Wednesday, April 24, 2024
Monday, April 22, 2024
The Rebirth of U.S. Labor
The stunning rebirth of the American labor movement
The pendulum is swinging toward countervailing power
| |||||||||||||||
 |
Friends,
On Friday, Volkswagen employees in Chattanooga, Tennessee, voted overwhelmingly to join the United Auto Workers union.
This is a truly big deal. The mainstream media — most of whom no longer have labor reporters — have barely mentioned it, but I believe it marks a major turning point for organized labor.
The victory in Chattanooga is the first successful organizing drive of an automaker outside of Detroit’s Big Three and the first major union victory in the South.
Volkswagen had told workers — in a very conservative Republican area — that the “UAW = Biden” and that the union would “turn Chattanooga into Detroit.” Six southern state governors attacked the union as a threat to “liberty and freedoms” and in a joint statement condemned the UAW’s push to organize in their states.
But the union and the workers triumphed anyway.
We are witnessing a historic rebirth of the labor union movement in America. Labor unions are not just an interest group. They are gaining the heft, solidarity, and passion to become what they once were — a movement.
And it’s about time.
For 30 years — from 1946 to the late 1970s — the American middle class expanded, largely because American labor unions won increases in wages and benefits that roughly tracked gains in overall productivity.
Non-union companies gave their workers similar raises because they knew they’d be targets of union organizing if they didn’t.
As American workers produced more, they got paid more. It was America’s postwar social contract.
As unions gained leverage at the workplace, they also gained political power. Unions supported major federal laws — Medicare and Medicaid, the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, the Family and Medical Leave Act. They became the major force countering the growing political power of large corporations.
But since the late 1970s, union power has been waning. As a result, the wages of production workers have been nearly stagnant, adjusted for inflation. And workers have lost pension benefits and job security.
Think about it. More than four decades of near flat wages, even though the United States economy is now more than three times the size it was four decades ago.
Where did the economic gains go? Mostly to the top.
Whenever I bring this up, some people accuse me of being a class warrior. I’m not. I’m a class worrier. For years, I’ve worried about what would happen to America as the middle class continued to shrink and most of the economic gains went to the top.
Well, I think we’re now seeing the results, as millions of Americans have grown so cynical and despairing about their chances to make it that they’re even willing to support an authoritarian sociopath for president.
As the voices of workers became muted inside corporations, their voices also became muted in Washington.
Why else would America enter into trade agreements that caused millions of working people to lose their jobs, without access to new ones paying them at least as much? Why else would entire regions of the nation be economically abandoned, without any concerted national effort to reverse the tide?
More states fell for the snake oil of so-called “right-to-work” laws, which should be called “right-to-work-for-less” laws.
Meanwhile, Wall Street was deregulated, allowing ever more of our economy to become dominated by the moneyed interests.
To add insult to widespread injury, Wall Street was bailed out after it brought the world to the precipice of economic Armageddon. Millions of people lost their jobs, wages, and homes in the financial crisis, but not a single major Wall Street executive was charged with a crime.
Corporate raiders got the right to mount hostile takeovers of companies and then demand bigger profits. And since payrolls comprise about two-thirds of corporate costs, the raiders forced corporations to limit wages and benefits.
To achieve this, corporations sought to bust unions — outsourcing jobs abroad and moving to “right-to-work-for-less” states. They also illegally fired workers who tried to organize — at worst getting their hands slapped by a National Labor Relations Board that might eventually order them to reinstate workers and give them back pay.
Ronald Reagan legitimized all this when in 1981 he fired more than 11,000 striking air traffic controllers represented by the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization.
The result was a dramatic decline in the bargaining power of ordinary workers — both inside companies and in American politics. And with this decline came a shrinkage of the American middle class. It’s estimated that between 1979 and 2017, the typical U.S. worker lost out on $3,250 in pay every yeardue to the decline of unions.
In the 1950s, over a third of all private-sector workers were unionized. Today, unionized workers comprise just 6 percent of private-sector workers (10 percent of all workers belong to a union, but many work in the public sector).
From 1946 through the early 1970s, unions staged hundreds of major strikes each year. Between 1981 and 2022, the number of major strikes dropped to a few dozen per year.
But here’s the good news: The pendulum is now starting to swing back.
It’s not just the UAW. Recent contracts negotiated by Hollywood writers, UPS workers, Kaiser Permanente health care workers, and even university employees, among others, provide significant pay increases and more job security (writers even got some protections against AI).
Last year’s union contracts gave workers an average first-year wage increase of 6.6 percent — the highest raise since at least 1988. With signing bonuses and other lump-sum payments added in, 2023’s average first-year wage increase was 7.3 percent, also a record high.
Overall, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. union membership grew by 191,000 workers last year — although the share of employees represented by a union fell slightly as strong job growth outpaced organizing efforts.
More good news: Most Americans are solidly behind unions. Approval of labor unions is near 70 percent, the highest point in five decades. At the same time, confidence in big business is at its lowest point in decades.
What accounts for this burst of labor activism and public support?
Partly, I think, it’s the harsh inequalities exposed by the pandemic. The pandemic dramatically revealed how much easier it is for rich Americans to survive than everyone else and how dependent all of us are on average workers just doing their jobs.
Couple this with the rise in populist politics in a system looking increasingly rigged against average people — starting with Bernie Sanders’s surprisingly strong showing in 2016, while Donald Trump posed as the “voice” of workers.
Union victories have fueled a virtuous cycle — encouraging more workers to join unions and more unions to flex their muscles and demand wage hikes.
Then there’s the tight post-pandemic labor market, in which consumers are spending like gangbusters, the economy is surging, and employers worry about getting and keeping the workers they need.
Not the least is Joe Biden — the most pro-union president America has had in 60 years. And a National Labor Relations Board that’s the most pro-union board I’ve seen in decades.
“Congratulations to the workers at Volkswagen in Chattanooga, Tennessee, on their historic vote for union representation with the United Auto Workers,” Biden said Friday in a statement.
Don’t wait for Trump to say anything positive about what just happened in Chattanooga.
Finally, both good news and a sign of how resistant corporations have become to unions: The share of non-union workers who would like to have a union at their workplace is far higher than the share who actually have a union representing them.
This is good news in terms of potential organizing drives. But it’s also evidence of the continuing effectiveness of corporate union-busting and the need for much stronger federal labor laws.
I believe the pendulum will continue to swing toward unions. Which means better wages and working conditions, a larger middle class, and laws and regulations that benefit the many rather than the few. And the possibility that America’s working class will return to the fold of the Democratic Party, where it belongs.
At a time when there’s a lot to be disillusioned about, this is the clearest, most positive trend in America.
Americans Overestimate the Size of Minority Groups
Americans Overestimate the Size of Minority Groups
Taylor OrthDirector of Survey Data Journalism
March 15, 2022, 3:23 PM GMT-7
When it comes to estimating the size of demographic groups, Americans rarely get it right. In two recent YouGov polls, we asked respondents to guess the percentage (ranging from 0% to 100%) of American adults who are members of 43 different groups, including racial and religious groups, as well as other less frequently studied groups, such as pet owners and those who are left-handed.
When people’s average perceptions of group sizes are compared to actual population estimates, an intriguing pattern emerges: Americans tend to vastly overestimate the size of minority groups. This holds for sexual minorities, including the proportion of gays and lesbians (estimate: 30%, true: 3%), bisexuals (estimate: 29%, true: 4%), and people who are transgender (estimate: 21%, true: 0.6%).
It also applies to religious minorities, such as Muslim Americans (estimate: 27%, true: 1%) and Jewish Americans (estimate: 30%, true: 2%). And we find the same sorts of overestimates for racial and ethnic minorities, such as Native Americans (estimate: 27%, true: 1%), Asian Americans (estimate: 29%, true: 6%), and Black Americans (estimate: 41%, true: 12%).
Yougov poll.
Duane Campbell
Friday, April 19, 2024
Choosing Democracy: Republicans Attack Columbia University - and Win
Tuesday, April 16, 2024
Sanders: A Complicated Political Situation
Sanders. A complicated political situation.
If you believe in democracy, if you believe in science, if you believe in justice and workers' rights, let me be very clear: The next several months will be the most important in modern American history.
Unfortunately, we are confronting a very difficult and complicated political situation.
Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal released a poll showing Trump leading in almost every swing state. He leads by 5 in Arizona, 3 in Michigan, 4 in Nevada, 3 in Pennsylvania, and is tied in Wisconsin.
If Trump wins even two of those states, it's game over.
And I think sometimes we slouch off the idea that Trump can win. It's hard to imagine that someone who was such a menace to the working class of this country could be popular enough with them to win a second term -- especially after we all lived through his first. I also believe sometimes we don't think enough about just how bad it will be policy-wise if he is re-elected.
Take one issue for example: Climate change.
Trump does not believe in climate change.
So what does that mean?
It means that not only all of the work we have done in trying to transform our energy systems away from fossil fuel will be undone, but every other country in the world is going to say “Hey if the second largest emitter in the world is giving up, than we're not going to do it either.”
And that really means dooming our kids and future generations to a very, very unhealthy, perhaps uninhabitable world.
So you don't need to know anything more than that to understand how dangerous Trump is.
But obviously the danger is much greater than just climate change.
Take another issue for example: American democracy.
Trump does not believe in, or care about, the future of American democracy.
So what does that mean?
It means that if he wins, you can expect more extreme gerrymandering, more laws and regulations making it easier for billionaires to buy elections, more efforts to keep people of color and young people from the ballot box, more election workers being harassed and threatened, more refusing to accept the outcome of election results, more political violence and, as a result of his policies and lies, more and more people increasingly believing democracy itself does not work for them.
I happen to believe that what this really means is that if Trump wins, the almost 250-year experiment of American democracy is all but over.
But obviously the danger is much greater than just that.
Trump has already tried to take away health care from tens of millions of people. He’ll try again in a second term.
Trump signed tax cuts where almost all the benefits went to the top 1 percent. He’ll try to make them permanent in a second term.
Trump brags about appointing 3 justices to the Supreme Court who helped repeal Roe v. Wade. He and his supporters have escalated their attacks on women’s’ rights across the country. In a second term he’ll try for a national abortion ban.
Other issues like education, gun control, criminal justice reform, income and wealth inequality, the cost of prescription drugs, workers rights, LGBTQ rights and more will all move backward.
Bottom line: We have to appreciate how unbelievably severe this current moment is.
Many of us believe that while the Biden administration can lay claim to some significant accomplishments, they are simply not enough given the very serious crises facing the working families of our country. Further, millions of us strongly disagree with the President’s position on the war in Gaza.
So what are we as progressives to do in this election?
First, we must all acknowledge that sitting out this election or even voting for Trump is definitely not the answer. That leads to catastrophe.
So then what?
In this unprecedented moment in American history we must make clear to the Democratic leadership and everyone else that we cannot return to the same old, same old establishment politics.
We must make it clear that if Democrats are given another chance after this election we cannot continue to ignore the needs of tens of millions of working families. We cannot continue to accept a political system where billionaires buy elections and an economy which has more income and wealth inequality than at any time since the 1920s. We cannot accept a government where the very rich get much richer while a majority of Americans live in economic desperation. We must go further on climate change. And we must restore faith in American democracy.
We must make it clear that we will fight for a strong, progressive agenda that represents the needs of working people, and not just the billionaire class, lobbyists and wealthy campaign contributors.
How do we do that?
It means supporting not just Joe Biden, but progressives who will fight for that agenda in Congress. It means donating, volunteering, posting on social media about your desire not just to beat Trump, but that your expectation for what a second term would look like for a Biden administration.
That is the work I will be doing over the course of the next several months, but it will take all of us to get it done. So I am once again asking for your financial support:
Bernie Sanders
Reich: How to Survive This Election
How to survive the next 280 days (and help America survive beyond them) Putting your outrage to constructive use
Friends, ( See the organizations at the end of this post. ) Fewer days now. The 2024 election is 280 days away. How can we survive until then? How can we help America survive beyond it? Many of you tell me or write in the comments section of this letter that you’re already filled with outrage. I am, too. Trump is still not locked up, although he incited an attack on the U.S. Capitol more than three years ago, which resulted in several deaths and could have cost the lives of many more, including members of Congress. He did it to overturn the results of the 2020 election. If he’s able to delay his trials and he gets elected, he may never be held accountable. He hasn’t stopped lying that the 2020 election was stolen from him, causing Americans to be more divided than at any time since the Civil War. He’s on the way to winning the Republican nomination, and polls (unreliable as early polls are) show him beating Biden. He has turned one of our two major political parties against democracy and toward neofascism. He embodies moral squalor — bragging about sexually assaulting women, being found in a civil trial to have raped a woman, lying constantly about everything, claiming immigrants are “poisoning the blood” of America, calling for a “termination” of the Constitution, describing political opponents as “vermin.” And on and on. All good reasons to be outraged. But do me a favor right this moment. Take a deep breath and consider what you’re doing with your outrage. Outrage on its own is exhausting (take this from someone who’s spent the better part of the last 77 years feeling outraged about one thing or another). It can also lead to two disempowering states: despair and cynicism. I know many who are in despair about the possibility of another Trump presidency. Their despair follows them around during the day and wakes them at night. It is robbing them of most joy in their lives. I know others who have sunk into deep cynicism. The system is rotten to the core, they tell themselves. Why even worry about Trump? Nothing can be done in any event. They’ve stopped listening to or reading the news. Why bother? Maybe you fall into one of these camps. I don’t mean to criticize you. I understand completely. Hell, I’ve been there myself. But despair and cynicism can be self-fulfilling prophesies. They can stop you from taking political action. As such, they make it more likely that Trump will become president — and that neofascism will prevail. Outrage can be a positive force if it fuels activism — if it gets people off their butts to do any number of things that individually don’t seem like much but taken together can have a big impact. What sort of things? Forgive me if I’ve suggested this before, but for example: 1. Becoming even more politically active. For some of us, this will mean taking more time out of our normal lives — up to and including getting out the vote in critical swing states. For others, it will mean phone banking, making political contributions, writing letters to editors, and calling friends and relations in key states. 2. Starting now to organize. Even if you cannot take much time out of your normal life for direct politics, you will need to organize, mobilize, and energize your friends, colleagues, and neighbors. A number of effective groups can help you (I’ve added their names and web addresses at the end). 3. Countering lies with truth. When you hear someone repeating a Trump Republican lie, correct it. This will require that you prepare yourself with facts, logic, analysis, and sources. 4. Not tolerating bigotry and hate. When you come across it, call it out. Stand up to it. Denounce it. Demand that others denounce it, too. 5. Not resorting to name-calling, bullying, intimidation, violence, or any of the other tactics that Trump followers may be using. We cannot save democracy through anti-democratic means. 6. Being compassionate toward hardcore followers of Trump, but remaining firm in your opposition. Understanding why someone might decide to support Trump is fine. But you don’t want to waste your time and energy trying to convert them. Use your time and energy on those who still have open minds. 7. Not wasting your time complaining. Don’t gripe, whine, or kvetch about how awful Trump and his Republican enablers are. Or about how ineffective Biden and the Democrats are in communicating how bad Trump and his Republican enablers are. None of this will get you anything except an upset stomach or worse. 8. Asking everyone you know to vote for Biden and not sit this election out or vote for a third-party candidate. Even if they don’t especially like Biden — even if they’re tired of voting for the “lesser of two evils” or fed up not “voting my conscience” — they still have to vote for Joe Biden. He may not be perfect, but Trump is truly evil. 9. Demonstrating, but not confusing demonstration for political action. You may find it gratifying to stand on a corner in Berkeley or Cambridge or any other liberal precinct with a sign asking drivers to “honk if you hate fascism” and elicit lots of honks. But this is as politically effectual as taking a warm shower. Organize people who don’t normally vote to vote for Biden. Mobilize get-out-the-vote efforts in your community. Get young people involved. 10. Not getting distracted by the latest outrageous Trump post or speech or story. Don’t let Trump’s hunger for immediate attention or the media’s complicity with that hunger divert your eyes from the prize — the survival of American democracy during one of the greatest stress tests it has had to endure, organized by one of the worst demagogues in American history. You probably have many other ideas (please feel free to add them in the comments). My point is to use your outrage. Please don’t let it wear you down. Don’t try to smother it. Using it will make you feel and be powerful. And your power is desperately needed right now. If you’d like more specific guidance on what you might do, check out these organizations: Swing Left: https://swingleft.org/ VoteForward: https://votefwd.org/ MoveOn: https://front.moveon.org/ Indivisible: https://indivisible.org/ Data for Progress: https://www.dataforprogress.org/ Stand Up America: https://standupamerica.com/ Common Cause: https://www.commoncause.org/ Sister District: https://sisterdistrict.com/ Justice Democrats: https://justicedemocrats.com/ If you know of other highly effective groups, please alert us in the comments. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Monday, April 15, 2024
Biden’s Gaza Policy Could Create a Replay of Chicago ’68
Sunday, April 14, 2024
Poverty - and the End Stage of Life
Poverty and End Stage of Life
Many Patients Don’t Survive End-Stage Poverty
April 11, 2024 By Lindsay Ryan Dr. Ryan is an associate physician at the University of California, San Francisco, department of medicine.
He has an easy smile, blue eyes and a life-threatening bone infection in one arm. Grateful for treatment, he jokes with the medical intern each morning. A friend, a fellow doctor, is supervising the man’s care. We both work as internists at a public hospital in the medical safety net, a loose term for institutions that disproportionately serve patients on Medicaid or without insurance. You could describe the safety net in another way, too, as a place that holds up a mirror to our nation.
What is reflected can be difficult to face. It’s this: After learning that antibiotics aren’t eradicating his infection and amputation is the only chance for cure, the man withdraws, says barely a word to the intern. When she asks what he’s thinking, his reply is so tentative that she has to prompt him to repeat himself. Now with a clear voice, he tells her that if his arm must be amputated, he doesn’t want to live. She doesn’t understand what it’s like to survive on the streets, he continues. With a disability, he’ll be a target — robbed, assaulted. He’d rather die, unless, he says later, someone can find him a permanent apartment. In that case, he’ll proceed with the amputation.
The psychiatrists evaluate him. He’s not suicidal. His reasoning is logical. The social workers search for rooms, but in San Francisco far more people need long-term rehousing than the available units can accommodate. That the medical care the patient is receiving exceeds the cost of a year’s rent makes no practical difference. Eventually, the palliative care doctors see him. He transitions to hospice and dies.
A death certificate would say he died of sepsis from a bone infection, but my friend and I have a term for the illness that killed him: end-stage poverty. We needed to coin a phrase because so many of our patients die of the same thing.
Safety-net hospitals and clinics care for a population heavily skewed toward the poor, recent immigrants and people of color. The budgets of these places are forever tight. And anyone who works in them could tell you that illness in our patients isn’t just a biological phenomenon. It’s the manifestation of social inequality in people’s bodies.
Neglecting this fact can make otherwise meticulous care fail. That’s why, on one busy night, a medical student on my team is scouring websites and LinkedIn. She’s not shirking her duties. In fact, she’s one of the best students I’ve ever taught.
This week she’s caring for a retired low-wage worker with strokes and likely early dementia who was found sleeping in the street. He abandoned his rent-controlled apartment when electrolyte and kidney problems triggered a period of severe confusion that has since been resolved. Now, with little savings, he has nowhere to go. A respite center can receive patients like him when it has vacancies. The alternative is a shelter bed. He’s nearly 90 years old.
We Demand Tax Fairness
|
|
|
Sunday, April 7, 2024
Saturday, April 6, 2024
141 New Billionaires in U.S.
Social Security is a great equalizer. It lifts the floor for economic security, making sure that no one who retires has to retire into poverty. But the ultra-wealthy keep pushing to dismantle Social Security and Medicare, leaving seniors on the street so that more money can go into their own pockets. Forbes just released its annual ranking of the world’s richest people, and discovered 141 new billionaires:1
“It’s been an amazing year for the world’s richest people, with more billionaires around the world than ever before,” said Chase Peterson-Withorn, Forbes’ wealth editor. “A record-breaking 14 centibillionaires [$100bn] have 12-figure fortunes. Even during times of financial uncertainty for many, the super-rich continue to thrive.”
The Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act would:
Apply a 2% tax on the wealth of households and trusts worth between $50 million and $1 billion and a 3% tax on fortunes exceeding $1 billion;
Provide the IRS with an additional $100 billion in resources to adequately enforce this new tax;
Mandate that at least 30% of these ultra-wealthy households be audited every year;
Bring in at least $3 trillion in revenue over 10 years without raising taxes on the 99.95% of households with net worths under $50 million.
Sign now: Become a grassroots co-sponsor of the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act today!
Thank you,
Michael Phelan
Social Security Works
A Joyful Left, not Puritanical
|
Thursday, March 21, 2024
Boeing, Safe Planes, and Globalization - Reich
 |
Friends,
On Friday, machinists at Rogue Valley International Airport in Medford, Oregon, discovered that a United Airlines plane that had landed from San Francisco was missing an external panel (see photo, above).
The plane was manufactured by Boeing. It was carrying 139 passengers and 6 crew. No one was injured, thank heavens. The missing panel went unnoticed during the flight.
Last week, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner jet went into a dive on a flight from Australia to New Zealand, injuring 50 people. Afterward, Boeing alerted airlines to a potential problem with loose switches on pilot seats, “resulting in unintended seat movement” that could affect the controls.
These latest incidents come after a cabin door blew out on a Boeing 737 Max 9 in January, a few minutes after takeoff. The incident, on Alaska Airlines flight 1282, left a gaping hole in the side of the plane and forced an emergency landing.
Since the Alaska Airlines cabin door blow-out, federal authorities — including the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) — have launched investigations and required inspections on 171 Boeing planes.
Those inspections have found that bolts and other hardware on multiple planes weren’t tight enough, according to both United and Alaska Airlines. The door panel involved in the Alaska Airlines blow-out was missing four bolts.
Boeing 737 Max planes have been the objects of safety concerns for several years, including in 2018 and 2019 when many countries grounded them after Boeing 737 Max 8 planes were involved in two crashes that killed hundreds of people.
A December 2021 Senate report on Boeing criticized the firm’s chronic understaffing and its downplaying of concerns raised by engineers in the company.
That Senate report was based on the testimony of seven whistleblowers — including some who had previously worked at Boeing — who were concerned about its production practices. Recently, John Barnett, another whistleblower and former Boeing quality control manager, died of an apparent suicide.
What’s the underlying problem? Why has Boeing become such a shitty company when it comes to quality control?
Last month, Boeing did what most big corporations do when they have problems that turn into scandals — change the leadership team. It replaced Ed Clark, the head of its 737 Max program, with Katie Ringgold, who had previously been vice president of 737 Max deliveries, and created a new executive position for Elizabeth Lund, overseeing quality at Boeing Commercial Airplanes.
Will this be enough? Michael O’Leary, CEO of Ryanair — Boeing’s largest customer in Europe — said the change “smacks of corporate bullsh*t. You’re putting someone in charge of 737s and someone in charge of safety. Why isn’t the person in charge of the 737s in charge of f**king safety as well? Boeing loves talking this corporate bullsh*t that they have a leadership team of 3,500 people, but that’s a committee designing a f**king camel.”
As my friend Harold Meyerson wrote last month in the American Prospect, Boeing’s quality-control problems transcend the leadership team. They first became apparent in 2001, when a Boeing engineer warned against the company’s decision to outsource key parts of the aircraft it assembled.
But Wall Street wanted Boeing to outsource rather than continue producing parts in-house with Boeing’s experienced and unionized workforce. Outsourcing was cheaper. The new crop of Boeing executives came to their posts from the financial side of the industry rather than from careers in production and were quick to respond to the Street’s demands.
In 2005, Boeing sold its Wichita plant to a private equity firm that slashed costs before unloading the plant to Spirit AeroSystems, which has become notorious for its deficient quality inspection practices. Boeing objected to what it said were Spirit’s high costs and inability to meet deadlines. As the workers on the shop floor and their union repeatedly noted, this led to rushed production and deficient oversight.
As The Wall Street Journal reported, a union representative from the International Association of Machinists wrote to union leaders that Boeing’s workers had “great quality and safety concerns,” but their concerns were routinely ignored by senior management.
Boeing’s major global competitor in producing commercial aircraft is Europe’s Airbus. Airbus’s largest shareholders are mainly politically-accountable governments that must pay heed to such public concerns as air safety. (Airbus’s four largest shareholders, in order, are the government of France, the government of Germany, the Capital Research and Management Company, and the government of Spain.)
Boeing’s major investors, by contrast, are entirely in it for the profits. (Its four largest shareholders, in order, are The Vanguard Group, Vanguard Group subfiler, Newport Trust Company, and State Street Corporation (a bank and asset manager.)
And because Airbus is a merger of German, French, and Spanish companies, Airbus’s production facilities are centered in nations where workers historically and currently have more power than their U.S. counterparts. Forty-six thousand of Airbus’s roughly 130,000 employees workin the company’s German factories, where workers, by law, routinely discuss production and safety issues with managers in works councils.
In the U.S., the Machinists union workers do have voice and power by American standards but lack mechanisms like works councils through which management must take at least some heed of their concerns.
In other words, Airbus’s clear leadership over Boeing in matters of flight safety stems largely from differences in ownership and worker power — that is, from the European model of mitigating laissez-faire capitalism with a measure of public and worker power, in contrast with the American model of subjecting corporate policy almost entirely to the demands of investment bankers.
Which, if you track the value of Boeing’s stock, hasn’t worked out that well for those investment bankers, either.
Just how outsourced is Boeing’s production? Almost two weeks after the Alaska Airlines blow-out, it was revealed that the door plug that blew out of the Alaska Airlines plane wasn’t actually produced in Wichita. It was produced in Malaysia, where workers’ concerns about speed of production and quality oversight are appt to have even less impact on their managers than in the United States.
The fact that the Malaysian production of the door plug didn’t come to light until 12 days after the blow-out suggests just how profoundly outsourcing can obscure the public visibility required for corporate accountability.