What Happens When Workers Organize

(Reposted as part of our staff picks from 2009, originally written by Will Urquhart on 9/11/2009)

Yesterday, we attended the Employee Free Choice Day of Action in DC. There, we met Cheri Seise, a student at the College of William & Mary, who told us about the cafeteria workers' fight to form a union.



As she said, they had simple, logical complaints, complaints that have yet to be rectified. So they started what is a grueling process to form a union. Management immediately held meetings to discuss the issue. They threatened to hold paychecks. They scared and intimidated the workers. And the fight to form a union quickly halted.

What is worse, is that under our current laws, there is no retribution for this type of management. Even when a manager is caught firing an employee for union organizing, the only retribution is that the employee is rehired and given back pay, minus what that person could have made at another job. What kind of punishment is that. This is one of the most important aspects of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). If EFCA passes as is, employers could be fined $20,000 for unfair labor practices, such as threatening to hold paychecks.

What is probably more important than all the other parts of the bill put together is this ability to actually find retribution for unfair labor practices. Without that, management will deem it less costly to threaten workers, or fire them, for union organizing.

Employee Free Choice Day of Action

(Reposted as part of our staff picks from 2009, originally written by Will Urquhart on 9/10/2009)

Hundreds of people, representing states all across the country, gathered on Capitol Hill in DC on Thursday morning to lobby their members of Congress in support of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). What made this group unique, is that it was a specifically non-labor coalition. Activists, students, faith leaders, members of all walks of life, united in their vision of a more just, fair America.

Without further ado, we present our coverage:




As you can see, we tagged along with the Virginia delegation as they lobbied Senator Warner, Senator Webb and several Representatives. There was a common theme for sure: plenty of support, but a lack of leadership and a lacking sense of priority. Frankly, this issue seems to be getting brushed aside, in the midst of a vigorous health care fight, and a dramatic struggle to shore up our economy. Yet with those challenges, there is still a strong and growing coalition that is fighting, tooth and nail, to pass this critical piece of legislation and give workers a stronger voice.

We also have Senator Harkin's entire speech, which gets more and more moving as it goes on:


The day of action is over, but, as I find myself saying more and more, this next session has to be our session of action. On many fronts, EFCA included, we have no time to let up, to take a break. We face many challenges. To find out more about what you can do to take part in the fight for workers rights, please visit the American Rights at Work.

If you still need a little inspiration, we present Stewart Acuff:

Bloggers and Blue-Collar Workers Unite!!!

(Reposted as part of our staff picks from 2009, originally written by Mitch Malasky on 8/24/2009)











Here are some snippets from an excellent panel at Netroots Nation 2009 in Pittsburgh called, 'Bloggers and Blue-Collar Workers Unite: You Have Nothing To Lose But Wall Street Domination'. The diverse set of panelists was all presented interesting insight from a variety of viewpoints. Present were three labor representatives- the moderator, Scott Paul, President of the American Alliance for Manufacturing, Leo Gerard, President of the United Steelworkers (USW), and Tula Connell, Managing Editor of the Website and Blog of the AFL-CIO, two industry analysts, Bob Borosage, President of the Institute for America's Future and Marcy Wheeler, blogger at Institute for America's Future and at Firedoglake, and one US Congresswoman, Donna Edwards, a Democrat from Maryland's 4th congressional district. (We have already posted videos from Marcy Wheeler, Donna Edwards and another video from Leo Gerard here.)

This group had an obvious pro-labor bias (which we share), but they focused on specifics of how American labor and manufacturing could help America recover from it's current economic situation. They talked about how manufacturing can help to break out of the boom a bust cycle and build a solid base for a sturdy economy. Recognizing that labor and manufacturing have been on the downswing for years, the are looking for ways to revitalize and modernize industry to help build a stronger, improved America. From Cars, to steel, to paper, manufacturing and production employ millions of people and reinvest American money back into the United States in a direct manor.

We will continue to release more snippets and longer versions of panels from Netroots Nation 2009 in Pittsburgh over the next weeks. Keep checking back to our Netroots Nation Page for more blogs and videos.

The Secret Plan to Defeat the Right Forever

(Reposted as part of our staff picks from 2009, originally written by Will Urquhart on 8/23/2009)

One of the panels I attended at Netroots Nation on Day 1, Thursday August 13th, was titled 'The Secret Plan to Defeat the Right Forever'. The panel focused on the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Stewart Acuff does a great job explaining some of the more important details of EFCA:



He also talks a little bit about what it is going to take to get this legislation passed:



And Tanya Tarr explains why EFCA is the secret plan to defeat the right forever:



We've got lots more videos from Netroots Nation available, and we will be releasing plenty more over the coming weeks at the Sum of Change NN09 page.

The Online Immigration Debate - Netroots Nation '09

(Reposted as part of our staff picks from 2009, originally written by Mitch Malasky on August 19th 2009)

Three of today's video's come from 'Four Perspectives from the Social Change Blogosphere: Case Studies from Civil Rights/ Pro-Migrant Bloggers' a panel at Netroots Nation 2009 in Pittsburgh hosted by Kety Equivel, the New Media Manager for the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), with David Bennion, a non-profit immigration attorney, Prerna Lal, a blogger, youth organizer, and new media consultant, Edmundo Rocha, the Publisher and Content Producer of Para Justica Y Libertad, a latino centered political blog, and Dee Perez-Scott, who runs the blog 'Immigration Talk with a Mexican American'. They all shared stories about their efforts to fight a struggling battle. They were not very optimistic, they all shared depressing stories and sentiments about numerous immigration inequities, but were hopeful and dedicated to getting comprehensive immigration reform passed. While the immigration reform bill in congress has taken a back seat to other issues, such as healthcare, there are millions of people whose lives and well being are being held hostage by the unjust execution of antiquated laws. While positive news on the national scene is hard to come by, these panelists are working to facilitate as many small scale successes as possible. Check back for more stories and thoughts from the panel over the next couple weeks.







We will be releasing lots, and lots, of videos from Netroots Nation over the coming weeks, including some panels in entirety. For more videos, and a list of every event we filmed, please visit the Sum of Change NN'09 page.

Vigorous Student Protests at UCLA over UC Tuition Hike

(Reposted as part of our staff picks from 2009, originally written by Rachel Tepper on 11/24/2009)

News of a steep hike in tuition fees at University of California public schools have students riled up at campuses across the UC system.

The UC’s Board of Regents met at UCLA on Wednesday to approve a plan which will raise next year’s undergraduate fees by an astounding 32%. UC President Mark Yudof told The New York Times that the fee increase was the university’s only choice in light of significant state budget cuts in the last decade. Yudof explained that the university system currently receives half as much, per student, as it did about twenty years ago.

Despite current measures in place which have slashed staff salaries, laid off teaching assistants, eliminated free printing for students and cut library hours, the board insisted that the university will be unable to maintain the same level of academic excellence without raising tuition.

Anger within the student body was most acutely felt at UCLA, where students from across the university system rallied outside the board’s meeting. Protests at times turned nasty, leading to the arrests of several students and accusations of police brutality.

Darlene Tran, a sophomore at UCLA, received bruises to her chest and wrist courtesy of officers responding to protests outside the meeting. Tran said she was chanting with a mass of students blocking the board members’ exit from a university building. She explained that she and others were demonstrating peacefully, but officers used unnecessary force when they pushed through the crowd to clear an exit path.

“From my perspective, I understand why they did it,” admitted Tran. “But I don’t think they needed to have been so aggressive. It was almost brutal, in a way.”

Tran noted that the Board of Regent’s meeting had originally been scheduled to take place on a day earlier on Thursday. She believes that the rescheduling was a deliberate attempt to thwart students’ plans to assemble. Students representing every institution in the UC system planned to bus to rallies at UCLA, but arrived a day late.

“We thought it was very sketchy,” said Tran.

In a last ditch attempt to convince the board to reverse its decision, some students stormed Campbell Hall, a building on UCLA’s campus, and occupied it from 2 a.m. to 7 p.m. Thursday in protest.

Tran noted that the protests had hit a particularly sensitive chord with students.

"We’re students, we can not handle this fee increase," said an exasperated Tran. She believes many students will be forced to drop out of school because of the increased fees. "We’re smart and we’re knowledgeable. We know there are other ways, there are other solutions, but we want to be protesting.”

Senior Sharya de Silva said the vigorous demonstration was a unique display of a particularly emotional student body.

“It was more students than I have seen in a long time. When it first started on campus, I would say at least 300 kids [were protesting],” explained Silva. “But then when we walked down Westwood Blvd…another group of students showed up. I think while marching we had around 600 kids.”

She described the scene outside Covel Hall, a building on UCLA’s campus, as “a mad house,” and said she believes about 1000 were protesting there.

Silva echoed sentiments of undue police force against what she described as passionate but nonviolent protest.

“I saw one officer swinging a baton around to try and clear room,” she said. “In the process he hit two guys and almost hit me. This one girl was actually trying to help the cops by calming the crowd down, and they got her. It was sad, she just hit the ground.”

Silva believes the police “didn't know how to handle the volume of students with that much passion,” and their actions were preemptive measures taken in fear that protests would turn violent.

Despite the widespread discontentment in regard to increased fees and the fervor demonstrated by protesters, some students questioned the effectiveness of such displays.

“Everyone is unified in their opinion about it, well, sucking, but not everyone supports the protests,” said junior Nathan Stein. He said the demonstrations are “causing a lot of disturbance to people living in the dorms and not accomplishing much.”

Both Tran and Silva confessed that they believed the decision made by the Board of Regents will likely stick.

Protests have currently died down, though students continue to stew over the possible implications the increase.

For now though, students must turn their thoughts to another problem: finals. Exams for the fall semester will begin taking place in a matter of days. Little time, said Stein, to worry about tuition.

“I think most students are spending their time studying,” he said.

Thousands in Berkeley Mobilize to Save Public Education in California

(Reposted as part of our staff picks from 2009, originally posted by Laura Gilbert on 9/24/2009)

On Thursday, September 24^th, an estimated five thousand people attended a rally on Sproul Plaza at the University of California, Berkeley. The rally and subsequent march through campus and downtown Berkeley—scheduled to coincide with and planned in support of the University of California (UC) Faculty Walkout that took place on all ten UC campuses—brought together undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, university workers and alumni to protest the budget cuts at Berkeley and stand up for public education across California.

All in attendance protested the enrollment cuts, layoffs, faculty furloughs and threatened department cuts outlined in a plan pushed through by the UC administration this summer in the aftermath of a reduction in state educational funding to the tune of more than $637 million—or 20% of the 2009-2010 budget. But it is perhaps the already imposed 9.3% increase in student fees for the 2009-2010 school year, as well as the proposed 32% fee increase to be partially imposed mid-year that has invigorated the masses. Many feel these increased fees will effectively privatize California’s public schools, making higher education inaccessible to countless California residents—including those already enrolled in the system. One Berkeley first-year, Magali Flores, currently pays her own fees but expressed worries of having to ask her mother for help if the 32% increase proposal passes, help she is not sure her single mother of five will be able to provide.

Ricardo Gomez, a third-year at Berkeley, says the fee increases will not affect him personally because he receives scholarship; however, “I know for a fact that students will be priced out—particularly undocumented students.” Another student held a sign that said, “’UC’ me now…you won’t see me after 32%”.

After the proposed increase, fees will amount to over $10,000, before room and board. With such high costs, “the line between public and private blurs,” says Alex Tarr, a graduate student in geography at Berkeley and head steward of the Local 2865 UAW which represents 12,000 student employees, grad-student instructors, readers and tutors.

But it is not just students who have something to say about the fee hikes. Paul (who declined to give his last name), a Spectroscopist and member of the University Professional Technical Employee union (UPTE), expressed concern that the University was no longer following its mission, laid out in the 1960 California Master Plan for Higher Education—specifically, the principle that higher education should be accessible to all regardless of one’s economic means. “The whole mission of the University of California was so anyone could come here, to a public university that was as good as Harvard or Yale. The irony is that it is cheaper now to go to either one of those schools than to one of the UC’s”—referring to the ability of many Ivy League schools to run needs-blind admission and finance the education of any admitted student who is unable to pay. Personally, he said, he has two children he hoped to send to the University of California system, but with rising costs he is exploring options in other states.

Tamar (who declined to give her last name), a Berkeley alum and an UPTE member (a union which chose to strike on the 24^th in solidarity with the Faculty Walkout after itself engaging in 19 months of negotiations with the University with no contract), wanted to bring greater awareness to the day-to-day changes brought on by these budget cuts. “Professors are being forced to furlough classes, to work harder in less time with less salary. Facilities and departments have fewer open hours or may close entirely. Essentially, students will be paying 32% in increased fees for reduced services.”

Tamar—and many others—argue that such drastic budget cuts are unnecessary. Many expressed a belief that the money is there, despite the reduction in state funding, but it is being allocated disproportionately to executive salaries for the Regents, the Cal football coach and especially President Mark Yudof, towards whom a great deal of the protesters’ ire was directed. (An objective observer may become sympathetic to such ire after reading Yudof’s snarky responses to Deborah Solomon’s questions in the September 24^thNew York Times interview.) Those who place most of the blame for the budget crisis on the University leadership demand budget transparency and democratization of the Board of Regents.

Others believe the blame for the current budget crisis should lie primarily on the state, whose priorities they question. They cite statistics that show that over the past 20 years, state expenditures on education have gone down from 17% to 7% while state expenditures on the prison system have gone up from 3% to 10%. As Ruben Canedo, a representative of the SOLIDARITY alliance and one of the organizers of the march, put it, “The message that the state is sending to kids is that it is more prepared to send you to the prison system than the education system.”

And still others believe the fact is there is simply not enough tax revenue to sustain public education in California. Those carrying signs that said, “Repeal Prop. 13” said the current state budget crisis was foreseen long ago. “Once Prop. 13 froze property taxes at 1970’s rates, a future budget crisis was inevitable,” said California State University, Monterey Bay campus Professor C. Menning. Originally intended to protect elderly residents from being taxed out of their homes, “it was the corporations who benefited most” from Proposition 13, Menning said. In 2004, in an attempt to preempt the public education crisis, Governor Schwarzenegger, then UC President Robert C. Dynes and CSU Chancellor Charles B. Reed created The Higher Education Compact that put forth a plan to mitigate the budget gaps by raising student fees and increasing private fundraising. This is the crux of the argument that California public higher education is being privatized. Or perhaps even the smoking gun.

Still, the September 24^th rally at Berkeley, along with the walkouts across California, illustrate the fact that thousands want to preserve public education. And the 24^th was just the beginning. Berkeley has held a general assembly and established committees to continue organizing in this fight. Conferences are being held to connect the UCs, CSUs, Community Colleges and K-12s within regions and eventually across the state. This is exciting: a new movement with inspiring leaders waiting in the wings. Thousands of leaders, in fact, ready to mobilize to protect the promise of an accessible education for all. “This is not a movement for a specific community or population,” said Canedo. “We stand in solidarity for education. We ask for your support.”

An estimated five thousand people gathered to rally on Sproul Plaza at the University of California, Berkeley.








































































































































































































































































Among the protesters was a contingent representing student-parents. They held a banner that asked, "Where's the affordability you promised us?"









Representatives from the Student Worker Action Team (SWAT) and the SOLIDARITY Alliance, among others, lead the march through the Berkeley campus and downtown Berkeley.










Marchers returned to campus via Bancroft road.









The marchers staged a sit-in at the intersection of Telegraph and Bancroft across from the Sproul Plaza entrance of the Berkeley campus.


Both UPTE (University Professional Technical Employees) and CUE (Coalition of University Employees) chose to strike in solidarity with the UC Faculty Walkouts on September 24th. Union members and supporters picketed at the Berkeley campus entrances throughout the day.







As night fell, a General Assembly was held for anyone who wanted to help organize to continue the fight to save public education.











Despite three relocations of the General Assembly due to a lack of open University facilities, hundreds moved together and finally settled in Lower Sproul Plaza on a chilly night to continue organizing.