just wage.

On fixing a wage, in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, Pius XI asserted “the condition of a business and of the one carrying it on must also be taken into account; for it would be unjust to demand excessive wages which a business cannot stand without its ruin and consequent calamity to the workers.” (#72). Even here, this does not consider the effect of reduced employment if the business still operates at all.

This particular insight clearly shows the appreciation of what Pope John Paul II called “the right of economic initiative” in the economic laws discovered by the Catholic Late Scholastics and the operation of cause and effect in a free economy based on the common good of society. It recognises that unemployment may result from attempts to force wage increases which are unrelated to, or out of sync with, the effects on supply and demand for the goods or services produced by a business or an industry.

It is vital to realise the development in Catholic Social teaching that has occurred. On wage fixing the Catholic Late Scholastics favoured leaving wage determination to the ‘common estimation’ of the market, since any other method is inherently arbitrary and leads to endless complications.

Here, Fr Brian Harrison, O.S., in *Religious Liberty And Contraception *is helpful (John XXXIII Fellowship Co-op (Australia), 1988, p 22-23), concerning “the practical order: human rights and duties.”

“But for a certain norm of action to be a matter of doctrine, it would clearly have to be proposed as a universally binding norm – one which is of certain validity always and everywhere. Thus, we could not elevate to the status of doctrine a norm which is proposed provisionally, and as subject to possible future correction after future consideration; nor one which is a particular ad hoc decision applying to given circumstances which might turn out to be transitory; nor, finally, one which is a concrete directive designed to give practical force to a doctrine which is in itself too broad or general to have much effect without such further application or specification. (An obvious example of such a doctrine would be the teaching – both natural and revealed – that a labourer deserves a just wage.)

Popes have warned explicitly against thinking that they have unique insights into specific matters of economic policy:
“If I were to pronounce on any single matter of a prevailing economic problem, I should be interfering with the freedom of men to work out their own affairs. Certain cases must be solved in the domain of facts, case by case as they occur…[M]en must realise in deeds those things, the principles of which have been placed beyond dispute…[T]hese things one must leave to the solution of time and experience.” [Pope Leo XIII. Quoted in *The Church And The Market, Dr Thomas E. Woods, Lexington Books, 2005, p 4].

No wealth can be created until it is produced – that’s why the Late Scholastic system works so well to enable everyone to produce some wealth and to do with it as they choose through free-will. Economic laws are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Everyone, including wealthy people

Please, tell me who sacrifices more than the wealthy person when it comes to paying tax revenue.

A family of five making close to 50k a year in this country can get what they paid in taxes back, and then some. With a federal refund check anywhere from 5 to 10k, just think how many people that is. Free money from the evil rich man coming straight to you thanks to your local democrat.

Just because a wealthy person still has 50, 100, 200 million or even a billion still in the bank after taxes does not mean the government did not take enough.

At some point you have to admit to yourself that taking too much is going to cost someone else their job.

So the question is not only how much do you take, but who among us has the right to sit on the sidelines, with a pretty good chance that we are not sacrificing at all (unless you lost your job, or are in the 50 some odd percent that do pay taxes) to tell people that because they received a tax break they are not doing enough?

You?

 

[tommcguire]

In response to my email of support, Most Reverend Jerome E. Listecki wrote this reply. It may be of interest to those who seek the true meaning of what the Archbishop of Milwaukee wrote.

Dear Friend in Christ,

        Thank you for your recent note expressing your viewpoint on the proposed legislation in the State of Wisconsin and about the statement I made on behalf of the Wisconsin Catholic Conference.  That statement has been widely reported and quoted without the benefit of its full context, leading many to believe it was a statement against Governor Walker and in support of unions.  It was not.  If you haven’t seen the full statement, I hope you will look for it on the archdiocesan Web site at this link [archmil.org/News/StatementRegardingtheRightsofW.htm](http://www.archmil.org/News/StatementRegardingtheRightsofW.htm) .

        Whether you support some, all or none of Governor Walker’s proposals, the ongoing debate about unions, benefits, collective bargaining and the rights of workers gives us, as Catholics, the opportunity to pray and reflect upon the teachings of the Church over the past decades.  It provides us an opportunity to look at issues both sides should understand and take into consideration when making decisions for the common good.

        The Church is at its best when it assumes its rightful role as teacher and the teachings of the Church allows for people of good will to disagree.  My statement simply was a reminder to those who serve in the public square, that they have responsibility for mutual, respectful communication in their decision-making.  It was also a reminder of certain ideals that demand our respect as faithful citizens.

        One of these principles is the protection of the rights and responsibilities of all involved and the mandate to work toward the common good.  This includes the rights of workers to organize, but, as I said in my statement, it does not mean that every issue brought forth by a union is a valid one.  We are all called to make sacrifices in times of fiscal distress and those sacrifices must maintain their focus on what is best for all the citizens of our community.  It is natural that there will be disagreement about what that means.  That is why the Church is positioned to remind people of the ideals that demand consideration in the public debate. 

        Social discourse dates back to early Christianity.  The Church should and must interact with government to work for the good of the people whom they both serve. Most importantly, we must maintain a respect and civility in our discourse.  If you don’t have respect, dialog cannot occur and you are left with who can yell the loudest to impress their point.  These past weeks have certainly demonstrated that point.

        Thank you again for writing.  Please continue to pray for the Church, for the people of our great state and for all those who serve us through public office.

        A blessed Lent!

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Most Reverend Jerome E. Listecki

Archbishop of Milwaukee

 

[tommcguire]

In response to fairness and taxes:

The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation last year projected that taxpayers making over $1 million in income this year will report, all together, over $1.1 trillion in income. Tax returns from taxpayers making between $200,000 and $1 million will total almost another $1.9 trillion. All these taxpayers would pay a whopping $382 billion more in taxes this year if they had to pay at the 1961 effective tax rate, the rate the rich actually faced on their tax returns 50 years ago after taking advantage of every available loophole.

I cannot verify the numbers quoted here, but I am certain those who earn the most pay less today then they would have paid in taxes in the 1961.

My concern in all of this is for people like the elderly African American woman I met this morning at a gas station. She had just gotten off work. Her home was some 15 miles from her site of employment. She did not have money to buy gas to get home. She was exhausted from working all night, and was begging for money to buy gas to get home.

The theory is important, but what matters for a disciple of Jesus Christ is a response of justice and charity for the most vulnerable among us. Today, the economic system we live with in the United States favors those who earn the most and does not favor people like the woman I met this morning. How are we in solidarity with them? They need unions with the power to do collective bargaining. I favor working to improve unions rather than take collective bargaining rights away from those who have them.

 

[Ender]

I cannot verify the numbers quoted here, but I am certain those who earn the most pay less today then they would have paid in taxes in the 1961.

Tax rates are surely less for the top brackets than they were in 1961 but it is a mistake to assume that simply because their rates were higher they payed more in taxes. More significantly, it is terribly mistaken to assume that raising taxes is the best way to increase government revenues. This is what Kennedy said in 1962 about tax rates:

“It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now … Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.”

The theory is important, but what matters for a disciple of Jesus Christ is a response of justice and charity for the most vulnerable among us.

Being a disciple of Christ provides no insight whatever into economic theory. Wanting to do the right thing does not confer on one the ability to determine what the right thing to do is.

Today, the economic system we live with in the United States favors those who earn the most and does not favor people like the woman I met this morning.

She has a problem because good jobs are scarce. Are Republican proposals the right ones? The Democratic ones? Moral purity offers no answers.

How are we in solidarity with them? They need unions with the power to do collective bargaining.

This is not simply wrong but beyond obviously incorrect. Less than 10% of private employees belong to unions and there is no rational claim that 90% of American workers are mistreated by their companies.

I favor working to improve unions rather than take collective bargaining rights away from those who have them.

Yes, clearly you like unions. In spite of all the evidence that (a) they are no longer needed, and (b) are generally harmful to every company and agency that employs them.

Ender

 

[bbarrick8383]

In response to fairness and taxes:

The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation last year projected that taxpayers making over $1 million in income this year will report, all together, over $1.1 trillion in income. Tax returns from taxpayers making between $200,000 and $1 million will total almost another $1.9 trillion. All these taxpayers would pay a whopping $382 billion more in taxes this year if they had to pay at the 1961 effective tax rate, the rate the rich actually faced on their tax returns 50 years ago after taking advantage of every available loophole.

I cannot verify the numbers quoted here, but I am certain those who earn the most pay less today then they would have paid in taxes in the 1961.

As the other poster pointed out, tax rates, even the tax percentages can not be the only thing you look at. Even though Buffetts secretary pays a higher tax rate, I’m sure she makes well over six figures, his tax bill is much much higher.

My concern in all of this is for people like the elderly African American woman I met this morning at a gas station. She had just gotten off work. Her home was some 15 miles from her site of employment. She did not have money to buy gas to get home. She was exhausted from working all night, and was begging for money to buy gas to get home.

The theory is important, but what matters for a disciple of Jesus Christ is a response of justice and charity for the most vulnerable among us. Today, the economic system we live with in the United States favors those who earn the most and does not favor people like the woman I met this morning. How are we in solidarity with them? They need unions with the power to do collective bargaining. I favor working to improve unions rather than take collective bargaining rights away from those who have them.

How does it favor them? Would you have the government comfiscate the rich man’s money to the point where he has to struggle to pay gas as well? Those who earn the most provide the most. What needs to happen is the feds need to remove their taxes from the price of gas. In many states over 50 cents a gallon goes to taxes.

As far as unions go, this was a UAW response to Ford now making a profit.

Bill Johnson, who represents workers at a Ford plant in Wayne, Mich., told the Detroit Free Press that if Ford does not restore “everything” to the union, “the membership is going to knock it down.”

I’m sorry, but let’s get one thing straight. A public union is a direct conflict of interest if politicians are involved in negotiations with public union representatives. Even a former AFL-CIO leader said that public unions would never work.

Second of all, UAW representatives have not learned a damn thing. I hear union members on here complain about jobs leaving the country. You want to know why? Unions are why. You want people with a high school education to make 50k a year with full healthcare benefits, fully funded pension and then complain about the education system? Why should I get an education if I can go to the UAW and make more than many college educated professionals? No wonder Fords shipping jobs to Mexico and Toyota is shipping them to Texas. Toyota knows that if it becomes known as an American brand and the Big 3 are now made in foreign countries they will have by virtue of factory location stolen a huge chunk of the auto market in the US.

The idea of unions, I’m fine with. The current operation methods of unions are a joke, they should either be disbanded or regulated to the teeth if they are going to behave so obtusely.

 

[tommcguire]

True the Gospel and Catholic Social Doctrine is not economics. I am not an economist. However, it does not require being an economist to know that wealthy people paying a larger percentage of their income in taxes will put them in danger of having to beg for gas money to get home after work.

Kennedy was not an economist, and what he said may or may not be true. I is true that the universal destination of goods means that no one has a right to what he or she does not need when others lack the necessities of life. Many in my community do lack the necessities of life.

Jesus taught we will be judged on what we do for the poor. I do not see any political party, or for that matter any union, that has the common good, with a preferential option for the poor, as a priority. That does not mean we should do away with unions. They need to be reformed!

 

[Abu]

tommcguire
My concern in all of this is for people like the elderly African American woman I met this morning at a gas station. She had just gotten off work. Her home was some 15 miles from her site of employment. She did not have money to buy gas to get home. She was exhausted from working all night, and was begging for money to buy gas to get home.
However, it does not require being an economist to know that wealthy people paying a larger percentage of their income in taxes will put them in danger of having to beg for gas money to get home after work.

These two statements indicate clearly that tommcguire should not be dabbling with economics and misusing the social teaching of the Church until he takes the time and trouble to understand what both encompass.

1. There is not the slightest clue as to how the elderly woman came to not have gas money for the car. Blaming free enterprise for her dilemma is crass; blaming another individual for her dilemma is judging without facts.
2. the second statement may be meant as satire, but is ill-fitted for a serious discussion.