![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Remember! Important history...
On this date exactly 100 years ago, a factory fire in a New York City high rise building took the lives of 146 workers. Most were young women, in their teens or early twenties, Jewish or Italian immigrants struggling to help their families. Factory work at that time was the sort of thing from which the term "sweatshop" is derived. A working day was ten or twelve hours long, and the work week was six days, though Saturday might be shortened a bit. A few places gave Jewish employees Saturday off but demanded that they work on Sunday to make up for it.
Anyway, the Triangle Shirtwaist factory was one such sweatshop. Employees operated sewing or cutting machines to make ladies' blouses ("shirtwaists") and occupied the 8th, 9th, and 10th floors of the building. It was a Saturday, between 4 and 5 pm, and the workers were just finishing up their day when a fire broke out. The exact cause was never determined, but it spread quickly through all three floors. In the panic, the outside fire escape collapsed, dumping many to their deaths. Two inside stairwells failed to save lives because the doors were kept locked. Ostensibly this was to keep union organizers from entering the shop, and to keep workers from leaving the area during the day. By the time a supervisor with the key was located, the stairwell thus opened was already filled with smoke and unusable. Some sought to escape the flames by jumping to their deaths from broken windows. Most suffocated or were trampled without ever getting to the roof or a window.
The city fire department arrived too late, and had no ladders to reach above the sixth floor in any case. The tragic aftermath left New York stunned and grieving for weeks, and some of the bodies were not officially identified until nearly a hundred years later, but were buried as "unknown" under a memorial to the workers who died that day.
It's a terrible story. The factory owners were fined for locking the stairwells (all of $75 or so) and ultimately a court awarded some money to the families of each identified victim, but nothing really large.
The emotional and political impact of this event, however, turned around legal attitudes toward unions and collective bargaining in the US. ILGWU, the International Ladies' Garment Workers Union, came into its own after that and was quickly followed by other worker negotiating groups and legal representative groups. Laws were passed recognizing the right of workers to join unions and to delegate negotiating rights to such unions. The courts eventually recognized the right of workers to bargain and to go on strike against an employer who violated contractual agreements or refused to negotiate in good faith.
For most of the 20th century, labor rights were accepted and recognized, though sometimes grudgingly. Workers received fair wages, profit sharing benefits, leave time with pay, and more reasonable work weeks. Yes, you can thank the labor unions for the concept of the "weekend." There was no such thing in the 19th century or earlier. (Just Sunday, which was often only a half day off to attend church.)
Now, on the hundredth anniversary of that ugly fire, we see politicians, employers, and even working voters trying to take away collective bargaining rights and void the contracts of public workers in an increasing number of states. They have forgotten the lessons of history, and seek to return to the old ways, when it was "every man for himself" and "dog eat dog" in the workplace, and employers could demand whatever they chose and kick an employee out without justification if she dared to question them. Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and New Hampshire are all trying to invalidate state employees' work agreements and bargaining rights.
OK, you assholes who voted for these tea party goons, sit there and feel smug about it. But guess what? When they're done stripping the public employees of their bargaining rights, benefits, and pensions, they won't stop there. Remember that the tea party doesn't stand for individual freedom from taxes so much as it stands for reduced regulation and taxation of corporate business. Private sector workers will be next, and no amount of union contract or representation will help. When they come for you, there will be no one left to complain. Just remember that when it happens, morons. You asked for it. You begged to be trampled into the mud and treated like manure for the benefit of capitalist profit that goes to the hyperwealthy and stays with them.
Economic recovery? There's no recovery. Sure retail sales are up. But did you check to see what's selling? Luxury goods, that's what. Nieman-Marcus is doing fine. Walmart is losing money because rich people don't shop there, and the rest of us can't afford to buy much. About 20% of the US population accounts for 70% or more of the discretionary spending. Those people are the wealthy, who have felt little pinch in this recession because they still got their million dollar bonuses and other perks, even after running their corporate asses right into the ground. These are the people the tea party really represents. They don't want to pay taxes. They don't want a government that might actually regulate their greed or business practices, or catch them in their frauds. They want to be able to rob their customers and employees with impunity. Think about this before you vote again for one of these so-called Republicans who are really nothing but carpet baggers. They haven't even as much heart as Ebenezer Scrooge had before he was visited by those three ghosts.
Anyway, the Triangle Shirtwaist factory was one such sweatshop. Employees operated sewing or cutting machines to make ladies' blouses ("shirtwaists") and occupied the 8th, 9th, and 10th floors of the building. It was a Saturday, between 4 and 5 pm, and the workers were just finishing up their day when a fire broke out. The exact cause was never determined, but it spread quickly through all three floors. In the panic, the outside fire escape collapsed, dumping many to their deaths. Two inside stairwells failed to save lives because the doors were kept locked. Ostensibly this was to keep union organizers from entering the shop, and to keep workers from leaving the area during the day. By the time a supervisor with the key was located, the stairwell thus opened was already filled with smoke and unusable. Some sought to escape the flames by jumping to their deaths from broken windows. Most suffocated or were trampled without ever getting to the roof or a window.
The city fire department arrived too late, and had no ladders to reach above the sixth floor in any case. The tragic aftermath left New York stunned and grieving for weeks, and some of the bodies were not officially identified until nearly a hundred years later, but were buried as "unknown" under a memorial to the workers who died that day.
It's a terrible story. The factory owners were fined for locking the stairwells (all of $75 or so) and ultimately a court awarded some money to the families of each identified victim, but nothing really large.
The emotional and political impact of this event, however, turned around legal attitudes toward unions and collective bargaining in the US. ILGWU, the International Ladies' Garment Workers Union, came into its own after that and was quickly followed by other worker negotiating groups and legal representative groups. Laws were passed recognizing the right of workers to join unions and to delegate negotiating rights to such unions. The courts eventually recognized the right of workers to bargain and to go on strike against an employer who violated contractual agreements or refused to negotiate in good faith.
For most of the 20th century, labor rights were accepted and recognized, though sometimes grudgingly. Workers received fair wages, profit sharing benefits, leave time with pay, and more reasonable work weeks. Yes, you can thank the labor unions for the concept of the "weekend." There was no such thing in the 19th century or earlier. (Just Sunday, which was often only a half day off to attend church.)
Now, on the hundredth anniversary of that ugly fire, we see politicians, employers, and even working voters trying to take away collective bargaining rights and void the contracts of public workers in an increasing number of states. They have forgotten the lessons of history, and seek to return to the old ways, when it was "every man for himself" and "dog eat dog" in the workplace, and employers could demand whatever they chose and kick an employee out without justification if she dared to question them. Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and New Hampshire are all trying to invalidate state employees' work agreements and bargaining rights.
OK, you assholes who voted for these tea party goons, sit there and feel smug about it. But guess what? When they're done stripping the public employees of their bargaining rights, benefits, and pensions, they won't stop there. Remember that the tea party doesn't stand for individual freedom from taxes so much as it stands for reduced regulation and taxation of corporate business. Private sector workers will be next, and no amount of union contract or representation will help. When they come for you, there will be no one left to complain. Just remember that when it happens, morons. You asked for it. You begged to be trampled into the mud and treated like manure for the benefit of capitalist profit that goes to the hyperwealthy and stays with them.
Economic recovery? There's no recovery. Sure retail sales are up. But did you check to see what's selling? Luxury goods, that's what. Nieman-Marcus is doing fine. Walmart is losing money because rich people don't shop there, and the rest of us can't afford to buy much. About 20% of the US population accounts for 70% or more of the discretionary spending. Those people are the wealthy, who have felt little pinch in this recession because they still got their million dollar bonuses and other perks, even after running their corporate asses right into the ground. These are the people the tea party really represents. They don't want to pay taxes. They don't want a government that might actually regulate their greed or business practices, or catch them in their frauds. They want to be able to rob their customers and employees with impunity. Think about this before you vote again for one of these so-called Republicans who are really nothing but carpet baggers. They haven't even as much heart as Ebenezer Scrooge had before he was visited by those three ghosts.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2011-03-26 03:59 pm (UTC)(link)no subject
Republicans want to undo changes, including many that have been in place for nearly a century. That's even worse than keeping the status quo, and represents instead a return to feudalism.
no subject
While I know nothing about the dynamics of the state employees' unions in these states, I would imagine that, if we had a Republican governor in New York, they would be trying the same thing. And, I would dare say, getting significant public support for the attempt, perhaps even among moderate liberals. For when the news started coming out of Albany that unionized state employees might be asked to make the same sort of job and salary related sacrifices that workers everywhere in New York were being forced to make, their immediate response was to launch a blitz of commercials on TV telling everyone how wonderful unionized state employees are and how it's not right for them even to be asked to consider making even the slightest salary concessions to help close the massive budget hole. To come out with a message full of such incredible hubris at a time when New Yorkers in general are hurting and state programs are going to be slashed massively did not engender much sympathy for the union cause.
When they're done stripping the public employees of their bargaining rights, benefits, and pensions, they won't stop there.
That's very likely the case. But while, on the one hand, this trend could possibly be slowed down or reversed through changes via the ballot box, those in charge of unions, both public sector and private sector, really need to take a path that isn't going to accelerate their slide into destruction. To come out like New York's public union leadership and proclaim that your membership is untouchable and unwilling to sacrifice while those around you are losing their jobs or struggling to make ends meet will only add to the fire and pitchforks mobs outside union headquarters calling for your head on a pike.
no subject
This is another example of politicians acting as pawns of corporate leaders who want to disenfranchise and destroy unions and back out labor regulations that have been in place for a century. And so far the opinion polls in Wisconsin and Michigan indicate that the public does not agree. Taylor's "approval" rating in Wisconsin fell into the basement in just ten days' time because of his ridiculous behavior and inflexible attitude.
As I pointed out the day before, no one denies that there is a financial crisis (except for the ones who caused it in the first place, who are doing their damnedest to get people to invest even more money in bogus "funds" so they can steal that too.) The cause of the crisis is not entirely a single issue, but a major part of it is due to financial bankers who "manipulated" things to their own advantage and took off with obscenely huge profits even after the collapse was irreversible. Before we start union busting and applying depression style austerity measures, I want to see those filthy bankers burned at the stake and their money taken back to help pay for the damage they did. Instead we just let them go on collecting their completely unearned "bonuses" while the rest of us are reduced to living on beans and rice and wearing patched clothing.
no subject
Unfortunately, I think the most important statement you made in your earlier post is that Americans, in general, are either morons or willfully ignorant. I honestly think that most people in this country want to be absolved of having to make any decisions about anything. They want someone to tell them what to think, and the side that makes the loudest arguments about the most volatile issues using words with the least syllables possible is going to have a distinct advantage. Maybe that's a bit harsh, or maybe not harsh enough. Looking at the population in general, I'm reminded more and more about the Proles of 1984. As long as they get their entertainment and just enough material goods to survive, they go blissfully on their way, merely ducking and shrugging whenever the occasional rocket bomb comes crashing in...
no subject
And then, once they are in office, they continue to use fear. Homeland Security is terminology drawn straight from NAZI Germany, where it was used in the same way to terrify the population into cooperation for fear of the faceless enemy who would otherwise infiltrate and destroy them. And we see people peacefully lining up to submit to every outrage that the government wants to force upon them in the name of Homeland Security, from strip searches to phone taps to having their personal mail and phone calls monitored (all without warrants or cause.)
On second thought, "morons and ignoramuses" may be too generous. "Sheep and lemmings" is more appropriate, I suspect.
no subject
no subject
And why is that? The second major cause: entertainment media, especially television but also motion pictures and video games. Young people no longer read for amusement or entertainment, unless you count graphic novels and manga. They have no exposure to great literary classics like Shakespeare or Melville, because those have been cast aside as "too difficult" and "too dated." They are replaced by cheap schlock materials that do nothing to stimulate the mind or imagination, and nothing to increase reading skills or vocabulary.
So. Elections are decided by voters who don't read and who therefore have no in-depth understanding of issues. Instead they have only the superficial viewpoints that are offered in talk radio or television news summaries, and they make emotional decisions driven by fears that those sources play upon.