Read on Twitter
A few thoughts on sectoral bargaining, worker power, and law in light of the debate that's followed on @noahopinion's tweet.
One line of push-back is that implementing sectoral bargaining without pre-existing strong unions won't necessarily help workers, and could hurt. 1/ https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1339049672459972610
One line of push-back is that implementing sectoral bargaining without pre-existing strong unions won't necessarily help workers, and could hurt. 1/ https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1339049672459972610
There's a lot to that. In Europe, sectoral bargaining structures were often the result of massive worker mobilization at key moments, which led to enduring class compromises. Many of those occurred in the early 20th century. 2/
Employers also organized into associations, often to counter workers' power. This all took place in a very different political context than our own. Industrial work dominated, working-class political parties were building power (and sometimes demanding rights to vote etc). 3/
We can't possibly re-create those conditions. We don't have parliamentary politics, much less a majority of the working class in manufacturing right now. Labor is de-mobilized rather than mobilizing. 4/
Current labor law enforces labor's de-mobilization. It makes it nearly impossible for workers to organize even at the enterprise level -- much less to exert power at scale. This leads to a chicken/egg problem. 5/
Labor can't mobilize under existing law -- but labor can't get better law without mobilizing.
All the scholars and activists I know who are in favor of sectoral bargaining see it as one among other strategies to rebuild worker power and raise wages. 6/
All the scholars and activists I know who are in favor of sectoral bargaining see it as one among other strategies to rebuild worker power and raise wages. 6/
It would have to be coupled with reforms to the basic structure of the NLRA to enable workers to organize once again, including a real right to strike. The PRO Act and the other reform bill (can't recall the name rn) take steps in the right direction. 7/
(Needless to say, the Uber proposals for "sectoral bargaining" are in a completely different category). 8/
This is what Clean Slate proposed, what Kate Andrias and I proposed for Roosevelt, what CAP proposed, etc. 9/
So the big question in my mind is NOT how to put sectoral bargaining in place tomorrow -- it is how to build it over the next decade or so, alongside a broader democratic reconstruction of workplace and economic governance. 10/
Using policy levers to encourage workers to mobilize, and to demobilize employer opposition.
Wage boards, properly designed, could certainly play a role in that process. They could bolster the power of existing unions, assist in organizing and mobilizing, etc. 11/
Wage boards, properly designed, could certainly play a role in that process. They could bolster the power of existing unions, assist in organizing and mobilizing, etc. 11/
But the broader process needs to reach deep into the legal interstices of employment and labor law -- including issues of privacy/surveillance, technological change, individual employment contracts and their enforceability, arb agreements, etc. 12/
And also project upwards into the sphere of economic policy -- giving workers an institutional role in welfare and social insurance, industrial policy, regulatory development, etc. Together with robust antitrust/competition policy reforms that others are developing. 13/
Long story short, for "sectoral bargaining" to deliver the goods that people seem to want, it would need to be coupled with a whole bunch of other institutional reforms. Which in turn would bolster it as one among other mechanisms for worker voice. End.
