I know this isn't really a hot take, though. But I don't see a scenario in which we can make real changes that help people, save the planet, and destroy US imperialism without an organized working class - and that requires mass unionization. And right now the deck is stacked so much against unionization, from a legal / policy / regulation standpoint. But also, I do see a whole lot more positive energy regarding unionization among the working class in the US. People really are seeing through the anti-unionization lies spread by neoliberalism over the last few decades. Really, the one big objection from workers is they don't want to get fired, which is totally reasonable. That's why we need to make radical changes to the unionization rules and really beef up enforcement.

And this is has the benefit of being ostensibly in line with the goals of the Democratic party. Now of course, the party is beholden to capital and capital will fight this tooth and nail. But I think there will still be plenty of D politicians who see mass unionization as increasing their base of power, right or wrong.

So I think this should be our electoral focus, even if that means to the exclusion of other policies (because not like we're gonna get shit done in those areas as things stand now, anyway.

    • FeverDream [comrade/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      I for one think it is a very good idea to exclude and ostracize as many other workers as possible because I define my sense of self based on the many things I hate.

    • curmudgeonthefrog [he/him]
      ·
      4 years ago

      While PMC upper management has bought into the system several times over, there's absolutely union potential among the professional grunt workers. Paralegals, nurses, medical resisdents, education workers, social workers. All treated like shit for years just for the chance at entering the PMC class. Telling them their lives can immediately get better would likely produce good results.

    • star_wraith [he/him]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Well, tbf a lot of the upper/middle class will be hostile to unionization. Particularly white folks, who even if they are getting screwed by their bosses, enjoy plenty of privileges from the status quo. I'm not saying we should ignore professionals and office workers, but if we get better legal protections it's gonna be a hell of a lot easier to get a warehouse or hotel unionized than it will an office park.

        • star_wraith [he/him]
          ·
          4 years ago

          "44% of U.S. workers are employed in low-wage jobs that pay median annual wages of $18,000... Most of the 53 million Americans working in low-wage jobs are adults in their prime working years, or between about 25 to 54, they noted. Their median hourly wage is $10.22 per hour" (link)

          I feel like we should absolutely be targeting this 44%. Folks in the next income brackets above this, too. So we're talking I dunno maybe 60-70% of workers who are living in material conditions that are very amenable to unions and socialism. Sure we shouldn't exclude the toner distribution manager making $125k but I don't know why we should be focusing any of our very limited resources on the labor aristocracy, either.