Food for Thought

[This was written for the Union of the Unemployed Thinkitank group on Facebook, a group originating among members of the Union of the Unemployed initiated by the Internation Association of Machinists.]

There’s been a lot of good input here and I thank you all.  Now I’d like to try to focus on what the Thinktank can do to represent ourselves, other unemployed, and working people in general who are a whisker away from being unemployed themselves. If offer no easy solutions.  I can’t get you a job.  I can’t even get myself a job.  But I can try to facilitate us coming up with a few ideas to pursue.  I have been getting to know some of you, I’d like to get to know you all better.  From looking at what people have been posting, it seems like there are roughly 3 levels of concern:

(2)  We need to directly address the crisis of unemployment in general in the U.S.

(3)  We need to addresses the causes of unemployment -- Wall Street greed and bipartisan political corruption -- on the political front.

Some of us may find one particular point rings a bell.  Some of us may relate to all three.  Although membership is open, at this point, the main thing we have in common is that we are members of the IAM’s Union of the Unemployed.  We are here because we have some concern that the union’s Cube structure limits our ability to communicate with each other, and that the IAM is setting the union’s priorities without our input.  Personally, I am grateful that the IAM has created this union, but I share the misgivings stated above.

The IAM has some “fighting words” about the need for jobs.  But in the letter we’re supposed to each send to Congress:

 I demand a bill that will work to slow the rate of job loss and put Americans back to work immediately. I demand policies that provide employers real incentives for hiring again. I demand a comprehensive strategy for rebuilding our country's infrastructure. 

“Slow the rate of job loss.”  “Provide employers real incentives.”  “Demand a comprehensive strategy.”  Not a word about the government directly creating jobs.  No new WPA, no revival of anything like the Civilian Conservation Corps.  Nothing incompatible with the lame Democratic jobs bills.

Another statement calls for:  “1) tax credits for employers creating jobs, 2) payments to employers for work sharing, and 3) public service job creation.”  Employers get (1) and (2) and we get to politely request (3), pie in the sky by and by.  Reagan’s old “trickle-down.”  Directing rage at the psychotically despicable Jim Bunning may be fun, but it is also a diversion, so we can forget that it was the Democratic Party leadership that turned this into a last-minute cliffhanger in the first place.

The IAM claims to fight on our behalf, but what role do we play in determining our own fate?  In creating our own demands?

So what is our stance towards the IAM?  We can:

(1)  simply operate independently of the IAM as a new organization of the unemployed.

(2)  function as an independent body, relate to other organizations and the media as a caucus of the IAM union, and relate to the IAM at its top level.

(3)  organize within the CUBE structure to apply pressure from the bottom uip.

I am inclined to (2) and (3), but that is for us all to discuss.  I think it is important, to the extent we are individually able, to invite others to join the Union.  Its strength is part of our strength.  While the union is still growing, the pace has slowed down, a little over 1,500 members as I write.  Larger membership makes us stronger. 

Once we have some broad outlines of what we want, I think we should start working our Cubes.  Some are led by folks who started  their own, as some of us have.  Others were started by people with close ties to the IAM.  We should be raising issues of representation and process, and discussing their responses here on Facebook.  Do we have demands the union should put forward as our representatives?  Isn’t that what a union  is for?

The issue of jobs is center-stage.  The system often gives the impression of being an unfeeling, all-powerful monolith.  Yet I believe it is exceedingly fragile and sensitive.  The New York Times -- not known for its love of the poor -- has been pumping out a steady stream of articles on the devastation this Great Recession has been wreaking on the American people.  Consider that, however grudgingly, Congress keeps  extending benefits with significant Republican support.  It seems the ruling consensus is to maintain business as usual, no structural change (do not create jobs directly) while paying us off with unemployment benefits.  Paying us badly, to be sure, but a payoff is a payoff.  They seem truly terrified of massive numbers of newly homeless unemployed roaming the streets doing lord knows what.

We are the new poster children.  Democrats use us to beat the Republicans over the head (they loved the Jim Bunning show).  And the Republicans use us to show that Obama’s stimulus program isn’t working -- which indeed it isn’t.

But in the midst of this disgusting spectacle, we do have a certain leverage.

Apart from whatever leverage we have with and through the IAM, there are other exposed  nerves we can hammer.  At least in my neck of the woods (Jersey City), all interaction with the New York Dept. of Labor is via phone or online.  That is wonderfully convenient, but it eliminates places where the unemployed can congregate as unemployed in any numbers.

But what about those ridiculous job fairs?  What if people showed up there in small bands, with flyers demanding jobs on the spot?  Would our very presence provoke a hysterical response that could draw media coverage?  Would the IAM provide legal support?

See, every tactic has two edges.  What will the public do?  What will the IAM do?

Anti-war leader Cindy Sheehan is setting up a Tent City in DC:  “Beginning March 13th, we will erect a tent city on the grounds of the Washington Monument as a base camp for our actions, community gathering and activities.

Your commitment can range from the entire action: Until our demands are met; or any other chunk of time that you are available.”  Evokes the old Bonus Marchers.  Suppose the homeless and the unemployed showed up at the tents and said, “We’ll join your protest if you feed us.”?  The possibilities are fascinating.

The Left has been completely irresponsible in ignoring the unemployed.  Their whole schtick revolves around the plight of the middle class.  Could something like this wake them up?

Teabaggers have been making hay at congressional Town Hall meetings.  The media covers this Town Hall stuff.  Suppose unemployed folks started showing up with signs demanding “Jobs Now!”

Then there are visits to our representatives offices.  The possibilities are endless.

I would note that there are a few here who are interested in putting forth their analysis of our ills, their critiques of U.S. capitalism.  I by-and-large agree with their analyses.  However, an analysis is of little value unless it can be expressed in tactics.  That is my focus.

There are roughly 120 of us scattered all over the country.  But some of us know groups of other unemployed folks.  We can try to push the IAM Union there.  There are other organizations we could connect with.  Why should they listen to us?  Because we are members of the IAM’s Goddamn Union Of The Unemployed!  It conveys “standing.”  Being a union has different meaning than being a coalition or do-gooder group.  We can use this.

So let’s do some thinking!