|
Homeland Security targets immigrants
working with hazardous chemicals
By Jessica LaBumbard
Dec. 1 — New cars are shiny because of a special and toxic
chemical that’s added to their paint jobs.
At Powder Cote II, outside Detroit, undocumented Mexican immigrants
paint the car parts (using paint with this toxic additive) that are
used by the Big Three auto companies.
Inadequate training and the cumulative effects of daily exposure pose
significant threats to their safety and health. In early October a new
and pressing threat was added to the lives of these workers: the threat
of arrest and deportation.
Citing national security concerns, the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE)-a section of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)-arrested
58 undocumented workers at Powder Cote II, with help from the company,
solely because their job is to work with these dangerous chemicals.
ICE and Powder Cote II were brought together by the domestic front of
the War on Terror.
Companies across the country will find themselves in a similar relationship
with ICE, as ICE is in the process of reviewing employee files of companies
that work with a range of chemicals to determine whether the workers
pose a threat to national security.
While reviewing the employee files of Powder Cote II, ICE discovered
that many workers were undocumented. Management was most likely presented
with the choice of facilitating mass arrests in the plant, or paying
a $10,000 fine per undocumented worker.
The company apparently opted to cooperate with the agency in a plan
to arrest undocumented Mexican workers at the plant.
The company scheduled a mandatory meeting for the morning of Oct. 6,
in which the workers were told their health care plans would be discussed.
Once all of the workers were gathered, the supervisor opened the door
to welcome not representatives from the insurance company, but rather
three ICE agents who proceeded to read a list of names and make arrests.
Most of these workers were back in Mexico within two days, having signed
a “Voluntary Departure,” which is essentially a waiving of
one’s right to a hearing in return for immediate removal to the
worker’s home country.
The Border Patrol and ICE frequently pressure people to sign this paper
without informing them of their right to a hearing because it is an
efficient way to remove large numbers of people.
A few other workers had enough knowledge of immigration procedures to
request a hearing, and are currently free on bond.
Inadequate training and the cumulative effects of daily exposure to
toxic chemicals posed a serious threat to workers at Powder Cote II.
In October a new and pressing threat was added: the threat of arrest
and deportation.
Undocumented workers at Powder Cote II reported that they are forced
to achieve higher levels of production than US-born co-workers.
Mexican and US-born workers work separate lines at Powder Cote II. Mexican
workers say that their line is often required to pick up the slack for
the US workers.
The supervisors also use other tactics to divide the US-born workforce
from the immigrant workforce.
Supervisors reportedly told arrested workers that it was their African-American
co-workers who had called immigration on them, though there is no evidence
that this is the case.
By assisting in the arrests of their workers, the company avoided government
sanctions, yet Powder Cote II management has requested the return of
the workers who are still in the United States. Management has also
promised, via word of mouth, to rehire those who can survive another
treacherous crossing from Mexico to the US.
Workers who attempt to return from Mexico risk being charged with a
felony if they are caught undertaking a second crossing or after their
arrival.
Arrests and deportations similar to Powder Cote II have begun to spread
to workplaces across the country. In a well-publicized action in late
October, ICE arrested more than 250 cleaners employed by contractors
at Wal-Mart.
Though these arrests were for different reasons than the arrests at
Powder Cote II, it is clear that the DHS, via ICE, has no qualms about
attacking workers in their places of work, but rather is targeting workers
quite specifically.
Because undocumented workers have few rights, are quickly removed from
the country, and tend to be a private community because of their legal
status, their arrests and deportations occur under the radar of the
broader public. This lack of attention leaves them vulnerable to continued
exploitation.
Source: Labor Notes
Borders workers strike over poor pay &
benefits
By Sheila McClear
Dec. 1 — On the morning of November 8, amid the clean,
tree-lined streets and coffee shops, restaurants, and movie theaters
of Ann Arbor, passers-by could see a sight that most of the college
town’s residents weren’t used to: a picket line.
The only thing more surprising than the strike, according to some residents,
was its target-Borders Books and Music.
The Borders workers, represented by United Food and Commercial Workers
Local 876, voted 27-1 to strike after rejecting management’s contract
offer, citing unfair labor practices and failure to negotiate on wage
and benefits issues.
After nine months of bargaining, “the contract gave us absolutely
nothing,” one worker said.
Borders is the second-largest bookstore chain in the country; only two
of the company’s more than 400 stores nationwide have union representation.
Not only is Ann Arbor the site of the flagship Borders store, it is
also home to Borders’ corporate headquarters.
It is also the first Borders to have ever been struck in the company’s
30-year history.
The average Borders employee earns about $8.50 an hour, with starting
wages at $6.50; both figures fall below Ann Arbor’s living wage
ordinance minimums.
While employees are concerned that Borders wages and benefits are substandard,
they are even more concerned that Borders has refused to guarantee to
continue current benefits, as management has reserved the right to reduce
or eliminate health insurance and the 401(k) program.
The union has filed numerous unfair labor practice (ULP) charges since
January 2003, including charges that Borders illegally interrogated,
disciplined, and fired workers for supporting their union.
Borders recently agreed to settle some of these charges with the National
Labor Relations Board.
Days before the strike, another ULP was filed when members of Borders
management were seen illegally surveilling a rally in support of the
union.
Workers at the Ann Arbor store decided to organize in the fall of 2002.
Some cited the corporatization of the bookstore and a restructuring
aimed at de-skilling the workforce as reasons for their discontent;
others blamed low pay and unaffordable health care benefits.
Over 93% of the workers voted in favor of the UFCW in December 2002.
In both the union campaign and the strike, they have used the internet.
Employees created a website where Borders workers could go to voice
their concerns anonymously and talk about the conditions inside their
store, as well as learn about unions and struggles at other Borders
stores.
Some believe Borders nationally is a ripe target for the innovative
type of organizing campaign that Ann Arbor workers have mounted.
“Borders is the only retail giant in an unorganized sector which
had had repeated, spontaneous grassroots [union] campaigns,” says
one Borders organizer.
Over the last ten years, there have been nearly two dozen spontaneous
bouts of grassroots organizing campaigns-campaigns in which workers
decided among themselves to organize, without being approached by an
outside organizer-at Borders stores nationwide.
Of these, 12 went to a vote and six voted in favor of representation.
Three stores won contracts, none of which are still in place. Today,
a Minneapolis Borders is the only other store with union representation
(but currently without a contract).
A Borders organizer cites the fact that Borders is still a medium-sized
corporation and asks, “If retail is ever to be organized, where
is that test case going to come from? Not [from corporations like] Wal-Mart-they’re
too big, too powerful.”
Borders’ stance is firmly anti-union-an internal pamphlet entitled
“Union Awareness Training for Borders Managers” was leaked
in 1996 and published on various websites.
In a press release, Hal Brannan, a Borders employee of 18 years, said,
“We see a strike as the last option we have to get Borders to adopt
a new attitude.”
Adds another Borders organizer, “[The strike] isn’t just about
this store. It’s about whether or not workers in an unorganized
store, in an unorganized sector, can have a union and a contract. If
retail is ever to be organized, then we will have to face these situations”
Source: Labor Notes
US shoppers join counter revolution
Benefits battle could be one of most critical
strikes in American labor history
By Duncan Campbell
Los Angeles, California, Nov. 29 — Normally, during Thanksgiving
week, Vons supermarket in Santa Monica would be packed with shoppers
waiting in long lines at the checkout counters. This week, however,
the only lines are the picket lines outside the store as one of the
largest and what is described as one of the most critical strikes in
modern American labor history enters its eighth week.
More than 70,000 workers at 859 locations across central and southern
California have been on strike in protest against plans by supermarket
chains to cut their health and pension benefits. This week, the strike,
called by the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union, intensified
as Teamsters union drivers refused to cross picket lines at depots.
The strike’s most significant backers, however, are the shoppers
who are also refusing to cross picket lines, reducing turnover in some
stores to a third of the normal volume.
The stakes are high. Victory for the strikers would accelerate attempts
to unionize other big service companies, say union organizers; defeat
could have a chilling effect on recruitment. Union leaders say the strike
could be the first round in a fight in which major companies seek to
reduce traditional benefits because they claim they are being undercut
by vast non-union firms, such as Wal-Mart.
The strike started after talks broke down over the employers’ intention
to cut health and pension benefits by stopping paying their employees’
insurance premium. First the staff at Vons and Pavilions, two chains
owned by Safeway Inc, walked out. The following day, two other chains,
Ralphs and Albertsons, which are owned by Kroger, which bargains jointly
with Safeway, locked out their staff.
The strike is different from the traditional disputes because many shoppers
have personal relationships with checkout staff, whom they often know
by name. As a result, backing has been heavy, with the sound of honking
car horns, as drivers signal their support, now part of the rhythm of
life around striking stores. As a result, the companies are losing $40
million a week in sales to rival stores.
“Support has been very strong,” said Ralph Venegas, 50, who
has been with Vons for 14 years and was standing outside the store’s
main entrance. A customer had just dropped off a large Thanksgiving
pie for the picketers, others had come by with tacos and sandwiches.
“A lot of unions are starting to realise that this is much bigger
than just a retail clerks’ strike. If we go down, others will go
down.”
Linda, who has been working for Vons for 17 years and preferred to give
only her first name, said most members of the public supported the strike.
“A few are rude and say ‘It’s a free country, I’ll
shop where I like,’ but most support us.” She said people
knew the supermarkets were highly profitable. “After Enron, that
term ‘corporate greed’ came up and people understand that.”
Ellen Andreder, the UFCW spokeswoman in southern California, said other
unions were watching closely and support was coming from unions across
the US. “I’ve never seen anything like this in 19 years,”
Ms Andreder said. “This is probably the biggest strike, in terms
of numbers and locations, in the history of the labor movement. The
Teamsters and other unions see a direct link: no industry would be immune
[from cuts in benefits] if they get away with it here.
“Our feeling is that we have come too far as a society to lower
the bar and go back to the days of Carnegie and Rockefeller when the
more you exploited your workers, the more successful you were.”
Andreder said the companies had enjoyed a 91% increase in profits in
the past five years and could well afford to continue paying benefits.
Safeway has an annual turnover of $30 billion.
“This strike should send a message,” said Greg Denier, the
UFCW communications director. “Healthcare is a major issue now
and people understand and are sympathetic.” He said the dispute
would have a major effect on the union movement: “This experience
will shape a whole new generation of trade unionists. We’re getting
more and more members and support from other unions.
“But the most important support we have had is from the grocery
shopper, and the fact that they have not been crossing picket lines
is a sign of our success.”
The local Teamsters president, Jim Santangelo, declared on announcing
that the drivers would respect picket lines at depots, “We either
end this thing together or we die together.”
The companies have started to place whole-page advertisements in the
newspapers headlined “Read Between the Picket Lines” and subheaded
“We care about our employees, too.” The ad concludes, “We’re
united in our goal of reaching a contract settlement that addresses
the very real competitive threats and skyrocketing healthcare costs
we face.”
They argue that their employees continue to enjoy better health benefits
than “the vast majority of our customers.” Around 43 million
Americans have no health insurance at all.
The supermarket chains claim they are being undercut by non-union firms,
like Wal-Mart, which pay minimum wages. Wal-Mart, now the world’s
largest grocery store, is able to pay low wages, $9.64 an hour, compared
with an average of $15.98 for a union store worker, because of the vast
reservoir of immigrant labor in the US who will work cheaply and will
heed company warnings not to join a union for fear of losing their jobs.
The length of the strike and the level of support it has attracted is
an indication of the times, according to David Koff of the Hotel Employees
and Restaurant Employees International union, which this year helped
to organize a Freedom Ride of immigrant workers in buses across the
country to draw attention to their conditions. “There is a growing
awareness that living conditions are being driven relentlessly downwards
and that concentrates the mind,” Koff said. “Union leaders
realise that they have to support each other.
“The slogan ‘united we stand’ is often hollow but now
content is being poured into it. This is a critical fight. A lot of
the union leaders came of age in the 60s and 70s and they were inspired
by people like Cesar Chavez [the farmworkers’ leader] and Martin
Luther King and they understand the importance of solidarity.”
He said union membership in the private sector had slipped below 10%,
with membership overall around 13% of the workforce. One of the reasons
for the unions prospering in the service sector of supermarkets, catering,
and cleaning is that it is one of the few industries which cannot move
its operations abroad.
A new book, Insurrection, Citizen Challenges to Corporate Power, by
Kevin Danaher and Jason Mark, suggests that a growing number of people
are becoming politically active, spurred on by revelations of corporate
malpractice. Danaher, a co-founder of the San Francisco-based Global
Exchange, said yesterday of the strike: “If they can win, it would
be a significant boost. It would say to people if you persevere, you
can achieve anything.”
Source: Guardian (UK)
|
