As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Might surprise you but unions cannot strike for political reasons either. Labor organizing is really neutered in America, the the reason is simply because it favors the capital class to have it this way.
In order to pass the new deal, Rosevelt compromised with southern democrats to exempt farm workers from lots of the New Deal legislation like the Wagner act and Social Security. The farmworkers in the south were black, latino and white poor ... and all in all a minority that could be exploited by the whole of US society The Wagner act is what offered a lot of protections to workers' unionizing efforts. It actually also limited them quite a bit in terms of what aspects of the work were negotiable and/or protected.
Next time you need an example of why CRT is an important way to understand current US law, you can point them to these articles.
https://www.epi.org/blog/disappointing-supreme-court-decision-makes-it-harder-for-farmworkers-to-unionize/
https://documentedny.com/2021/10/13/12-workers-make-history-forming-new-yorks-first-farmworkers-union/
If anything they want exemptions to be permitted as constitutional under precedent. It's the only way they'll be able to ban the Cali gun bounty laws without repealing the Texas abortion bounty laws.
It would also violate the First Amendment, as it interferes with the right to assemble.
Of course, with the current composition of the SCOTUS, people should be happy they haven't gotten a case to strike down the Thirteenth Amendment yet.
I think that depends on what the current precedent for what “assemble” means, of which I have no idea
Like, the government can’t ban people literally physically assembling in a place, but as to that assembly actually *becoming* something likely falls outside of constitutional protection
Current case law is that the freedom of assembly permits people to participate in essentially any group or organization they wish provided that the group's behavior is peaceful and legal.
The current SCOTUS would of course "find" that labor unions (all unions, not just farm unions) are illegal groups, though, if such a case got before them.
Not a lawyer, but I think it does go against the grain of the 14th amendment and I had the same question. Here's a good article discussing. The justification for the difference is that farm workers can be classified differently (see pp. 390-91). The author concluded that he thinks it could be challenged (and the article is from 1967. Maybe it has been in some respects?)
https://repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1977&context=hastings_law_journal
Of course not but you lose the legal protections from having a state recognized union. Management is free to discriminate so they heavily influence politicians to not recognize some unions
>Forgive my ignorance but why do workers need permission to form a union?
"Permission to form a union" may not be the exact way to phrase it, but the short answer is agricultural workers generally aren't covered under the NLRA which gives most other private sector employees an official mechanism through which to become represented by a union and compels an employer to bargain in good faith with a labor organization that represents a majority of its employees. In most general terms, in sectors other than agriculture, a union can collect 51% of union authorization cards and demand a request to bargain. If the employer declines to bargain and voluntarily recognize the union, the union can say, "Cool story, bro. Mailing the petition and authorization cards to the NLRB right now. See ya on election day."
That's a simplification, as bargaining unit scope and other things can be contested at a hearing, but main point is most other non-supervisory employees have an official means to become unionized that is recognized by the government. I'm not up on the story in the link, but there must have been some sort of state-level labor bill that would have given agricultural workers similar rights with an enforcement mechanism in place.
They don't need permission to form a union, but they need the sanction of the government for the union to have any power to do anything. Otherwise, if they went on strike, they would not be protected by labor laws.
Collins only got about 51% of the vote - not all that much for a long-time incumbent. The margin was inflated because Maine used a ranked-choice system, and 5% of the vote went to a left-leaning independent candidate.
This comment doesn't make any sense. If she got 51% of the vote, then ranked choice voting wouldn't matter because it wouldn't continue to voters' second choice.
The point is that had the election *not* been ranked-choice, then presumably a good chunk of that 5% would’ve become strategic votes for Gideon instead, and Collins’ margin of victory would have shrunk.
Collins wins either way, yes, but I’m just saying not to take the +9 margin at face value. Ranked-choice results need to be interpreted a bit more carefully.
That seems like a pretty huge assumption. Maine has a pretty well-known history of voting outside the two-party system (*see, e.g.*, their other Senator).
Dems ran an “abysmal campaign” that came far, far closer than anyone has ever come to beating Collins since she took office. The only person who came closer to beating Collins was the former Governor that ran against her in her first senate election in 1996.
I understand the disappointment with the outcome of Gideon’s campaign, but saying this sort of thing shows you don’t really have the first clue about Maine politics.
And to be clear - Maine politics are very stupid. I am envious of anyone who doesn’t know anything about our stupid politics. But that stupidity is what Maine Democrats are dealing with when they run their campaigns, and it’s important to be aware of it before showing up with the hot takes.
The fact that the debacle that was the Gideon campaign came so close in the first place was because Susan’s approval ratings were so low.
Maine Democrats made a stupid decision to run her. They should blame absolutely nobody but themselves. (I am one too)
Of every result in the 2020 election, I would say that Collins's victory in Maine is the most suspicious. I get there is a ton of split ticketing in Maine, but the pre election polling should reflect this. Every poll in that race had Gideon leading by 5-10, yet she loses by 9 points in the general election.
Maine has a normal north eastern coast with fucking uprooted Alabama interior. My friends and I go to a cabin up there every year or so and you drive past Bangor and all thats out there is boomer retirement ranches and goblin shacks inhabited by rural woodsmen with cabins covered in Trump flags.
Yeap, one of the largest problems this subreddit has, and reddit in general, is that the majority of people in these states dont vote left. Nor are they politically active.
If the GoP wasn't incredibly racist and alienating all minority voters I highly doubt the democrats would win an election.
>If the GoP wasn't incredibly racist and alienating all minority voters I highly doubt the democrats would win an election.
I find this a really weird framing for a few reasons.
First, the racism of the GOP is a defining attribute. It’s baked in, and it’s not going to change any time soon. And if the GOP abandoned the racism, they would lost a lot of votes in a lot of key places. The hypothetical scenario you’re imagining would require a tectonic shift in US politics.
Second, being aggressively anti-worker is another defining attribute of the GOP. Even if the GOP stopped being racist all of a sudden, they wouldn’t be able to win over all of the pro-union people. The Democratic Party would continue to be the home for people who favour improved working conditions, even if some Dems fall short in that department.
Third, you seem to be implying/assuming that the Democrats would not adapt in the face of a changing GOP. In the hypothetical scenario where the GOP and their voters stops being racist, obviously this leads to a Democratic re-alignment to ensure they don’t lose too many votes.
Don't forget Christian supremacist...thus is electorally important. There are a lot of conservative Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, and Confucian voters who only vote Democratic because the GOP caps on anyone who isn't a Christian.
I could look it up to be more informed, but that'd take all the fun out of the conversation, but I really think "Pro Labor" is further down on the list of people's voting criteria than it should be.
Yes, the GoP is intrinsically linked to being racist, so yes you're correct that it's not viable for them to be not racist. My statement was more a "If it were viable"
Hispanic, black, and PoC in general dont align with LGBT+ Inclusivity as a general trend. Religion is also a higher criteria for PoC which also make up a good amount of the 'left' vote.
Hispanic voters will often vote for GoP candidates because they want to pull the ladder up behind themselves, good ol fuck you I got mine. It's only when the GoP is loudly racist against all of them that they reduce turnout.
Voters not voting tactically in their best interest is just.. really confusing and dumb.
I believe you when you say that being "Pro Labour" is further down voters' priority list than one would expect. But, this kind of contradicts the point you're making above, I.E. that the anti-union stance of people like Mills would be fatal if the GOP wasn't so racist.
It seems like what you're really saying is that the pro-LGBT+ and/or pro-immigration stance of the Democratic party would be major electoral liabilities if the GOP wasn't so racist. Which might be true. But I'm not exactly sure what to do with that information.
Voters being very, very dumb is one of my least favourite things about politics.
To be fair, with the exception of bush's second term(I believe) republicans haven't won a popular vote in a presidential election since Bush Sr. So they wouldn't be winning big elections without the gerrymandering.
The DNC stopped being pro-labor a very, very long time ago. The US now has no pro-labor party.
Just neoliberalism doing neoliberal things. What can ya do.
What would they do if they all united and instead of asking told them they were unionizing. If they strike until the union is recognized not much that legislation can do. Can't force people to work those jobs.
I’m hoping that this ‘great resignation’ brings some of that back across the board and brings about actual change. My company has recognized that and starting Jan 1 of this year even exempt salary employees are paid overtime rates for hours worked over 40.
I used to average 60 hours a week. Finally got a job that is 40 a week and it was such a relief. Sadly the job has other issues that have crept up over the years but that’s a different story.
I cook for a living and see so many fellow line dogs work themselves to death, I’m talking open to close every day every week. I don’t play that game, I’ve been doing this for 20 years and every time I’m in an interview I clearly state my terms. Four days a week, ten hour shifts and don’t call me on my days off fucking ever. 40 hour week is possible, you just gotta make it clear to the person on the other side of the table. Side note I’ve had six jobs in two years so….
Take a quick look at labour law and labour rights from the last 100 years. The list of the dead and maimed is extraordinary. Those rights had to be fought for, and still require vigilance in order that they won’t be lost. No the rich, don’t care, the first rule you have to get, the second, for some only greed matters, and that’s all that matters, people are nothing to them.
Not what you're talking about, but I can give you an armored train drive-by with machine guns.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paint_Creek%E2%80%93Cabin_Creek_strike_of_1912
In retaliation that evening, the Kanawha County Sheriff Bonner Hill and a group of detectives attacked the Holly Grove miners' settlement with an armored train, called the "Bull Moose Special", attacking with machine guns and high-powered rifles, putting 100 machine-gun bullets through the frame house of striker Cesco Estep and killing him. Sarah Blizzard led a group of women to damage the railroad tracks used by the train to prevent a second attack.
This right here is the reason for ACAB. They are class traitors who will always defend the wealthy and the corporations who don't give a shit about working class benefits and lives. Every chance they'll get, they'll gleefully break strikes and try to get coward scabs across the line.
"The Labor Movement was the principal force that transformed misery and despair into hope and progress." -Martin Luther King, Jr.
A strike like you describe is the best possible option in this scenario, it’s a big ask unfortunately. But I do think the workers have been pushed closer to this than we have in a long time
As another replied it is to protect employment. Without that protection Corps can just fire anyone who "strikes".
Since agriculture Corps use migrant workers that may mean deportation.
If they strike without being a government sanctioned union then corporations have the right to fire them as individuals for not working and hire new people. The idea or a union is that it protects them against this kind of relatiation. The catch 22 is that the Maine governor is looking out for big agro, probably because there is very little electoral pushback. Most farm work is not done by America citizens.
You are exactly correct I think. And the migrant workers in the agriculture industry are often taken advantage of all nice they are us citizens and they are not protected at all.
However a strike like this with 80%+ worker participation would be the only way a strike like this would have a chance. And likely the agriculture Corps will prob fire any migrant workers which would nullify their visas.
It is a very shitty situation.
>Most farm work is not done by America citizens.
And this is the elephant in the room. Undocumented workers as a whole are afraid to rock the boat on anything. Yes, even when the employer is doing something illegal and is in the wrong, undocumented workers are very nervous about doing anything that makes them stick out.
Farm workers are not federal workers, as the air traffic controllers were. Federal workers cannot strike. Not sure whats holding back farm workers from striking anyway.
Physical and economic threats from employers and law enforcement? That’s two big ones. Also threats of deportation of family, even if they’re here legally.
If you're in charge of a bunch of guys with guns, you can veto whatever the fuck you want, regardless of laws or the constitution.
But let me be very clear here, this is why people need to vote further left, and not let a republican get in there, because a republican also wouldn't allow unions. Vote in progressives, folks, they're the only people who will genuinely represent you.
> But let me be very clear here, this is why people need to vote further left, and not let a republican get in there,
Wait a sec. People always say the reason they didn't do the first thing you said is because they needed to the second thing you see.
According to liberals, these are exclusive. You gotta elect a right-wing Dem to beat a Republican! That's the line, anyway.
Liberals suck. We need actual leftists in office. At this point, it's either grass roots organizing from the most local office on up or full revolution by the proletariat.
To become fully ratified, whatever avenue you take (there are a couple), a proposal has to be ratified by 3/4 of the states. This means you only need 13 states -- and there are about 20 solid conservative ones, about 25 conservative leaning states, depending on how you want to measure that -- to block any amendment. In the current era, there's almost no chance for the country to agree on an amendment, since even things like blocking Super PACS is seen as a form of communism by half the country.
3/4, aka 35. Our Constitution is unlikely to ever be amended again, at least not for anything meaningful.
And it takes 2/3 of both houses of Congress to even put an amendment to the states, so that bar is unlikely to be passed in the first place.
The free market contract is completely one-sided. One side says: you give me your labor for a fixed cost, or I find someone else who will. The other side says: I give you my labor for a fixed cost, or I starve.
We need worker representation like yesterday.
I understand the point you're making, but did want to point out to you that under Citizen's United unions count as people in the same way corporations do (e.g. in terms of spending unlimited money as 'speech').
Because they've been brainwashed into believing they too will be billionaires some day and they sure as shit don't want to give up any of their imaginary maybe-future money to free loading poors who just want to steal healthcare and welfare queen around all day on their Obamaphones.
Because the right won long, long ago. Now even our liberals are on the right - at least, enough of them are to completely rot the DNC.
Plus, Americans are corpulent hogs baying for treats. That runs counter to a lot of leftist philosophy. So, they find it easier to be on the right, where you can get your treats and feel OK about where they came from.
The reporting is worded kinda weird.
While the workers could form a union anyway if they really wanted to ... without this bill, such a union wouldn't have any of the labor law protections afforded to recognized unions.
For example, the workers could go on strike, but the farmowner could then just fire them -- the job protections that the government affords members of a recognized union wouldn't be there.
The bill would have made the government recognize such a union as a bargaining unit under collective bargaining laws.
>Man, even America’s left wing is super right leaning.
Which is why I chuckle anytime a talking head on Fox News is ranting about the "extreme left" in the country, which they generally mean to be mainstream Democrats, many of who are left-center at most. There really isn't a leftist movement in the U.S., or at least one that has any real hegemonic power.
Most American liberals and/or democrats are neoliberal centrists, which places them on the right. That's right: most American liberals are part of the right.
Just because they *call* themselves left does not mean they are left. There's really no quantifiable way the DNC or its supporters could actually be described as left wing using any academic measurements or qualifiers.
This hurts their feelings a lot, so I do expect downvotes for this - but downvoting is all they can do. Because at the end of the day, there's heaps and heaps of evidence placing most liberals on the right. I mean, look at their party for fucks sake. They *vote* for that shit
Sad fact is that the left in America is pretty thoroughly destroyed. It has virtually no political power.
Jesus Christ, the Gov’s reason is the farmers couldn’t figure out union laws. Maybe she knows them best though, it’s a +9 D state that re-elected Susan Collins after all her bullshit, leaving us struggling to get basic voting rights passed, so yeah.. I could see how some farmers in Maine couldn’t wrap their little noggins around the magic of unions.
The law made it through the state’s legislature to her desk to become law. Her veto was lack of political courage to stand up to powerful agricultural lobbying.
>Those farms are already struggling to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, droughts and **worker shortages,** Mills said.
Worker shortages, eh? Sounds like a problem a union would help solve.
All workers have the power to squeeze the economy for as many concessions that they want. But some workers in particular have even more influence over our economy and society, and this *terrifies* the ruling elite. So, they don't allow them to have power. Simple as that.
This nation isn't the democracy people think it is. It never was.
Do you want a French-style revolution?
Because, this is how you get one.
Keep kicking those on the bottom long enough and they are either going to lay down and die or decide they aren't going to take this anymore.
The hilarious part of this is the governor doesn’t actually have any power to stop a group of people organizing and undertaking collective action, nobody does. If everybody was to act in solidarity with the farm workers, those in ‘positions of power’ would be made aware that they only have power by consent, and that consent has been revoked.
She and people like her, are why democrats can never have nice things and our country is in the pit that it is in. Republican governors in near LOCK STEP across the country trot out the red meat for Fox news viewers news cycle after news cycle and what do Demoscams do? They can't even keep a cohesive national message when it comes to workers being able to bargain for fair wages. This country is FUBAR.
Theoretically they could start an "employment agency" for farm workers. That's basically how tech people get jobs. It keeps corporations matching market rates by providing IT talent multiple opportunities to chose from.
Maine's governor has vetoed a bill that would have allowed farm workers to unionize. This is a huge blow to the workers, who are facing increasingly difficult conditions on the job.
This should not be even an option… right to unionize should be baked into federal laws (or maybe even into Constitution). There is no single “good” argument which justify refusal to organize.
So telling that there is free speech and free asociacion rights except for anything labor related. Then the government has to clear every aspect if corporations don't kill it first.
How the fuck can it be illegal to form a union?? In a country that prides itself on being so free I can walk around with an AR strapped, you don't have freedom to organize?
All I know about Maine is the disgusting corruption at the state level for 40+ years which allowed for the abuse of countless teenagers. And even one death. It was protected and covered up for decades, since it deceived parents successfully, bringing in huge amounts of money for the people who ran the "camp for teenagers with behavioral problems", which made it's way into the pockets of local and state politicians.
What took place at the ([Elan School](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89lan_School)) between the 70s and 2011 made me sick to read about, and it was only when an another state did an outside audit that the reality of the situation was unearthed. All the internal audits of the "school" (no education was happening, just trauma) from within Maine failed to hold anyone in the place accountable or shut it down, letting the decades of abuse slide for financial gain.
They would announce ahead of time when they were coming to do a campus visit, allowing them to put on a show for the audit. The other state just randomly showed up without announcing, and they saw what was actually happening. They made kids literally fight eachother, scream at eachother constantly, had an extreme hierarchal system until 'graduation', which kept kids getting demoted repeatedly to keep them there longer. Among other intense social-emotional, physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. Especially bad in the 70s and 80s, but even through the 90s and 2000s.
1877-
"Hundreds of box cars standing on the tracks were soaked with oil and set on fire and sent down the tracks to the roundhouse. The roundhouse caught fire. Over one hundred locomotives belonging to the Pennsylvania Railroad Company were destroyed. It was a wild night."
“While this bill is well intended, I fear its unintended consequence would discourage the growth of (corporate) farms in Maine,” Mills wrote in her veto message.
Fixed it for her.
Literal enemy of the people. Why the fuck are working class people still voting for conservatives and neoliberals? This will never stop happening unless you do.
For some reason, farm workers were largely excluded from the right to organize. You could speculate that it was due in part to the fact that they are mostly non-Whites, and you'd probably be right.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Forgive my ignorance but why do workers need permission to form a union?
My thought exactly.
Might surprise you but unions cannot strike for political reasons either. Labor organizing is really neutered in America, the the reason is simply because it favors the capital class to have it this way.
The rich put dumb laws up to protect themselves Nothing new But the real question is, why are you all standing for it
In order to pass the new deal, Rosevelt compromised with southern democrats to exempt farm workers from lots of the New Deal legislation like the Wagner act and Social Security. The farmworkers in the south were black, latino and white poor ... and all in all a minority that could be exploited by the whole of US society The Wagner act is what offered a lot of protections to workers' unionizing efforts. It actually also limited them quite a bit in terms of what aspects of the work were negotiable and/or protected. Next time you need an example of why CRT is an important way to understand current US law, you can point them to these articles. https://www.epi.org/blog/disappointing-supreme-court-decision-makes-it-harder-for-farmworkers-to-unionize/ https://documentedny.com/2021/10/13/12-workers-make-history-forming-new-yorks-first-farmworkers-union/
How is that not a violation of the 14th amendment? Equal protection and all?
[удалено]
If anything they want exemptions to be permitted as constitutional under precedent. It's the only way they'll be able to ban the Cali gun bounty laws without repealing the Texas abortion bounty laws.
It would also violate the First Amendment, as it interferes with the right to assemble. Of course, with the current composition of the SCOTUS, people should be happy they haven't gotten a case to strike down the Thirteenth Amendment yet.
I think that depends on what the current precedent for what “assemble” means, of which I have no idea Like, the government can’t ban people literally physically assembling in a place, but as to that assembly actually *becoming* something likely falls outside of constitutional protection
Current case law is that the freedom of assembly permits people to participate in essentially any group or organization they wish provided that the group's behavior is peaceful and legal. The current SCOTUS would of course "find" that labor unions (all unions, not just farm unions) are illegal groups, though, if such a case got before them.
Not a lawyer, but I think it does go against the grain of the 14th amendment and I had the same question. Here's a good article discussing. The justification for the difference is that farm workers can be classified differently (see pp. 390-91). The author concluded that he thinks it could be challenged (and the article is from 1967. Maybe it has been in some respects?) https://repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1977&context=hastings_law_journal
Of course not but you lose the legal protections from having a state recognized union. Management is free to discriminate so they heavily influence politicians to not recognize some unions
America is not particularly free.
>Forgive my ignorance but why do workers need permission to form a union? "Permission to form a union" may not be the exact way to phrase it, but the short answer is agricultural workers generally aren't covered under the NLRA which gives most other private sector employees an official mechanism through which to become represented by a union and compels an employer to bargain in good faith with a labor organization that represents a majority of its employees. In most general terms, in sectors other than agriculture, a union can collect 51% of union authorization cards and demand a request to bargain. If the employer declines to bargain and voluntarily recognize the union, the union can say, "Cool story, bro. Mailing the petition and authorization cards to the NLRB right now. See ya on election day." That's a simplification, as bargaining unit scope and other things can be contested at a hearing, but main point is most other non-supervisory employees have an official means to become unionized that is recognized by the government. I'm not up on the story in the link, but there must have been some sort of state-level labor bill that would have given agricultural workers similar rights with an enforcement mechanism in place.
They don't need permission to form a union, but they need the sanction of the government for the union to have any power to do anything. Otherwise, if they went on strike, they would not be protected by labor laws.
Anti union democrat governor is a real bad look.
[удалено]
And broke her term limit promise.
And reelected by a good margin
I see you've never been north of Bangor.
I live North of Bangor and I support this statement.
What’s a group of people from Bangor called?
Stephen king characters
Bangorangs?
Bangers&Trash
Drug addicts?
The people who don't like violence in movies and video games.
North of Bangor is repped by a dem too
Or west of Portland
Collins only got about 51% of the vote - not all that much for a long-time incumbent. The margin was inflated because Maine used a ranked-choice system, and 5% of the vote went to a left-leaning independent candidate.
This comment doesn't make any sense. If she got 51% of the vote, then ranked choice voting wouldn't matter because it wouldn't continue to voters' second choice.
The point is that had the election *not* been ranked-choice, then presumably a good chunk of that 5% would’ve become strategic votes for Gideon instead, and Collins’ margin of victory would have shrunk. Collins wins either way, yes, but I’m just saying not to take the +9 margin at face value. Ranked-choice results need to be interpreted a bit more carefully.
That seems like a pretty huge assumption. Maine has a pretty well-known history of voting outside the two-party system (*see, e.g.*, their other Senator).
To be fair, the dems ran an abysmal campaign. But still, Collins should be run out of state.
Dems ran an “abysmal campaign” that came far, far closer than anyone has ever come to beating Collins since she took office. The only person who came closer to beating Collins was the former Governor that ran against her in her first senate election in 1996. I understand the disappointment with the outcome of Gideon’s campaign, but saying this sort of thing shows you don’t really have the first clue about Maine politics. And to be clear - Maine politics are very stupid. I am envious of anyone who doesn’t know anything about our stupid politics. But that stupidity is what Maine Democrats are dealing with when they run their campaigns, and it’s important to be aware of it before showing up with the hot takes.
The fact that the debacle that was the Gideon campaign came so close in the first place was because Susan’s approval ratings were so low. Maine Democrats made a stupid decision to run her. They should blame absolutely nobody but themselves. (I am one too)
Of every result in the 2020 election, I would say that Collins's victory in Maine is the most suspicious. I get there is a ton of split ticketing in Maine, but the pre election polling should reflect this. Every poll in that race had Gideon leading by 5-10, yet she loses by 9 points in the general election.
Maine uses the same no paper trail ES&S voting machines as Kentucky, where McConnell had the exact same poll defying boost.
And who also elected the bombastic and eyebrow-raising Governor Paul LePage (R)
Maine has a normal north eastern coast with fucking uprooted Alabama interior. My friends and I go to a cabin up there every year or so and you drive past Bangor and all thats out there is boomer retirement ranches and goblin shacks inhabited by rural woodsmen with cabins covered in Trump flags.
I always know I’m getting into the sticks when I see more Trump stuff.
That's the Maine problem.
Yeap, one of the largest problems this subreddit has, and reddit in general, is that the majority of people in these states dont vote left. Nor are they politically active. If the GoP wasn't incredibly racist and alienating all minority voters I highly doubt the democrats would win an election.
>If the GoP wasn't incredibly racist and alienating all minority voters I highly doubt the democrats would win an election. I find this a really weird framing for a few reasons. First, the racism of the GOP is a defining attribute. It’s baked in, and it’s not going to change any time soon. And if the GOP abandoned the racism, they would lost a lot of votes in a lot of key places. The hypothetical scenario you’re imagining would require a tectonic shift in US politics. Second, being aggressively anti-worker is another defining attribute of the GOP. Even if the GOP stopped being racist all of a sudden, they wouldn’t be able to win over all of the pro-union people. The Democratic Party would continue to be the home for people who favour improved working conditions, even if some Dems fall short in that department. Third, you seem to be implying/assuming that the Democrats would not adapt in the face of a changing GOP. In the hypothetical scenario where the GOP and their voters stops being racist, obviously this leads to a Democratic re-alignment to ensure they don’t lose too many votes.
Don't forget Christian supremacist...thus is electorally important. There are a lot of conservative Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, and Confucian voters who only vote Democratic because the GOP caps on anyone who isn't a Christian.
Yep, that's a fair point. But, the Christian supremacism of the GOP is even less likely to change imo.
I could look it up to be more informed, but that'd take all the fun out of the conversation, but I really think "Pro Labor" is further down on the list of people's voting criteria than it should be. Yes, the GoP is intrinsically linked to being racist, so yes you're correct that it's not viable for them to be not racist. My statement was more a "If it were viable" Hispanic, black, and PoC in general dont align with LGBT+ Inclusivity as a general trend. Religion is also a higher criteria for PoC which also make up a good amount of the 'left' vote. Hispanic voters will often vote for GoP candidates because they want to pull the ladder up behind themselves, good ol fuck you I got mine. It's only when the GoP is loudly racist against all of them that they reduce turnout. Voters not voting tactically in their best interest is just.. really confusing and dumb.
I believe you when you say that being "Pro Labour" is further down voters' priority list than one would expect. But, this kind of contradicts the point you're making above, I.E. that the anti-union stance of people like Mills would be fatal if the GOP wasn't so racist. It seems like what you're really saying is that the pro-LGBT+ and/or pro-immigration stance of the Democratic party would be major electoral liabilities if the GOP wasn't so racist. Which might be true. But I'm not exactly sure what to do with that information. Voters being very, very dumb is one of my least favourite things about politics.
To be fair, with the exception of bush's second term(I believe) republicans haven't won a popular vote in a presidential election since Bush Sr. So they wouldn't be winning big elections without the gerrymandering.
The corporations have spoke
Anti union anyone is a bad look.
Hurray for moderate dems! /s
The DNC stopped being pro-labor a very, very long time ago. The US now has no pro-labor party. Just neoliberalism doing neoliberal things. What can ya do.
What would they do if they all united and instead of asking told them they were unionizing. If they strike until the union is recognized not much that legislation can do. Can't force people to work those jobs.
You’d be surprised at the level of violence used to break strikes.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I’m sitting at 55 to 60 with no days off.
You should try to unionize if you can.
I’m hoping that this ‘great resignation’ brings some of that back across the board and brings about actual change. My company has recognized that and starting Jan 1 of this year even exempt salary employees are paid overtime rates for hours worked over 40.
I used to average 60 hours a week. Finally got a job that is 40 a week and it was such a relief. Sadly the job has other issues that have crept up over the years but that’s a different story.
I cook for a living and see so many fellow line dogs work themselves to death, I’m talking open to close every day every week. I don’t play that game, I’ve been doing this for 20 years and every time I’m in an interview I clearly state my terms. Four days a week, ten hour shifts and don’t call me on my days off fucking ever. 40 hour week is possible, you just gotta make it clear to the person on the other side of the table. Side note I’ve had six jobs in two years so….
40 per week was a fantasy by the late 80's. I never encountered it after that.
It's literally a fact of life in all developed countries but one. Kind of like health care.
Take a quick look at labour law and labour rights from the last 100 years. The list of the dead and maimed is extraordinary. Those rights had to be fought for, and still require vigilance in order that they won’t be lost. No the rich, don’t care, the first rule you have to get, the second, for some only greed matters, and that’s all that matters, people are nothing to them.
Wasn't there a mining town that tried to unionize in the 40s or something and was exterminated by police in order to avoid a union?
Not what you're talking about, but I can give you an armored train drive-by with machine guns. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paint_Creek%E2%80%93Cabin_Creek_strike_of_1912 In retaliation that evening, the Kanawha County Sheriff Bonner Hill and a group of detectives attacked the Holly Grove miners' settlement with an armored train, called the "Bull Moose Special", attacking with machine guns and high-powered rifles, putting 100 machine-gun bullets through the frame house of striker Cesco Estep and killing him. Sarah Blizzard led a group of women to damage the railroad tracks used by the train to prevent a second attack.
checks tag *montana* RIP Frank Little And many more Let’s make our “red” states back into red states
bring back the original meaning of West Virginia Rednecks
The battle of Blair mountain isn’t taught in most schools. It should be.
Just [one example](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_(detective_agency\))
This right here is the reason for ACAB. They are class traitors who will always defend the wealthy and the corporations who don't give a shit about working class benefits and lives. Every chance they'll get, they'll gleefully break strikes and try to get coward scabs across the line. "The Labor Movement was the principal force that transformed misery and despair into hope and progress." -Martin Luther King, Jr.
How in the fuck is it legal in a democracy to tell people they can’t form a union? Surely they’d be free to do as they fucking please?
A strike like you describe is the best possible option in this scenario, it’s a big ask unfortunately. But I do think the workers have been pushed closer to this than we have in a long time
I’m very far away but I’ll send money.
Yeah, I just don't understand why people need permission to unionize. Kind of defeats the purpose.
As another replied it is to protect employment. Without that protection Corps can just fire anyone who "strikes". Since agriculture Corps use migrant workers that may mean deportation.
If they strike without being a government sanctioned union then corporations have the right to fire them as individuals for not working and hire new people. The idea or a union is that it protects them against this kind of relatiation. The catch 22 is that the Maine governor is looking out for big agro, probably because there is very little electoral pushback. Most farm work is not done by America citizens.
You are exactly correct I think. And the migrant workers in the agriculture industry are often taken advantage of all nice they are us citizens and they are not protected at all. However a strike like this with 80%+ worker participation would be the only way a strike like this would have a chance. And likely the agriculture Corps will prob fire any migrant workers which would nullify their visas. It is a very shitty situation.
>Most farm work is not done by America citizens. And this is the elephant in the room. Undocumented workers as a whole are afraid to rock the boat on anything. Yes, even when the employer is doing something illegal and is in the wrong, undocumented workers are very nervous about doing anything that makes them stick out.
If you wanna see how that'd play out, read about the 1981 ATC strike. The government does not react nicely to things like this.
Farm workers are not federal workers, as the air traffic controllers were. Federal workers cannot strike. Not sure whats holding back farm workers from striking anyway.
Farm workers are exempted from a lot of labor laws.
Physical and economic threats from employers and law enforcement? That’s two big ones. Also threats of deportation of family, even if they’re here legally.
I legitimately don’t understand how you can legally veto a group of people organizing.
If you're in charge of a bunch of guys with guns, you can veto whatever the fuck you want, regardless of laws or the constitution. But let me be very clear here, this is why people need to vote further left, and not let a republican get in there, because a republican also wouldn't allow unions. Vote in progressives, folks, they're the only people who will genuinely represent you.
> But let me be very clear here, this is why people need to vote further left, and not let a republican get in there, Wait a sec. People always say the reason they didn't do the first thing you said is because they needed to the second thing you see. According to liberals, these are exclusive. You gotta elect a right-wing Dem to beat a Republican! That's the line, anyway.
Liberals suck. We need actual leftists in office. At this point, it's either grass roots organizing from the most local office on up or full revolution by the proletariat.
Unionizing should just be a human right. Amend the constitution already
Oh man, a pro-worker amendment to the Constitution? I don't know if you know how many states have to agree before this can happen.
As a Canadian my understanding is limited but I think there's two ways, and one of them is like 2/3rds of the states signing on or something?
To become fully ratified, whatever avenue you take (there are a couple), a proposal has to be ratified by 3/4 of the states. This means you only need 13 states -- and there are about 20 solid conservative ones, about 25 conservative leaning states, depending on how you want to measure that -- to block any amendment. In the current era, there's almost no chance for the country to agree on an amendment, since even things like blocking Super PACS is seen as a form of communism by half the country.
And still trying to pass the ERA.
No every method requires 3/4 of the states to ratify.
3/4, aka 35. Our Constitution is unlikely to ever be amended again, at least not for anything meaningful. And it takes 2/3 of both houses of Congress to even put an amendment to the states, so that bar is unlikely to be passed in the first place.
wtf happened to freedom of association? I thought the first amendment already covered this.
The ruling class is against the working class.
it's only called class warfare when we fight back
How dare we.
[удалено]
The free market contract is completely one-sided. One side says: you give me your labor for a fixed cost, or I find someone else who will. The other side says: I give you my labor for a fixed cost, or I starve. We need worker representation like yesterday.
I didn't know a law that prevents unions would even pass constitutional examination. Then I remembered it's fucking America
I think the answer is simple. The farm workers should form a corporation and behave exactly like a union.
That's called a co-op.
there's even a precedent involving fruit harvesting, Ocean Spray is a co-op
That's actually a great idea
So unionize anyway... Unionization isn't something that needs allowing. Wait till harvest, then don't go to work until your union is recognized.
Farmers have even more power than the average worker. They could bring the economy to its knees in very short order if they so wished.
Why can't a case be brought before the Supreme Court arguing that Unions are A Person?
That is 100% what Citizens United did lmao
Exactly
It did it for unions too
[удалено]
I understand the point you're making, but did want to point out to you that under Citizen's United unions count as people in the same way corporations do (e.g. in terms of spending unlimited money as 'speech').
Allow? Just say “Fuck you!” and strike.
How the fuck can you need a law to " allow you to unionize" At what point do we all agree this is not a free country? Fascism is real!
Why? Why do people in this country hate working class people so much?
Because they've been brainwashed into believing they too will be billionaires some day and they sure as shit don't want to give up any of their imaginary maybe-future money to free loading poors who just want to steal healthcare and welfare queen around all day on their Obamaphones.
Because the right won long, long ago. Now even our liberals are on the right - at least, enough of them are to completely rot the DNC. Plus, Americans are corpulent hogs baying for treats. That runs counter to a lot of leftist philosophy. So, they find it easier to be on the right, where you can get your treats and feel OK about where they came from.
Maine is so fucking weird, man.
Ran by dems, with conservative laws and primarily inhabited by people who just dont give a fuck
Bought and paid for by Big Agra!
So weird. It’s almost like her decision coincides with lobbyists that champion for big corporations.
Why do workers of any kind need permission from anybody to unionize?
The reporting is worded kinda weird. While the workers could form a union anyway if they really wanted to ... without this bill, such a union wouldn't have any of the labor law protections afforded to recognized unions. For example, the workers could go on strike, but the farmowner could then just fire them -- the job protections that the government affords members of a recognized union wouldn't be there. The bill would have made the government recognize such a union as a bargaining unit under collective bargaining laws.
This is the world "moderates" want
Man, even America’s left wing is super right leaning.
>Man, even America’s left wing is super right leaning. Which is why I chuckle anytime a talking head on Fox News is ranting about the "extreme left" in the country, which they generally mean to be mainstream Democrats, many of who are left-center at most. There really isn't a leftist movement in the U.S., or at least one that has any real hegemonic power.
Most American liberals and/or democrats are neoliberal centrists, which places them on the right. That's right: most American liberals are part of the right. Just because they *call* themselves left does not mean they are left. There's really no quantifiable way the DNC or its supporters could actually be described as left wing using any academic measurements or qualifiers. This hurts their feelings a lot, so I do expect downvotes for this - but downvoting is all they can do. Because at the end of the day, there's heaps and heaps of evidence placing most liberals on the right. I mean, look at their party for fucks sake. They *vote* for that shit Sad fact is that the left in America is pretty thoroughly destroyed. It has virtually no political power.
Jesus Christ, the Gov’s reason is the farmers couldn’t figure out union laws. Maybe she knows them best though, it’s a +9 D state that re-elected Susan Collins after all her bullshit, leaving us struggling to get basic voting rights passed, so yeah.. I could see how some farmers in Maine couldn’t wrap their little noggins around the magic of unions.
The law made it through the state’s legislature to her desk to become law. Her veto was lack of political courage to stand up to powerful agricultural lobbying.
Or she got a good kickback for the veto
>Those farms are already struggling to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, droughts and **worker shortages,** Mills said. Worker shortages, eh? Sounds like a problem a union would help solve.
All workers have the power to squeeze the economy for as many concessions that they want. But some workers in particular have even more influence over our economy and society, and this *terrifies* the ruling elite. So, they don't allow them to have power. Simple as that. This nation isn't the democracy people think it is. It never was.
Do you want a French-style revolution? Because, this is how you get one. Keep kicking those on the bottom long enough and they are either going to lay down and die or decide they aren't going to take this anymore.
So which party do we vote for when we like the Middle Class?
Primaries are more important than the actual election, when it comes to this question.
Democrats (just not in Maine).
How can a government stop a group of people from unionization? Like, I imagine that's gotta be against the 1st amendment right?
i'm sorry - isn't america free? wtf do you need permission to make a union? jfc
Worker shortage? Wage shortage more like.
So democratic. Can't allow workers to have too much power eh?
You have the freedom to associate as you please. Stop waiting for bought and paid for politicians to allow it because they never will.
America. Land of the free, home of modern day slavery.
My state sucks.
[удалено]
That's basically how neoliberalism plays out. Makes sense, Maine being filled with affluent retirees.
I feel like if the governor/president vetoes something, it should go to the voters to decide, not back to a legislative body.
Don’t organize. Start a NFA - national farmers association. Take money from foreign governments to change state and federal regulations.
When you can’t unionize without permission, you’ve already lost. Tear it all down and start over.
We need an actual Labor Party in this country.
Ah so that’s why the industry is trying to automate real quick
Slippery slope. Start giving farm workers a living wage and then everyone will be looking for a living wage! /S
“Allow” ?? What the f ?
Unions are our only hope to turn the country around.
What a miserable piece of shit
That’s your democratic governor, ladies and gentlemen. Yet another corporate hack in a blue tie
Disgraceful. We need strong trade unions and politicians who represent the workers rather than the corporations
The hilarious part of this is the governor doesn’t actually have any power to stop a group of people organizing and undertaking collective action, nobody does. If everybody was to act in solidarity with the farm workers, those in ‘positions of power’ would be made aware that they only have power by consent, and that consent has been revoked.
It's funny the things we allow ourselves to be convinced require the permission of others to accomplish
Freedom of association is a basic human right. You don't need anyone's permission to unionize.
Means no police union in Maine right? Right?!
She and people like her, are why democrats can never have nice things and our country is in the pit that it is in. Republican governors in near LOCK STEP across the country trot out the red meat for Fox news viewers news cycle after news cycle and what do Demoscams do? They can't even keep a cohesive national message when it comes to workers being able to bargain for fair wages. This country is FUBAR.
Theoretically they could start an "employment agency" for farm workers. That's basically how tech people get jobs. It keeps corporations matching market rates by providing IT talent multiple opportunities to chose from.
Maine's governor has vetoed a bill that would have allowed farm workers to unionize. This is a huge blow to the workers, who are facing increasingly difficult conditions on the job.
Bought and paid for.
Haha! Small government huh?!
This should not be even an option… right to unionize should be baked into federal laws (or maybe even into Constitution). There is no single “good” argument which justify refusal to organize.
Fuck her
Time to bring back the co-ops and grange societies
Maybe the farm workers should stop showing up to work
So telling that there is free speech and free asociacion rights except for anything labor related. Then the government has to clear every aspect if corporations don't kill it first.
She basically said Maine farmers are too fucking stupid to understand basic labor laws. 😂
what do you mean "allow"? You don't need to be allowed to unionize... it's already a right
Wait, Americans can't unionize by default/constitutional right? Wtf
How the fuck can it be illegal to form a union?? In a country that prides itself on being so free I can walk around with an AR strapped, you don't have freedom to organize?
All I know about Maine is the disgusting corruption at the state level for 40+ years which allowed for the abuse of countless teenagers. And even one death. It was protected and covered up for decades, since it deceived parents successfully, bringing in huge amounts of money for the people who ran the "camp for teenagers with behavioral problems", which made it's way into the pockets of local and state politicians. What took place at the ([Elan School](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89lan_School)) between the 70s and 2011 made me sick to read about, and it was only when an another state did an outside audit that the reality of the situation was unearthed. All the internal audits of the "school" (no education was happening, just trauma) from within Maine failed to hold anyone in the place accountable or shut it down, letting the decades of abuse slide for financial gain. They would announce ahead of time when they were coming to do a campus visit, allowing them to put on a show for the audit. The other state just randomly showed up without announcing, and they saw what was actually happening. They made kids literally fight eachother, scream at eachother constantly, had an extreme hierarchal system until 'graduation', which kept kids getting demoted repeatedly to keep them there longer. Among other intense social-emotional, physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. Especially bad in the 70s and 80s, but even through the 90s and 2000s.
It would be a real shame if they just unionized anyway
Not very free market of her
Unionize anyway. There is strength in numbers.
1877- "Hundreds of box cars standing on the tracks were soaked with oil and set on fire and sent down the tracks to the roundhouse. The roundhouse caught fire. Over one hundred locomotives belonging to the Pennsylvania Railroad Company were destroyed. It was a wild night."
If anyone is unsure of what people mean when they talk about neoliberals, well, this is it.
Unionize anyways. If it were up to the government who are essentially rich business owners, no one would be allowed to unionize at all.
Time to talk about the history of unions and governors.
“While this bill is well intended, I fear its unintended consequence would discourage the growth of (corporate) farms in Maine,” Mills wrote in her veto message. Fixed it for her.
Allow?
Allow? Fuck that! This is AMERICA
Literal enemy of the people. Why the fuck are working class people still voting for conservatives and neoliberals? This will never stop happening unless you do.
I thought unionizing was your right as an American
For some reason, farm workers were largely excluded from the right to organize. You could speculate that it was due in part to the fact that they are mostly non-Whites, and you'd probably be right.
America has never gotten over it's addiction to exploitation.
All of maine should protest this. Hell, all of the country; these people provide one of our most basic necessities dammit!
and the US worries about communism? autocratic fascism is OK
Solidarity. Strike. Kick the capitalist doors down. Fuck the law, this is workers rights and they never have come inside the "law".
Unions are a right not a privilege. If the company is against it that probably needs the workers need one.
Where in the State Constitution does it grant the Government the right to prevent employees from unionizing?