Power Play

Why the Wisconsin Fight Matters

Photo: Justin Ormont


The earlier battle was staged in Sheboygan at Kohler, the legendary manufacturer of kitchen, bath, and furniture products. The employees at Kohler had voted to join the United Auto Workers union, and a strike that began in April 1954 was not settled until the early 1960s.

In taking on the unions—as the historian Kim Phillips-Fein recounts in Invisible Hands: The Businessmen's Crusade Against the New Deal—Herbert Kohler, the president of the family company, became a hero to small manufacturers around the country.

"Who runs this country?" Kohler would ask appreciative antiunion audiences. "That is the basic issue at Kohler. That is the potential question for ALL industry. We must meet this issue fighting."

There is an interesting coda to this story. This past December, as the Green Bay Press-Gazette reported, the members of UAW Local 833 voted 1,152 to 717 to endorse a contract at Kohler that included a five-year wage freeze, higher health care premiums and the creation of a two-tiered wage and benefit system.


That is the background for the confrontation going on now between Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker and the state's public-employee unions. Private-sector workers are taking it on the chin, and conservatives now see a chance to cripple organized labor altogether by killing off public-sector unions, the most vibrant part of the movement. The underlying argument is actually insidious: If workers in the private sector have it bad, shouldn't workers in the public sector have it bad, too?

"The game goes like this," as one prounion political consultant I spoke with put it. "Destroy private-sector unions, reduce private-sector health and retirement benefits, then say 'Hey, how come those public employees get such (relatively) good benefits? That's not fair.'" He scoffed at those now insisting that they like private but not public-sector unions: "Private-sector unions are only 'OK' once they are completely emasculated."


Nobody denies the recession has tanked state revenues. That's why even progressive governors have been making budget cuts—and why Wisconsin's state unions conceded to Walker's demands for higher pension and health-care contributions. What the unions are rightly resisting is a shift in the long-term balance of political power that undercutting collective bargaining would represent.


And last week, Walker also signed into law a bill that will require a two-thirds supermajority in the legislature, or a state-wide referendum, to raise income, sales, or corporate franchise taxes. Imagine if President Barack Obama had insisted that a two-thirds majority be required to repeal his health-care law? This is an antidemocratic effort to lock in the policies of what could prove to be a temporary conservative majority.

It's said that this fight is all about partisanship—and it's true that Walker's proposal is tougher on the most Democratic-leaning public-employee unions than on the ones more sympathetic to Republicans.



(c) 2011, Washington Post Writers Group

Related: State of the Unions, by the Editors
Who Approves This Message?, by Steven H. Shiffrin



Commenting Guidelines


Well, it's been known for years before the last econonic meltdown here in Michigan that the MEA (Michigan Education Association, our public school teachers' union) has the Cadillac of health care benefits, and the state employees have enjoyed a slightly less expensive Cadillac. Didn't have to pillage private health insurance to accomplish that.

Next they will bring back the poll tax and the coup of the right wingnuts will be complete. This is plain and simple a direct attack on unions per se. The current recessionary economy is just an excuse. Instead of making progress in growing the economy and improving wages and benefits for all, the Wisconsin governor seeks to totally destroy. Somewhere, this seems immoral and outside the boundaries of good government.

I believe Bob Herbert of the NYTimes had it right, pointing out that the Wisconsin caper has the old cynical  tactic of splitting up opponents.  Middle class folks who don't understand and support unions are pitted against middle class union folks, providing lots of cover for GOP ideologic efforts.


About the Author
