Organizational support for Illinois' Workers Rights Amendment starts to build

On June 2, the Peoria Labor Temple hosted a “Vote Yes for Workers Rights” fundraiser sponsored by West Central Building Trades, the West Central Illinois Labor Council, the Union Labor Life Insurance Company (ULLICO) and the Illinois AFL-CIO, with proceeds going toward fighting for workers rights and against an expected barrage of attacks on a proposed amendment to Illinois’ state constitution.

 

Last year, the Illinois legislature adopted Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment No. 11, which will be on the general-election ballot Nov. 8. It would prohibit “any law that interferes with, negates, or diminishes the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively over their wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment and workplace safety.”

 

Illinois AFL-CIO President Tim Drea said, “For the first time, Illinois voters will have the chance to enshrine ironclad protections for working people in the Illinois Constitution.”

 

The proposed amendment doesn’t protect only unions. It’s about EMPLOYEES, whether they’re in a union or not. It would be a CONSTITUTIONAL right.

 

Again, this state amendment wouldn’t provide union perks or worker privileges like free housing, discounted transportation, or clothing allowances. It simply guarantees rights for workers on the job.

 

The amendment has three parts:

* Employees would gain the fundamental right to organize and bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to protect their economic welfare and safety at work;

* it prohibits any law from impeding employees’ right to organize and bargain collectively; and

* that includes laws prohibiting contracts requiring union membership, such as so-called “Right To Work” bans on employer/union agreements to mandate workers represented by unions to share in the costs of representation (and the amendment would apply to all levels of government, from public schools and townships to cities and counties).

“If we work in this country, we should have justice,” said Abel Muhammad at a rally for International Workers Day at Chicago’s Union Park on May 1. “If we have children and family in this country, we should have justice. And we shouldn’t have to beg for it.”

 

To pass, the proposed amendment will need 60% of those voting on the measure, or a majority of those voting in the overall election, and the political mood for change seems very good.

 

The COVID pandemic exposed inequities in health care, child care and job safety; grassroots engagement increased since Floyd George’s 2020 murder; a sense of unfairness has grown; and public support – increasingly among young Americans – is strong.

Everyday people appreciate regular working people and their efforts, from “essential workers” to the labor movement. Support for unions has never been greater, according to Gallup last year. About 68% of Americans approve of organized labor, up 20% since 2009. And support is especially strong among younger workers (GenZ and Millennials), who approve unions by 77%.

Of course, only 10.3% of the country’s workers had union representation in 2021, down from 20.1% in 1981, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in January. Just 6.1% of the workers in the private sector are represented by unions.

On the federal level, the PRO Act labor-law reform is marooned by a thtreatened Republican filibuster. But Illinois is a comparable oasis in a desert of anti-labor states, and now the General Assembly has empowered voters to establish workers rights.

Further, there’s positive, if modest momentum, too, with organizing or new contracts at colleges and museums, retailers such as Amazon and Starbucks, and tech, game and digital companies.

Meanwhile, the world’s 10 richest men more than doubled their fortunes, from $700 billion to $1.5 trillion during the first two years of a pandemic that has seen the incomes of 99% of humanity fall and over 160 million more people forced into poverty, according to an Oxfam report out this winter. Nine out of the top ten richest men in the world are Americans.

They include Elon Musk, whose wealth increased from $24.6 billion to $234 billion (851%), from March 2020 to March 2022, according to Forbes. During that same time, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos’ wealth grew from $113 billion to $161.5 billion (46%), and Bill Gates’ wealth jumped from $98 billion to $129.5 billion (32%).

College graduates’ support for labor has increased from 55% in the late 1990s to around 70% in recent years, and is higher among younger college graduates, according to Gallup. College-educated workers are translating support to action. They’re skeptical of employers’ “union-avoidance” consultants, identify as workers after surviving more than a decade of lousy job prospects, and feel confident.

 

But a juggernaut of anti-worker ads, mailers, billboards and commercials loom, so pro-amendment messaging that’s accurate (though expensive) is needed.

 

“Advertising on various platforms will start” soon, said Clint Drury, Executive Director of the West Central Building & Construction Trades Council,

 

“The money can come from [unions’] general funds, PAC funds and labor-management funds,” he continued. “There’s no limit on the contribution amount.”

 

The workers rights amendment will need financial backing from unions, community allies, and individuals,and the months-long campaign is expected to cost millions of dollars to combat anticipated attacks and misinformation.

 

That’s in spite of the proposed amendment – co-spomsored by Peoria lawmakers Sen. Dave Koehler and Rep. Jehan Gordon-Booth – having had huge, bipartisan support in the legislature, with the Senate passing it 49-7 (with 2 not voting) and the House 80-30 (with 3 voting Present).

 

In west-central Illinois, the only No votes among lawmakers came from Reps. Thomas Bennett (R-106), Dan Brady (R-105), Tim Butler (R-87), Keith Sommer (R-88) Ryan Spain (R-73) and Dan Swanson (R-74), and Sens. Jil Tracy (R-47) and Sally Turner (R-44). But in the House, Republicans Norine Hammond (93) and Mark Luft (91) voted Yes, as did Senate Republicans Sue Rezin (38) and Win Stoller (37).

 

“Everybody needs to pitch in,” said Chicago Federation of Labor president Bob Reiter. “The enemy’s at the gate.”

Donations and offers of other assistance may be sent to Vote Yes for Workers’ Rights, 180 N. Stetson Ave., Suite 1529, Chicago, IL 60601.

The ‘Joy Silk’ doctrine was labor law for 20 decades before it died at the hands of conservatives. Now it could be revived.

 Joy Silk might sound like an experimental fabric or a punk band, but the name actually refers to a U.S. labor law tenet that functioned well for decades until a conservative takeover of the National Labor Relations Board in the 1960s killed it.

In effect for 20 years, Joy Silk was another casualty of a long war on workers.

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA: the Wagner Act) was enacted in 1935, and opponents have chipped away at it ever since. It gave workers the right to form unions and bargain collectively, and for a decade, it worked. The labor movement grew to about one-third of the nation’s workforce and over the next several years, despite a Republican Congress limiting the law’s scope with the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947, unions remained healthy.

But starting in the 1960s,  membership started eroding due to the Landrum-Griffin Act (1959), President Reagan breaking the air-traffic controllers strike (1981, signaling an OK to “permanenly replace” lawful strikers), and court rulings ranging from “Beck” to “Janus” – all strengthening U.S. business’ relentless opposition to worker rights.

Although the NLRA is still the law, penalties employers face for lawbreaking are so weak that violations became common and organizing relatively rare. In fact, 21^st century employers are charged with violating federal law 41.5% of the time in union lection campaigns, according to data compiled by tbe Economic Policy Institute.

Now, however, the National Labor Relations Board’s Jennifer Abruzzo is trying to actually enforce existing labor laws and revive past practices that were overturned throughout years of fierce attacks on unions.

Confirmed as General Counsel last summer on a party-line vote, Abruzzo became the agency’s chief prosecutor and in recent weeks initiated a series of actions.

First, she said that mandatory, anti-union “captive audience” meetings should be Unfair Labor Practices since they’re coercive behavior – a violation of the NLRA. In her three-page message to NLRB field offices, Abruzzo said these meetings — where employers condemn unions  — “inherently involve an unlawful threat that employees will be disciplined or suffer other reprisals if they exercise their protected right not to listen to such speech.”

Limiting such one-sided meetings wouldn’t violate companies’ free-speech rights, she added.

“Imposing that long-overdue protection of employees’ right to refrain will not impair employers’ statutory or constitutional freedom of expression,” she wrote

Next, Abruzzo followed up with memos suggesting requiring employers to reimburse unions for costs incurred in fighting Unfair Labor Practices, increasing “back pay” awards to workers after they are illegally fired, and stepping up use of NLRB injunctions stopping employers’ illegal activities.

But Abruzzo – raised in a union household in Queens and an NLRB attorney for decades – proposed an even more significant idea: calling for the Joy Silk doctrine to be reinstated.

The doctrine grew out of the Joy Silk Mills case in 1949, when the NLRB decided that “if a union provides evidence that a majority of workers want to unionize,” employers should voluntarily recognize the union by default unless they have “good-faith doubt” regarding that evidence. Further, “if there’s an Unfair Labor Practice, meaning the employer broke the law, then it is presumed that the workers wanted to join a union.”

Under Joy Silk, employers who refused to recognize a union’s legitimate majority status had been compelled to recognize the union and to enter into bargaining with it, except in rare instances.

“Currently, a bargaining order may only issue in cases where an ‘employer’s misdeeds are so widespread they make a fair election impossible,’ a standard which the brief argues has ‘failed to deter employers’ from interfering with elections,” writes Fran Swanson from Harvard Law. “Under a return to Joy Silk, an employer would be ordered to recognize and bargain with a union if the union is supported by a majority of workers in the bargaining unit, even absent an election, unless the employer can show that its refusal to bargain is based on its good faith doubt about the union’s majority status.”

Joy Silk, which was established in 1949 by an NLRB dominated by Democrat Harry Truman’s appointees, was essentially dismantled in 1969 when the Board, dominated by Republican Richard Nixon’s appointees, during oral arguments in the Gissell Packing Co. case, said it was abandoning the doctrine.

Although a U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the decision, eventually the U.S. Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, agreed with the NLRB’s 1969 decision.

Under Gissel, employers who refused to recognize a union’s legitimate majority status were compelled merely to run or rerun an election among their employees to determine union status. That let employers delay recognition and bargaining, in some cases for years, and to intimidate workers from voting in a union.

Before Joy Silk was struck down, charges of employer intimidation totaled about 1,000 cases a year.

“There were many more elections that were untainted” [by employer intimidation], Abruzzo told The American Prospect magazine.

Once the softball remedies of Gissel became the standard, Unfair Labor Practice charges exploded to a peak of 6,493 in 1981,

Abruzzo’s recommendation has been overlooked for decades,

“Even labor lawyers had forgotten about Joy Silk,” University of California - Berkeley labor law professor Catherine Fisk told The American Prospect.

Abruzzo’s proposal must be considered by the current NLRB. If the full Board agrees with Abruzzo and most of the 500-some lawyers she supervises, the doctrine  probably would have to be considered and applied in a specific case where the situation is applicable – such as the Iron Workers’ dispute with G&S Integrated in Morton.

“Because Joy Silk has been suspended for generations, it’s so much harder than it needs to be or should be to exercise your basic rights as a worker,” said Ben Scroggins, an Iron Workers District Council organizer. “We should have been able to walk in and say, ‘OK, let’s negotiate,’ and not have to continue fighting for months to gain what the workers had already proven — that they are a union.”

Is there an ‘elephant in the room’ for GOP candidates for Illinois governor?

 Many Illinoisans aren’t that aware of the positions of most of the Republicans competing in the June 28 primary to unseat Gov. J. B. Pritzker in November’s general election. There seem to be few public appearances, much less press conferences, and the elephant in the room may be where each stands on abortion.

Here are facts:

Six GOP candidates for governor will be on this month’s ballot (two others were removed), the Illinois State Board of Elections said at press time. In alphabetical order, they are:

Darren Bailey of Xenia, Richard C. Irvin of Aurora, Gary Rabine of Bull Valley, Paul Schimpf of Waterloo, Max Solomon of Hazel Crest, and Jesse Sullivan of Petersburg.

There’s virtual unanimity about corruption, crime, education, gun control, state pensions, and taxes, plus opposition to Pritzker, especially his response to the pandemic and his approach to budgeting. A rare public forum in Washington, Ill., on April 25 featured all of them except Irvin.

(Watch WEEK-TV’s video of the event on its Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?ref=watch_permalink&v=5202692536460317 ).

Meanwhile, a leaked draft by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito indicates that the court could overturn the landmark 1973 “Roe v. Wade” legalizing abortion, and leave its legality up to state lawmakers.

Former Republican Gov. Jim Edgar in May told Politico’s Shia Kapos, “Abortion is going to suffocate every other issue. It will be hard for candidates to talk about anything else.”

Edgar said Republicans then embraced the Roe decision when it passed. (Another fact: Republican judges Harry Blackmun, Warren Burger and Potter Stewart agreed with Democrats William Douglas, William Brennan, Thurgood Marshall and Lewis Powell in the 7-2 vote, with Democrat Byron White joining Republican William Rehnquist in opposition.)

Edgar added that it wasn’t until the Christian Right stressed the issue that the GOP turned from abortion rights, at least publicly.

Most people have supported Roe v. Wade for years. This month, an ABC News/Washington Post said majorities of Americans still support upholding Roe, say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and that abortion should be a decision made by a woman and her doctors, not lawmakers.

(Fact: In Illinois, 56% think abortions should be legal in all/most cases, 41% think it should be illegal in all/most cases, and 3% aren’t sure.)

“One of the good things Roe v. Wade did was take [abortion] off the front burner,” Edgar told Politico. “Now, it’s the whole burner. It’s going to change the political landscape and what people talk about and what people worry about.”

Even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe, Illinois state law protects women’s choice to terminate their pregnancies (along with California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Vermont and other states).

However, Bailey and Sullivan have said they’d try to end Illinois’ laws on abortion; Irvin has said he’s “pro-life” but concedes exceptions could be made for incest, the health of the mother and rape, and he wants to reinstate parental notifications for abortions; Rabin has said he is “unapologetically pro-life”; Schimpf when he was a state senator opposed the Reproductive Health Act (signed by Pritzker in 2019) and the measure permitting state-funded Medicaid coverage for abortion (signed by Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner in 2017); and Solomon’s website had said Solomon’s opposed to “all bureaucratic mechanisms that remove parental consent and notification for our daughters under 17 and the expansion of abortion access with taxpayer funding.”

Bailey is a state Representative, Irvin is mayor of Aurora, Rabine is a businessman, Schimpf is a former state Senator, Solomon is a lawyer and ordained Christian minister, Jesse Sullivan is an entrepreneur.

For more information, voters can turn to the nonpartisan, nonprofit Ballotpedia.org, or to candidates’ web sites (which, of course, present just part of their story, but it’s at least a part and a start):

baileyforillinois.com, irvinbourne.com, rabineforgovernor.com, schimph4illinois.com, maxsolomon.org (which at less time is offline, but his Facebook page is m.facebook.com/ready2serv), and jesesullivan.com.

Peoria location becomes one of state’s first unionized Starbucks

Applause, cheers and hugs erupted at the Peoria Labor Temple, where an April 26 viewing party watched the National Labor Relations Board open and count mailed ballots in Campustown Starbucks workers’ vote whether or not to unionize.

Live via Zoom, the NLRB announced the results: 9-2 in favor of unionizing, with 1 voided ballot and no challenged ballots – one of the first Illinois Starbucks to vote to unionize.

Beforehand, Dave Clark, a regional rep with Workers United, an affiliate of Service Employees International Union (SEIU), had sat on a folding chair and express his confidence.

“This is pretty much a done deal,” he said.

Afterward, Jon Gill, a Campustown barista, said, “Workers’ power is coming back in a force that we have not seen in decades. It proves that workers can fight and win against massive corporations like Starbucks.

“We’re feeling incredibly empowered,” Gill continued. “Workers do have power, and if they organize, they can reach that power. We’re feeling incredibly empowered.”

Nationwide, some 230 Starbucks stores have filed with the NLRB to vote, and at least 32 locations in 31 states have unionized (3 voted no), covering more than 5,000 workers. In addition, workers voted to unionize at Starbucks roasteries in New York City and in Seattle – 2½ miles from Starbucks headquarters.

Starbucks has about 9,000 U.S. stores

Of course, under U.S. labor law, the unioniaation vote is just one step. Starbucks will probably appeal every NLRB ruling, said Carlos Ginard from SEIU’s Chicago and Midwest Regional Joint Board of Workers United (CMRJB).

“Starbucks challenged half the ballots in Kansas City,” Ginard said. “Starbucks will challenge results, if not ballots.

“In some ways, it’s a sad situation,” he continued. “It opens up who Starbucks really is: not what it claimed, the marketing image of a hip, progressive place. It’s all a scam.”

In other markets, corporate campaigns and outreach efforts are gaining support from clergy, city councils and other community members. Gill said workers are preparing.

“We don’t expect them to necessarily play fair,” Gill said. “We hope that they do.”

Starbucks workers’ issues include better wages and benefits, and also input in scheduling their hours.

“Starbucks says they can’t afford to pay better wages, but it spends thousands an hour on ‘union-avoidance’ union-busters,” Ginard said.

Elsewhere that same week, a 33%-larger Starbucks in Cary, Ill., voted 17-4 mere minutes before Peoria/Campustown, becoming Illinois’ first unionized Starbucks; a Baltimore Starbucks voted for the union 14-0; two stores in the Washington, D.C., area voted for the union 30-2 and 24-1 and a Hopewell, N.J., Starbucks went union 15-1.

The following week, a second Peoria Starbucks – on Pioneer Parkway at Knoxville Avenue – on May 3 filed a petition with the NLRB for representationwith Workers United.