Union membership, density, and -busters

News usually goes beyond a recitation of statements; merely presenting a company’s or a government’s
framing of some policy or action can be incomplete, misleading or false.

If a house fire occurs, coverage should include a cause, an estimated loss, etc. Was it arson or spontaneous combustion? Limited to smoke damage in the kitchen or a total loss requiring immediate demolition?

A recent example that got some attention but little context was the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics’ annual report on union density. Late last month, the BLS reported that the share of America’s workers in unions declined from 10.0% in 2023 to 9.9% in 2024.

First, of course, the number of dues-paying union members isn’t the same as the number of workers a union represents – especially in Right To Work (for less) states and after Supreme Court decisions allowing some public employees to more easily become “free riders,” enjoying the benefits of union representation without sharing the costs of organizing, bargaining and enforcing contracts.

Few stories mentioned the number of union members vs. the number of workers represented – a distinction with a HUGE difference. And far fewer tried to explain how and why the percentage is virtually stagnant.

“If a workplace is unionized, all workers in the bargaining unit get the benefits of being represented by the union, even if they are not union members,” the Economic Policy Institute reminds us. “Thus, the share of workers represented by a union is somewhat higher than the share of workers who are members of a union. Because all workers in a bargaining unit get the benefit of being represented by the union, union representation is the more relevant statistic.”

So, 16.0 million U.S. workers were represented by a union. This was 11.1% – more than one in ten – of all wage and salary workers. That 16.0 million was a drop from 2023, but just 170,000; the 11.1% unionization rate was down, but barely, from 11.2%.

Next, people are right to be curious why, if more than two-third of Americans approve of unions, according to Gallup (which has showed such support grew from 48% in 2010 to 70% in 2024), more unionization hasn’t followed. Popular approval is at its highest level in more than half a century (and much higher than the approval rating for corporations).

And some wonder how, if the surge in approval has translated to active interest – petitions to unionize more than doubled since 2021, and were up 27% just last year, and about 1,800 union elections were held in 2024 – statistics didn’t budge much.

Maybe most startling is poll results showing that 60% of U.S. workers would join a union if they could.

Perhaps not fully appreciated by many regular Americans – but certainly realized by labor and its allies – is that the increasing disparity between the powerful rich and the rest of us for years has been used to prevent reform and attack organized labor. Further, there are few consequences for employers to break the laws that established workers’ rights.

As AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler said, “Corporations and billionaires continue to union bust with impunity.”

EPI in a recent report agreed, noting, “The disconnect between the growing interest in unionization and declining unionization rates can be explained by the fact that there are powerful forces blocking the will of workers: aggressive opposition from employers combined with labor law that is so weak that it doesn’t truly protect workers’ right to organize.

The National Labor Relations Act guarantees most private-sector workers the right to join unions and bargain collectively. However, decades of federal policy and court decisions have weakened labor law, and employers often exploit weaknesses in U.S. labor law to mount aggressive opposition to unions. For example, the lack of civil monetary penalties for breaking the law allows employers to violate workers’ rights with little to no repercussions.

“Decades of attacks on unions both on the federal and state levels have made it hard for workers to form and maintain unions,” EPI continued. “Further, weaknesses in federal labor law have made it possible for employers to oppose unions.”

Americans may be at a moment of truth, Shuler added.

“Working people are ready for some long overdue change,” she said. “And more and more people are starting to realize that change starts when we stand together and demand it.”

New analysis: Torrent of Trump orders hard to keep track

Remembering the number and danger of dozens of Executive Orders issued by President Trump and his inner circle in recent weeks is difficult, like treading the surface after going over a waterfall.

Try to catch your breath, with a little help from the Labor Paper.

Workers, seniors, the needy and veterans all are especially targeted, but literally every American could be affected by the onslaught of decrees from the White House. Early this month, a single issue of the Washington Post had these headlines:

“CDC removes gender, equity references in public health material”

“Large sets of data are being scrubbed of references to transgender and LGBTQ people, among others, which could compromise their use in research”

“Trump sketches unprecedented plan for sweeping tariffs”

“Justice Department orders FBI purge, review of staff who touched Jan. 6 cases “

“D.C. U.S. attorney fires Jan. 6 prosecutors, launches new probes”

The same week, one afternoon edition of the Chicago Tribune was dominated by:

“Trump’s orders have upended immigration”

“Trump’s FBI director pick Patel insists he has no ‘enemies list’ ”

“RFK Jr. on the defensive over his vaccine vows in hearing”

“National parks are on the chopping block as Trump cuts federal jobs”

“Destabilizing Mexico would make U.S. less safe and wealthy”

“Trump blames DC plane crash on Biden, diversity initiatives”

 

Concerning that last accusation (uttered without proof), the Meidas Touch news site – edited by Marine, former prosecutor and ex-Florida Republican Ron Filipkowski – commented, “Trump's handling of this situation should be treated as one of the biggest scandals in presidential history.”

 

Again: Inhale.

But try to take in this flurry (or fury) from early February. Trump announced:

his endangering the lives of critics including Gen. (ret.) Mark Milley, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, National Security adviser John Bolton and public health expert Dr. Anthony Fauci by removing their security details; starting to round up immigrants, planning to deport or incarcerate them at Guantanamo, and withholding federal aid to states and cities unless they help; killing funding for the bipartisan Infrastructure law; canceling all federal collective bargaining agreements reached before he was president, notifying 1,100 Environmental Protection Agency workers they could be fired, and offering more than 2 million other federal workers an inducement to quit (although Congress hasn’t authorized the payout); that the State and Defense Departments will no longer recognize Black History Month and making plans to restore the names of 10 renamed Army installations to previous names of traitorous Confederates; strong “free speech” protections but new steps to sue or shut down speech he didn’t like; replacing prominent news media at the Pentagon with right-wing outlets such as Breitbart and OAN;

purging the FBI of its six top executives, more than 20 heads of field offices and dozens of federal prosecutors who’d worked on cases involving Jan. 6; the possible elimination of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and also withholding disaster aid from California unless it passes a stricter voter ID law; threats to take over Canada, Gaza, Greenland, and Panama’s Canal Zone; possibly considering convicted felon Rod Blagojevich, the impeached Illinois governor, as ambassador to Serbia (according to Politico); firing the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts board and naming himself its new chair; criticism of safety precautions about peanuts, schools using “spork” utensils, and restrictions on plastic straws; anticipated cutbacks for the National Endowment for the Arts and public media; ideas for opening public land for exploitation; and firing at least 17 independent Inspector Generals who monitor government corruption.

Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service, told the Washington Post that Trump “is destroying whatever gets in the way of what he wants to do. That includes having loyalty be the primary screen for choosing his direct lieutenants and crushing the civil service and converting it into a tool for his private agenda, as opposed to a force for the public good and the rule of law.”

 

Trump also:

fired the National Labor Relations lead attorney and one of its Board members so the agency won’t have a quorum to conduct business; rescinded Temporary Protected Status for about 600,000 Venezuelans who came to the U.S. at that offer; backed unelected billionaire Elon Musk who said he was killing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which had recovered $19.6 billion for consumers since it started in 2011; supported Republican proposals to tax worker benefits and GOP efforts to cut federal support to Medicaid (which helped some 770,000 Illinoisans, according to the state’s Healthcare and Family Services), revoked the Equal Employment Opportunity program for workers and businesses; and threatened punishing tariffs imposed on Canada, Mexico, Colombia and China.

In The Atlantic magazine, Ronald Brownstein notes that the combination of steep tariffs, the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants, major cuts in federal health-care programs like Medicaid, and attacks on funding for public schools or even eliminating the Dept. of Education altogether could produce a “quadruple whammy” for much of small-town and rural America – MAGA country.

Ag columnist Alan Guebert wrote, “Less than two weeks into the Trump Administration we have some idea about the overall meaning: picking unnecessary fights with vital ag trade partners like Colombia, firing government watchdogs like the U.S. Department of Agriculture's inspector general, attempting to repeal the 14th Amendment's guarantee to birthright citizenship, and making deep cuts to critical food aid programs like SNAP.

 

But wait: There’s more!

Before that series of edicts – after November’s election through last month’s Inauguration – Trump also:

* freed all 1,600 or so people convicted in connection with the Jan. 6 insurrection;

* withdrew from the global climate agreement, the World Health Organizations and the International Criminal Court;

* removed thousands of webpages from Health & Human Services, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Agriculture, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;

* paused USAID and other federal funding for organizations in a power grab called “impoundment,” which illegally prevents spending funds Congress authorizes.

“The administration has carried out unlawful budget freezes, massive civil servant layoffs and unconstitutional firings, directed federal funding specifically to places with ‘higher birthrates,’ allowed an unelected and unchecked billionaire to determine what our tax dollars are worthy of funding, and more.”

Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) told the Associated Press. “This is unacceptable and dangerous.”

 

Trump:

* let Musk send staffers to access Americans’ private information at federal agencies including the Office of Personnel Management, Treasury, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Small Business Administration, and the General Services Administration, and payment procedures, which some lawmakers said was a hostile takeover of the U.S. government’s digital backbone. Musk said, “Regulations, basically, should be default gone.”

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said, “I am deeply alarmed that Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, who has been given broad access to the resources of the American people without election, vetting, or confirmation by anyone, has reportedly gained access to the Treasury Department's payments system. This access could potentially give him control of the funds Congress has appropriated for health care, for housing, for child care, for small businesses, and for students.”

* Trump’s nominations to his cabinet look too much like a team of Village (Idiot) People, highlighted by ex-Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (with ties to Russia and ex-Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad), conspiracy theorist RFK Jr. (who compared the CDC to “Nazi death camps” and claimed COVID-19 was created to spare Ashkenazi Jews), and ex-Florida AG Pam Bondi (a lobbyist and one of Trump’s defense attorneys). She was confirmed as U.S. Attorney General after swearing under oath she would not seek revenge against Trump’s political opponents, and then not long after taking office setting up a “weaponization working group” to investigate those who worked on Trump cases at state or national levels.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said, “Pam Bondi has passed Donald Trump’s Attorney General loyalty test with flying colors, whether by peddling election lies or saying she will prosecute perceived enemies, and her unflinching loyalty to the president-elect raises serious concerns about the future of an independent Justice Department.”

 

Lurking in the shadows: ‘collaborators’?

As Trump and his Project 2025 handlers stomp on the Constitution, trash government and insult allies and half of the U.S. electorate, Republican leaders seem Mad.

As in, “What? Me worry?”

U.S. Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Peoria) seems comfortable staying in lockstep with members of the GOP who appear to bounce between quivering like blackmail victims or go-along-to-get-along members of the kidnap gang eager to share the ransom, having given up on the hostage – our republic.

At a recent stop in Bloomington-Normal, the 56-year-old Congressman entering his 10^th year on Capitol Hill, seemingly excused Musk and his ilk with making cuts, commenting, “I think it’s helpful anything in the federal government to try to make sure money is spent in an effective way, especially when we’re $36 trillion in debt.

“I’m going to give the new administration some discretion in what they want to do,” he told WCBU public radio.

Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) in the Senate said, “This isn't about politics. This isn't about policy. This isn't about Republican versus Democrat. This is about tampering with the structure of our government, which will ultimately undermine its ability to protect the freedom of our citizens. If our defense of the Constitution is gone, there's nothing left to us.”

After appealing to his Republican colleagues to “say no to the undermining and destruction of our constitutional system,” King asked them, “Are there no red lines? Are there no limits?”

Indeed, Trump’s Project 2025 overreaches and Musk’s intrusions have provoked lawsuits and a public response in the streets and through the Capitol’s phone system. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said the Senate’s switchboard usually receives about 40 calls per minute, but was getting 1,600 calls each minute from people complaining about Musk.

And Trump and his regime have had some defeats in the courts, too. A pro-democracy coalition of unions, democracy groups, state Attorneys General and others have won major victories, from stopping Trump’s illegal rewrite of the Constitution’s citizenship provisions to blocking his federal firing scam.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), sounding the alarm in Washington, encouraged more grassroots engagement, saying, “We don’t have years. We don’t have months. We have days to stop the destruction of democracy.”

It’s worth remembering some historical perspective. As author Raymond Lonergan quoted Louis Brandeis in his 1941 biography of the U.S. Supreme Court Justice, “Mr. Justice Brandeis, Great American,” Brandeis said, “We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both.”