RE: [Marxism] MTA threatens to eliminate check-off

[Walter Lippmann <walterlx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This is one of those situations where there's no simple answer and there is
right and wrong on both sides. While there's no question that it's easier for
a union to receive its monthly dues automatically, through a system run by
the employer, it's then also easier for the employer to decide to cut off the
dues should it wish to do so. If the union is then dependent on money from
such does payment, it's vulnerable to pressure and thus there's a great deal
of pressure inherent in the situation, on the union leadership to maintain an
agreement by more or less any means necessary.

The idea of the union having to ask for the dues each month by going around
and responding to "what have you done for me lately" questions is of course
a wonderful one. But anyone whose worked in a situation where the union is
obligated to represent everyone, but everyone isn't required to belong knows
as well that there are a lot of free-loaders who would just as well accept the
package the union negotiates, and still not want to pay for it.

Dobbs's criticism was based on the esperiences of the 1930s and organizing
at that time was completely different. Workers were paid with cash in pay
envelopes, at least in smaller shops. I don't know how they were paid in
giant industrial installations.

Revolutionary forms of organizing work well in revolutionary situations. In
Cuba workers in may places still receive salaries in cash in a pay envelope,
but the dues and other deductions - though not taxes - have already been
deducted before the worker gets the envelope, sometimes with a computer-
printed slip outlining the deductions. On the other hand, Communist Party
dues are still collected by hand, and the payments recorded by stamps or
signed for in the small book which party members retain.

The pressure toward conservatism in large organizations is a powerful one.

I've often wondered what would be a workable solution for such necessities.
I don't have one any longer. Certainly having to collect the dues by hand on
the spot each month is a good one, but ask yourself, what percentage of
union members choose union activity? We all know the answer: damn few.
And so, who's going to go around and collect the dues each month? In an
advanced capitalist country where there are a million demands on everyone
for their time and activity, how will such things be organized on a normal
basis during normal times??? I suppose everyone could sign to have their
dues deducted from a credit card or a checking account. What what do
you do for those workers who don't have such things?

Wish I knew...


Walter Lippmann

========================================================
DAVID McDONALD WROTE:
You have to have a lot of people, shop by shop, who collect the dues. The
point made in the SWP, I believe in one of Farrell Dobb's books, was that
such a practice put union officials, even shop stewards, immediately in the
firing line of their co-workers. Why should I pay my dues this month? What
have you done for me? I'm for it, myself. It would get a lot of union people
talking to other union people. So it takes a lot of time. I don't care.

Plus at 30,000 the TWA is not really that gigantic.

Louis Proyect:

 However, I can't imagine how in the world a huge union like the TWA could
really collect dues in any other way. Bureaucratic inertia would seem to be
a function of deeper structural/political issues.
>
> NY Times, January 28, 2006
> Transit Union Fights Effort to Restrict Dues Collection
> By SEWELL CHAN
>
>


________



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism