Church Teaching on Unions

[Abu]

tommcguire
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?

These are good and relevant questions. The question of a living wage is very important but not as simple as in legislation, as we have seen.

Jobs arise when investors and entrepreneurs combine to produce a product which consumers wish to purchase at a price they are willing to pay and those jobs require capital, employees including managers, and marketing. If the business is successful it can expand and employ more people, if not it may contract or disappear.

“The key problem of social ethics in this case is that of just remuneration for work done” (no.19). This, as we have seen, has been a major theme of papal social teaching since Leo XIII. John Paul reminds his readers of the connection of just wages with the family. “Just remuneration for the work of an adult who is responsible for a family means remuneration which will suffice for establishing and properly maintaining a family and for providing security for its future” (no.19). This can be done either by means of “what is called a family wage – that is, a single salary given to the head of the family for his work, sufficient for the needs of the family without the other spouse having to take up gainful employment outside the home” or by “family allowances or grants,” which are common in many European countries. Such arrangements are a way in which a society can ensure that mothers are not forced to leave the home to take up paid work, something which is “wrong from the point of view of the good of society and of the family when it contradicts or hinders [the] primary goals of the mission of a mother” (no. 19).
Catholic Social Teaching: John Paul II, Laborem Exercens, (Thomas Storck)
[catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0286.html]](http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0286.html])

“Single men and the married men with families receive the same rates of pay for the same work. As a result, one sector of the population bears a disproportionately large share of the financial burden of maintaining the child population, which means the future nation, except for income tax benefits, which may unfortunately, be cancelled out by consumer taxes. The effective solution we are urging may well require a family allowance system in the United States similar to those adopted by Canada, many European nations, Australia, New Zealand and some governments of South America. We stand ready to support enlightened legislation in this sense.”
[ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/USBPSHV.HTM]](http://www.ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/USBPSHV.HTM])

This is all the more urgent now because of the population devastation facing Western nations, and the difficulties facing families.

Here are facts from May, 2006:
mises.org/daily/2130
Supporters of minimum wage laws do not realize that prior to minimum wage laws the national unemployment rate did fall well below 5%. According to the US Census, national unemployment rates were 3.3% in 1927, 1.8% in 1926, 3.2% in 1925, 2.4% in 1923, 1.4% in 1919 and 1918, 2.8% in 1907, 1.7% in 1906, and 3.7% in 1902.[6] Even today, some states have unemployment rates as low as 3%. Virginia now has an unemployment rate of 3.1%. Wyoming has an unemployment rate of 2.9%. Hawaii has an unemployment rate of 2.6%. National unemployment rates seldom drop below 5% because some categories of workers are stuck with double digit unemployment. Given these figures, it is quite arguable that minimum wage laws keep the national unemployment rate 3 percentage points higher than would otherwise be the case.
Note:
[6] US Bureau of the Census Historical Statistics p135.

With regard to legislated minimum wages facts are useful:
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
By Dr. Shawn Ritenour
Various empirical studies since the 1970s have shown that a 10-percent increase in the minimum wage results in a general drop in employment of between 2-3 percent and an 8.5-percent decrease for high-school dropouts, young black adults, and teenagers; those are the labor sectors most affected by minimum-wage increases. Teen employment fell 5 percent after last summer’s 12-percent minimum-wage increase. The 2007 minimum-wage mandate was implemented in three phases. Since going into effect, over 480,000 teen jobs have been lost
mensnewsdaily.com/2009/07/28/the-minimum-wage-keeping-prosperity-around-the-corner/

Dr. Shawn Ritenour is an associate professor of economics at Grove City College, contributor to The Center for Vision & Values, and adjunct professor at the Mises Institute in Auburn, AL

 

[tommcguire]

Coming up with a means of providing a just wage is complicated and unions are not always about justice. This reality suggests for those who take Catholic Social Doctrine seriously other means are needed to find a way to justice.

To leave it all in the hands of those who have the power to employ, is to leave one group with the power to dominate another group those to be employed. The principle of solidarity suggests the common good of workers served when workers have power to bargain with employers. I grew up in a family business that did all it could to prevent workers from joining a union. From that experience I can see both sides of the issue. My living and working in an urban area where I have experienced the suffering of many workers from the unjust practices of employers has convinced me that there is no question about the need for solidarity among those who suffer. As one who is committed to the communal nature of the common good, I see an imperative for employees of all kinds to organize for justice. Not just wages and benefits but also for other social goods.

TThere is a program on ABC TV that brings together people with money to invest and people who are looking for investments. The program is a dramatic demonstration of how investors and those seeking investment have no concern about the common good, only the amount of profit. Questions about worker compensation, environmental concerns, or the good a a given community are not raised in the discussion about investing. The approch does not represent the values of Catholic Social Doctrine; it presents a challenge to those conerned about the common good of all.

 

[pnewton]

I’m not sure that I understand what’s surprising about my last statement-would you mind elaborating a little bit?

I found it surprising that one can promote unions as a means for living wages, yet believe that those without a union could gain higher wages than COLA. If this is really a possibility, then unions are not needed.

 

[Lujack]

I found it surprising that one can promote unions as a means for living wages, yet believe that those without a union could gain higher wages than COLA. If this is really a possibility, then unions are not needed.

Oh, I understand. Well, I guess my analogy would be this: In rock climbing, you have all those carabiners and safety ropes to hold you up. If you’re climbing with them, and I’m climbing without them, we might not notice the difference…until I fall.

That’s the role that I would argue unions have in that case-they serve as a safeguard and and a fallback. Your salary situation can change adversely a lot faster without a union. Also, the union’s role in protesting unjust firings and other grievances provides a measure of job security.

 

[MarkInOregon]

Can anyone tell me what the Catholic Church teaching is on unions? What about unions controlled by corrupt leadership, mandatory membership/dues for workers, dues used for political issues/candidates with which a member disagrees or which are contrary to Catholic teaching on faith and morals, poor stewardship of funds by leaders? How about public employee unions where there is no “greedy, profit-seeking company” as the opponent, but rather other taxpayers, including those of low-income who subsidize with taxes and increased cost of goods & services the excessive benefits and unwieldy management and extra costs that such public unions engender? How about the social justice of maintaining high cost benefits which lead to bankruptcy of civil government units? In light of all this, why do so many church leaders think such unionism is socially just?

I am sure you have been given an answer to your question, but your question seems to show a lack of understanding as to why we have unions. I would suggest studying the history of labor and the abuses of the business owners that gave rise to unions. Had business owners acted farily and justly with their employees you would not have unions. The issue is much more complex than your post would indicate.

Do you enjoy the 40 hour work week? Do you look forward to being able to retire? Thank unions, not your employer. Employers made concessions to unions when times were good and they were making money (even with union labor)–on the assumption that they would continue–but then a funny thing happened–we started shipping jobs to other countries–countries where children, as well as adults, could still be made to work in sweat shops without safe guards, where environmental regulations don’t apply–countries that don’t provide the same employee and environmental safeguards we require here–and so our jobs have been going away–because we as consumers don’t seem to care who makes our cheap goods–we don’t care if its children or prisoners and we don’t care if the environment is fouled–as long as its not here and we get cheap goods.

Look around you–you’ll find corruption everywhere–you’ll find corrupt employers, corrupt employees, corrupt government officials, etc–that has nothing to do with the validity of the institutional idea i.e. corrupt government officials does not mean we should not have government.

Do we really want to return a world where employees are locked in the factory? are not allowed bathroom breaks? work dangerous equipment with no safeguards and are let go without a thankyou after they are injured making their employers rich while they have been forced to work for a subsistence wage shopping at the company store?
Have we all gotten fat off of what unions provided and forgotten what life was like before?

Continued

 

[MarkInOregon]

Continued:

In 1911 Helen Susscak, an 8 year old textile mill worker, was questioned by a Pennsylvania judge:

Judge: Helen, what time do you go to work?
Helen: Half after 6 evenin’s
Judge: When do you come home from the mill?
Helen: Half after 6 mornin’s
Judge: How far do you live from the mill?
Helen: I don’t know. I guess it mostly takes an hour to git there
Judge: And the inspector tells me it’s accross lonely fields exposed to storms that sweep down the valley. What’s your pay, Helen?
Helen: I gits 3 cents an hour, sir.
Judge: If my arithmetic is good that is 36 cents for a night’s work. Well, now, we do indeed find the flesh and blood of little children coined into money.

Is this what we want to return to? If we won’t let our children work–why are we buying goods from other countries my by child labor under similar conditions?

Have we forgotten employment conditions most workers found themselves in?

Employers bargain with unions. I for the life of me do not understand the deals struck with teachers unions–they often seem absurd to me–but that is the districts fault. Teachers need jobs and districts need teachers–let’s close down the schools and see how long teachers and administrators can go without their jobs. Maybe that will let them both come to a reasonable agreement. Maybe having to teach our own kids (the way it used to be done) would be make us appreciate both more than we do.

Unions helped us all to obtain better working conditions, a living wage and some time off–for that I am thankful. Maybe we should try exporting those things rather than our jobs. I will acknowledge that some unions abused the clout they once had–but employers have abused employees since the beginning of time–maybe its time that both treat each other with mutual respect.

Peace,
Mark

 

[tommcguire]

Thank you Mark for your comments. The issues are complex, but in the end the dignity of the person requires justice from all for all. Catholic Social Doctrine provides principles; the principles have to be applied. So few Catholics know anything about CSD, so it is not surprising that the principles are not applied.

 

[Ender]

Thank you Mark for your comments. The issues are complex, but in the end the dignity of the person requires justice from all for all. Catholic Social Doctrine provides principles; the principles have to be applied. So few Catholics know anything about CSD, so it is not surprising that the principles are not applied.

The disagreement here has nothing whatever to do with knowing what Catholic social doctrine contains; it has to do with determining how to achieve the goals it sets out. The disagreement is not between those who accept the Church’s social doctrine and those who reject it; it is over how best to achieve shared goals. If you had better arguments to support your position you wouldn’t find it necessary to disparage those who disagree with it. As you said, the Church provides principles but she leaves it up to the individual to determine how best to apply them, and Catholics may legitimately disagree over the prudential application of those principles.

Ender

 

[tommcguire]

Knowledge of Catholic Social Teaching is almost non existent. If Catholics knew the Doctrine, I am sure there would be a different tone to Catholic participation in unions and the political process. I wonder how I “disparaged anyone”?

 

[Ender]

Knowledge of Catholic Social Teaching is almost non existent. If Catholics knew the Doctrine, I am sure there would be a different tone to Catholic participation in unions and the political process. I wonder how I “disparaged anyone”?

You have no idea how well or poorly most Catholics know the social teaching of the Church. You mistakenly assume that the Church supports your position and conclude that because other Catholics disagree with you then they must either be unfamiliar with Catholic social teaching or else they are ignoring it. What you haven’t come to terms with is that your position is neither more nor less in accord with that teaching than the positions that are contrary to it. That you misunderstand what the Church teaches says nothing about how well or badly others understand it.

Ender

 

[tommcguire]

Ender,

You do not know what I know or do not know about the knowledge of Catholics regarding Catholic Social Doctrine!

Your assumptions about my position are not accurate.

The challenge I see in the Catholic Church is to live the life Jesus Christ calls us to live. The Catholic Social Teaching is one source that helps us to do that. The main source is the Gospel. Jesus does not teach in the Greek and Roman logic; he teaches in parables. The parables often confuse our logic, without ever being unreasonable. Love your enemy? Do good to those who persecute you? Give your coat too? Jesus calls us to a far deeper spirituality than any, including myself, are willing to go. I am like many others caught up in my own little world. I first is the narcissistic reality I experience in my own life and in the preaching I hear in Church. Jesus harshest criticism is reserved for religious leaders who are more concered about the law than the good of the people.

In my opinion, I do not care what ideology you subscribe to as long as its first priority is the preferential option for the poor. Unions do not today serve the needs of the poor, though they have in the past. What can be done to improve them so that they do serve the poor. The capitalist system does not serve the needs of the poor today. What needs to be done to make sure it does serve the needs of the poor? The socialist system does not serve the needs of the poor today, although the Chinese system has brought more people out of poverty than any other known to human kind. What must be done to make a socialist system more responsive to the poor? What we will come up with in the end, if we follow the way of Jesus, will not look like any system we have today.

 

[Abu]

tommcguire
The capitalist system does not serve the needs of the poor today. What needs to be done to make sure it does serve the needs of the poor? The socialist system does not serve the needs of the poor today, although the Chinese system has brought more people out of poverty than any other known to human kind. What must be done to make a socialist system more responsive to the poor?

“Chinese system”? There is no such thing. There is the condemned Communist political system which brutalizes freedoms, and there is the Communist Chinese realization that free enterprise is the only way to improve the living standards – so they have adopted some aspects of free enterprise. It is bizarre to feel that a “Chinese system has brought more people out of poverty than any other known to human kind.”

You fail utterly to understand the Catholic Late Scholastic discovery of the economic laws of cause and effect which then resulted in the free enterprise system which really did raise untold millions in the West from poverty, and then spread to the world, from which the Communist Chinese have, throwing Mao out, learned some economic truths.

There is nothing that can replace free enterprise for the poor, which is why so many are trying to emulate it.
As long as you ignore the Church you will go around in circles.

Pope John Paul II teaches in Centesimus Annus, 1991:
CA 42. ‘Returning now to the initial question: can it perhaps be said that, after the failure of Communism, capitalism is the victorious social system, and that capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society? Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?
‘The answer is obviously complex. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”.
‘CA 43. The Church has no models to present;’

No wonder Pope Benedict XVI felt it necessary to teach that “Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations…Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (Caritas et Veritate, Benedict XVI, 2009, #36).

Why consider socialism at all? It has never “served the needs of the poor”. Face the facts:
Pius XI declared emphatically in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, #120: “If Socialism, like all errors, contains some truth (which, moreover, the Supreme Pontiffs have never denied), it is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.

 

[starshiptrooper]

The socialist system does not serve the needs of the poor today, although the Chinese system has brought more people out of poverty than any other known to human kind.

If you really believe this, you are either a brainwashed agent of the Chinese government or seriously misinformed. The average salary for a Chinese citizen in 2004 was $5,000 (worldsalaries.org/china.shtml)

What must be done to make a socialist system more responsive to the poor?

Nothing at all, socialism is incompatible with Catholic social teaching.

… Socialism, if it remains truly Socialism, even after it has yielded to truth and justice on the points which we have mentioned, cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the Catholic Church because its concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth.

(Quadragesimo Anno paragraph 117)

 

[tommcguire]

Ender,

I have traveled in China, lived in Hong Kong for ten years. Look at where China was in 1949 and where it is today. Please consider some facts. Yes people of China do not make what Americans make but there are not the starving millions that there were at the beginning of the Revolution.

The Government of Rome was not exactly a model of the Kingdom of God at the time of Jesus. Yet he did not condemn the Roman Government. He said give to Caesar what is Caesar"s. Socialism nor capitalism represent the ideal of Catholic Social Doctrine. Neither system is going to go away anytime soon. I choose to do what so many of the Chinese Catholics do: live with the system, work to model the way of Jesus, and do what can be done to point the way to the “Will of God on earth as it is in heaven.”

 

[Ender]

You do not know what I know or do not know about the knowledge of Catholics regarding Catholic Social Doctrine!

Catholic social doctrine provides guidelines, that’s all. The comments about a preferential option for the poor and the rights of unions to exist are just that: guidelines that say nothing whatever about how best to help the poor or whether the actions or even existence of any particular union are valid. Any claim that specific actions are mandated or even supported by Catholic social doctrine is a failure to understand what that doctrine is. Then again, if you are unhappy that I have questioned your knowledge of Catholic doctrine, perhaps you should reconsider the propriety of your evaluation of that knowledge in others.

Jesus harshest criticism is reserved for religious leaders who are more concered about the law than the good of the people.

There are certainly some people who are unconcerned about the welfare of others but it is wrong to assume simply because someone opposes your heartfelt attempt to do what you think is right that he does so because of a lack of concern rather than because he feels your solution will be ineffective or even harmful. You cannot know why he opposes you and it is wrong to judge his motivation.

Ender

 

[Abu]

tommcguire
Socialism nor capitalism represent the ideal of Catholic Social Doctrine

Myopia is a frightful malady.

Socialism is not merely non-ideal, it is condemned: Pius XI declared emphatically in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, #120: “If Socialism, like all errors, contains some truth (which, moreover, the Supreme Pontiffs have never denied), it is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.

The “capitalism” terminology was a term of denigration coined by Marx.

Pope John Paul II has seen that “it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”. (Centesimus Annus, 42). This reality he supports. Face facts.
And further, “The Church has no models to present.” (CA 43). There is no “ideal model” in Catholic social doctrine simply because the Church has no models to present.

The obvious solution is to learn that economic laws are real, the result of real cause and effect, and developed by Catholic Late Scholastics.
Dr Alejandro Chafuen expresses that reality: Economics “is the study of the formal applications that can be deduced from the fact that human beings act purposefully. It does not consider whether these actions are good or bad (an ethical question). Economic science is value free. It analyses cause and effect relationships that, if true, are scientific….only human acts can be judged morally.” (Christians For Freedom, Ignatius, 1986, p 33).

That is precisely why Pope Benedict XVI felt it necessary to teach that “Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations…Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (Caritas et Veritate, Benedict XVI, 2009, #36).

Why bother to refer to “Catholic Social Doctrine” and then rubbish it in practical terms?

 

[tommcguire]

Abu,

Yes I know what the Church teaches about Socialism. However, we are in the 21st Century; Socialism is a tag. What does it mean in Cuba, China, or in Norway? I really am not interested in discussing these theories.

What I am interested in is the welfare of people today.

I just got back from a movie set. My daughter and son-in-law are making a movie. I was pleased learn that in hiring all non union workers, they were careful to follow all the rules that unions have established for film makers. Unions have done a great deal of good for many who are not now unionized. Those who would destroy unions do well to make sure that in destroying unions does not return workers to pre-union conditions.

I also think about the way children are raised in the United States. It is nearly impossible for most families to have one parent home in the most formative state of child development. To support a middle class standard of living two parents must work full time. In talking about unions, I would prefer to talk about how solidarity among parents might help to get policy for change in the way children are raised. This might mean unions have a role to play. What needs to change so unions can help in this most critical need?

Certainly there is no subject that is more talked about in the Catholic Social Doctrine than the need to support families.

 

[Abu]

tommcguire
I know what the Church teaches about Socialism. However, we are in the 21st Century; Socialism is a tag. What does it mean in Cuba, China, or in Norway? I really am not interested in discussing these theories.Certainly there is no subject that is more talked about in the Catholic Social Doctrine than the need to support families.

They are NOT “theories” – the facts are precisely why Socialism is condemned. Knowing is not necessarily the same as understanding…

Post #121 has shown what needs to be done to support families:
“The key problem of social ethics in this case is that of just remuneration for work done” (no.19). This, as we have seen, has been a major theme of papal social teaching since Leo XIII. John Paul reminds his readers of the connection of just wages with the family. “Just remuneration for the work of an adult who is responsible for a family means remuneration which will suffice for establishing and properly maintaining a family and for providing security for its future” (no.19). This can be done either by means of “what is called a family wage – that is, a single salary given to the head of the family for his work, sufficient for the needs of the family without the other spouse having to take up gainful employment outside the home” or by “family allowances or grants,” which are common in many European countries. Such arrangements are a way in which a society can ensure that mothers are not forced to leave the home to take up paid work, something which is “wrong from the point of view of the good of society and of the family when it contradicts or hinders [the] primary goals of the mission of a mother” (no. 19).
Catholic Social Teaching: John Paul II, Laborem Exercens, (Thomas Storck)
[catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0286.html]](http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0286.html])

“Single men and the married men with families receive the same rates of pay for the same work. As a result, one sector of the population bears a disproportionately large share of the financial burden of maintaining the child population, which means the future nation, except for income tax benefits, which may unfortunately, be cancelled out by consumer taxes. The effective solution we are urging may well require a family allowance system in the United States similar to those adopted by Canada, many European nations, Australia, New Zealand and some governments of South America. We stand ready to support enlightened legislation in this sense.”
[ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/USBPSHV.HTM]](http://www.ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/USBPSHV.HTM])

This is all the more urgent now because of the population devastation facing Western nations, and the difficulties facing families. Further, taxation can provide worthwhile exemptions for each child increasing as the children increase. School vouchers for parents enable them to choose the school and help to form their children wisely.

Wasting time on discredited foolish ideas gets no one anywhere. Unions run by really responsible people are as necessary as businesses run by really responsible people.

 

[tommcguire]

Abu,

I agree, the Catholic Social Doctrine you quote demonstrates the primacy of the family. I also agree with your statement about unions. The question of Socialism, I am not a scholar, but what was condemned in the past is not what is practiced today in many countries that are called socialist.

I was blessed in my family. My wife was able to be home with our children for four years. We had little income, but lots of loving family support. It made a great difference in the life of our children. For this we are grateful.

The tragedies I saw, in the poor communities in which I worked, resulted from serious structural failures to support the family. Few people in these communities had the blessings of economic support that I had. Parents care about their children. Many did not have the economic or educational resources to do what was needed for their children. Along with poverty, comes moral poverty as one wise mother once told me. This increases the burden on families. I can site so many examples, of how with all the love and care of parents, children lacked the opportunities my children had.

I am not optimistic that in the present political climate the United States will take on the problems of the family in any serious way. Only with greater suffering will political systems change. I still pray “Thy will be done on earth as in heaven.”

 

[Abu]

tommcguire
I am not optimistic that in the present political climate the United States will take on the problems of the family in any serious way.

It is rather the moral climate and the degradation of the culture which needs to be rescued, and restored, in order for people to influence politics for the better based on reason and faith. The present efforts to restore prudence, fortitude and temperance against the prevailing insanity can only bear good fruit if wisely implemented and monitored.

It is the abysmal governmental economic incompetence and interference based on irrationality over decades, rather than sound laws, which have produced the dilemma faced today.