Which federal laws and policies would you get rid of or modify in order to help the American labor movement.

I was looking through the labor law tag on my blog and your ask reminded me I haven't actually written a comprehensive post about this on Tumblr. (Indeed, you'd have to go back to my old, old policy blog from 2009...it's been a while.)

One silver lining of the Sisyphean struggle to restore American labor law that's been going on since the 1970s is that the labor movement and their allies in Congress, academia, think tanks, and progressive media have been thinking through this very issue of "what reforms would make a real difference" for a long time. I'm not going to say it's a solved question, but the research literature is pretty robust.

For the purposes of this post, I'm going to focus on the three most recent reform packages: the Employee Free Choice Act that was the main vehicle during the Obama years, Bernie Sanders' Workplace Democracy Act (which was introduced repeatedly between 1992 and 2018), and the Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize Act (PRO Act) that is the current proposal of the Democratic legislative caucuses. There's going to be quite a bit of overlap between these proposals, because it's very much an iterative process where allies in the same movement are trading ideas with one another and trying to stay abreast of new developments, but I'll try to tease out some of the similarities and differences.

EFCA

While EFCA contained a number of provisions that sought to close various loopholes in U.S labor law, the three main provisions largely target the flaws that have made it extremely difficult to win a union through the National Labor Relations Act process devised in 1935 that has turned into a Saw-style gauntlet thanks to the professionalization of union-busting and the Federalist Society's strategy of death-by-a-thousand-cuts:

"Card check." Probably the most common pattern of union-busting in the workplace today is a war of attrition by management waged by an industry of specialized law firms. Generally what happens is that the union files for election with a super-majority of ~70% workers having signed union cards, then management delays the vote as long as possible to give their hired "union-avoidance" firm to systematically intimidate, surveil, propagandize, and divide workers, up to and including illegally firing pro-union workers pour encouragez les autres. Over several months, what happens is that the initial 70% of pro-union support starts to erode as workers decide it's just too dangerous to stick their necks out, until the vote happens and the union loses either by a squeaker or a landslide.

Card check short-circuits this process by just saying that if the union files with a majority of cards, you skip the election and the union is recognized. And for all the pearl-clutching by the right, this is actually how labor law works in many democratic countries, because the idea of a fair election that lets management participate is an oxymoron.

Arbitrated first contract. In the event that enough workers keep the faith and actually vote for a union, management's next move is to draw out collective bargaining for a year or more. After a year, the original vote is no longer considered binding and employers can push for a "decertification" vote, which they usually win because workers either give up hope or change jobs. So this provision says that if the two sides can't reach an agreement on a first contract within 120 days, a Federal arbitrator will just impose one, so that at least for two years there will be a union contract no matter what management wants.

Strengthening enforcement. As I said above, one of the problems with existing labor law is that there are basically no penalties for management knowingly breaking the law; companies literally just budget in a line-item and do it anyway. This provision would allow unions to file an injunction against employers for unfair labor practices or ULPs (at present, injunctions are only required for violations done by unions), and would add triple back pay for illegal firings and fines of $20,000 for each ULP. This would make union-busting much more expensive, because companies routinely rack up hundreds and hundreds of them during a campaign.

Workplace Democracy Act

Sanders' proposal includes the main proposals from EFCA, and adds a bunch of additional reforms, like mis-classifying workers as independent contractors, banning captive audience meetings, making "joint employers" liable for labor law violations by franchisees, legalizing secondary boycotts, and requiring employers to report to the NLRB on all anti-union expenditures during a campaign and barring anyone convicted of an unfair labor practice from being hired for anti-union campaigns and making "union-avoidance" consultants liable for fines for ULPs (which would kill the "union-avoidance" industry, because they commit ULPs for a living).

PRO Act

The PRO Act is very much an updating of the previous efforts we've talked about. It bans captive audience meetings, allows for secondary strikes and boycotts, massively increases fines and allows for compensatory damages, ends mis-classification, speeds up the election process, etc.

It also contains a couple new and ambitious proposals:

it allows unions to sue management in court instead of having to complain to the NLRB, which opens management up to a very expensive legal proceeding and discovery.

it bans "right-to-work" as established by the Taft-Hartley Act.

it requires that any worker who's fired for pro-union activity be immediately reinstated while their unfair labor practice process or civil lawsuit is going through the process. This would be enormous just on its own, because it changes the entire veto structure of illegal firing. As it stands, employers fire people and maybe maybe have to pay some back wages in a couple years when the worker has found another job and is unlikely to come back. This would reverse the balance of power, such that the worker is immediately back and other workers can see that they can speak up without getting fired, which makes illegal firings a giant waste of time and money for management.

In terms of stuff that's not on this list that I would add, I would say that an enormous difference could be made by simply making it illegal for management to lock-out their workers or hire scabs. You do that, and unions can win almost every strike.

Today is Yom Kippur

Shout out to all the queer Jews who have to explain this holiday to their queer friends.

Shout out to all the queer Jews who have friends that respond with laughter, or calling fasting child abuse, or asking why you even bother.

Shout out to all the queer Jews who feel conflicted over this holiday.

Shout out to all the queer Jews forced to participate (you deserve to make your own choices).

Shout out to all the queer Jews who are in traditional communities, and will read in tomorrow's torah reading that being queer is wrong

Shout out to all the queer Jews who feel the need to repent for their queerness (you are perfect the way you are).

Shout out to all the queer Jews who are tired of lying, and tired of repenting for lying.

Shout out to all the queer Jews who can only think of all the times and all the people they are lying to every time they read Al Chet (על חטא)

Shout out to all the queer Jews who think of how many less sins they'd commit if only they weren't queer.

Shout out to all the queer Jews who do not feel safe today.

Shout out to all the queer Jews who do not know if or when they will ever feel safe on Yom Kippur.

You are all accepted here. You deserve a voice. My DMs are open if you need someone to talk to. This holiday can be challenging, but you will make it through.

btw it's worth saying here! I'm pro-palestine, and my content isn't for anyone who thinks this isn't a genocide or that "peaceful protesting" was ever an option.

I'm a conservative conversion student with a mikveh date of 08/07 and I wish I was excited but it just feels hollow. I've been at this for 7 years on my own, and 1 year with a rabbi. He had me take a class (that was far to beginner for me, which I mentioned to him and he said “I don’t want you wasting your time on this class if you’re not getting anything from it… well see you in class”) and we've only met individually like 4 times - we've literally talked for less than an hour total. Our last meeting was 5 minutes and consisted of “so do you want go to the mikveh soon?”. It’s been my call this whole way, he hasn’t expressed any opinion or really guided me anywhere. He hasn’t really gauged where I’m at at all, no “how many times a day are you praying?” or “how did you celebrate shavuos?” etc. It just feels so frustrating. I would convert modox if I could but my fiance is not jewish and I'm not asking him to convert. I just feel like I haven't learned anything and I haven’t been challenged at all through this process. It just rubs me the wrong way because this should be hard, some people should get a no, and we should be pushed. Sorry for venting, I’m just feeling really down about this whole thing.

I know how frustrating this must be for you, and I agree that it should be hard and some people should be told no. At my university's Hillel, the rabbi there has an "introduction to judaism" class that meets for one hour a week for eighteen weeks and at the end of it if you get a good grade they just ask if you want to convert and if you do, you get a mikveh date (This class had no testing, and was based entirely on if you just showed up). I was talking about this with the rabbi and asked if they'd ever turned someone away, or if they had ever had someone go to the beit din and determine the person was not yet ready, and they said no, not in all twenty years they had done this class. I knew someone in this class so I asked for the syllabus and reading list, and it was incredibly lack-luster and didn't explain a lot of core concepts of Jewish observance or history (Obviously, how can you learn 4,000 years of history in 18 hours?), did not require you to read the Torah, or to learn any Hebrew at all. The class didn't teach prayers for different occasions, nor did it touch on bible stories and characters. These were supposedly conservative conversions.

I'm not saying "Oh reform and conservative conversions are always bad because theyre not observant etc etc" because I don't believe that, and if an orthodox rabbi did the same thing I would also think it wasn't good enough. What I AM saying is, regardless of whatever movement the person is converting to, they deserve to have a good and thorough education, enough to be able to determine it fits with their wants, needs, and lifestyle. They deserve to know what they're getting into, and are really (in my opinion) owed time, attention, dedication, and care by their sponsoring rabbi. You deserve to have a rabbi who cares enough to make the course more challenging or complex for your needs, and who is willing to make time to meet with you outside of class. You deserve to know about the mitzvot you're going to be saddled with after you convert, because it's not like you can just de-convert, and you should be educated on the various halachic interpretations to decide which one fits for you. You should be thoroughly educated on Jewish history so you understand the people and culture you are joining, and the burden (and blessing) you are putting on your own shoulders by being a part of the Jewish people. To do any less is a disservice to you.

You have two options, the way I see it. You can either complete this conversion, which will be relatively simple from how it sounds, and you will officially be recognized as a Jew by both conservative and reform movements. This will allow you to go on Birthright and other similar programs (internships, educational trips, job offers to Israel, etc) and opens the door for you to go to a seminary or yeshiva that accepts conservative conversions. If you aren't satisfied still, you can try to do another conversion through modox. Or, you can forego the conservative conversion and seek out a modox rabbi instead.

A lil lady? For your time?

i would like to submit these screenshot of totally unrelated bits of united states history

anyways. just wanted to post these for no reason at all

Finished "The Children of the Glow"! I really really liked it actually, a nice bit of moral grayness! The final choice of how to publish the last piece did, in fact, have me going on a rant about how we should overthrow the governments of both locations because we have nothing to lose but our chains, and that's a compliment to it.

third wave feminism had its issues yes yes but frankly. i wish i was born 10 years earlier because having to spend my 20s in the andrew tate girl math decade fucking sucks

Surprised I'm not seeing more posts about this and want to make sure people are aware that France is RISING UP.

We are so used to perceiving everything we hear in terms of moralizing rules and regulations that sometimes even pure information may be interpreted as a reproach and this cannot be absorbed at all.

It may be that I am trying to attain something with these texts that either is not possible at all or is completely superfluous. For as long as you are not allowed to see something, you have no choice but to overlook it, to misunderstand it, to protect yourself against it in one way or another. But if you have already perceived it for yourself, then you don’t need me to tell you about it.

Alice Miller, For your own good. Hidden cruelty in child-rearing and the roots of violence, 1980

Came for the Twilight Renaissance, stayed for the Twilight Reformation.

i have a lot of leftist friends who are very strongly pro-voting and i have a lot of leftist friends who are very strongly anti-voting and i'm always telling them the same fucking thing: being a condescending asshole about your voting perspective is not going bridge that difference. it is just going to drive a further wedge in our movement.

MARI'S LIFE

—"A man/child's journey with, and recovery from, chronic mental illness."

*Mari's personal proclaimer: The word "God" can mean anything you "believe" in. Don't let this word and my personal beliefs stop you from your recovery; find a "GOD" and move forward; simply put, JUST BELIEVE.

The first time I actually "heard" God's voice was shockingly frightful. I was 8 years old.

At night, lying in bed, listening to music quietly while my family slept, I would quietly lie there and allow my mind to race until I finally accepted sleep into my body. This exercise began like this, listening to music, allowing my already racing thoughts to flow rapidly in and out of my brain, racing, at times screaming for release; I had to be crazy, right?

I was raised Catholic. I never quite understood church at all. We never had a bible in our home growing up, which looking back, seemed a bit odd to me, even as a child. Religious confusion, or religious shock, aftershock, and the residuals that fester in our soul until we can find release from the "Religious" thought process, that "bondage" that many of us have experienced in our spiritual upbringing. Whew!

So, with all of the madness racing through my mind and no one to turn to, I called on God. I don't recall an exact date, or what he said the first time I heard Him, but I was a frighteningly excited, and confused child.

More on this later folks, small bits at a time, similar to a therapy session was the only way Mari was able to have me help him to get his story out there. Please stay tuned and read past blogs to hear more of his amazingly arduous journey, and the journey is still very much alive in Mari, today.

Design Drawing by Christopher Dresser, Dated ca. 1883. Similar to the pattern on this vase by Dresser at the V&A Museum. Medium is graphite, ink and gouache on paper.

(Source: metmuseum.org)

even more weird victorian psychology/eugenics stuff..... yikes

Some nice light reading about Lithuanian paramilitary organizations past & present