School budgets have been slashed. Thousands of firefighters, police officers and teachers have been laid off. Many libraries and parks have been closed. College tuition has become out of reach for millions and student loan debt just hit one trillion dollars!

Foreclosures continue at unprecedented rates. Unemployment is persis­tently over 9 percent. The numbers of uninsured Americans continue to rise.

So where did all the money go?

Anyone who attended our recent stewards conferences knows the answer.

In 1976, the richest 1 percent of Americans owned 20 percent of all wealth in this country. Today, that number is well over 40 percent. Which, of course, explains why the middle class’ share of wealth in that same period has gone from 53 percent to 46 percent.

But the biggest cause of this imbal­ance of wealth can be traced to the national decline of union membership.

Since 1979, right around the time that President Reagan broke the air traffic controllers’ union and gave the green light to the corporations to do the same to their unionized workers, almost all of the increases in productivity have gone not to the working people who created the wealth, but to the richest 1 percent.

From 1947 to 1979, productivity increased 119 percent, average hourly compensation (which includes benefits) went up 100 percent and hourly wages rose 72 percent. But from 1980 to 2010, productivity increased 80 percent while hourly compensation rose only 8 percent and hourly wages rose just 7 percent!

The chart on this page sums it up very well.

Asking questions

So if this decline of our share of income has been going on for the last 30 years, how come we’re just aware of it now?

The answer is that middle class spending did not decline in those 30 years.

First, family income and spending rose because women joined the work force in ever larger numbers, so now many families had two wage earners.

Later, spending increased because of the easy availability of credit — much of which was borrowed against rising equity in people’s homes.

But now there are fewer jobs and extremely tight credit markets. Hence the crises and the big question: Where did all the money go?

We are not a poorer nation than we were 30 years ago. There is no economic reason why the 99 percent of the rest of us should have less opportunity and less hope for our future.

But there are political reasons why this situation is so.

Huge corporations, the ones with all the money, also own the vast majority of the media and contribute heavily to the politicians. They tell us that things are naturally the way they are and that we have only ourselves to blame if we are without a job or upside down on our mortgage, or we have to take out huge loans to send our kids to college.

But do not despair. People are starting to ask questions.

Where has all the money gone?

This is a democracy and we are the vast majority. The times they are a-changin’!

Ace Parking Ground Transportation workers gain new contract

Desert Museum members approve new agreement

Federal judge rules on legislature’s anti-­union measure, blocks SB 1365 from taking effect

Federal District Court Judge G. Murray Snow issued a temporary injunction to block implementation of anti-union legislation SB 1365 in September.

In his order, Judge Snow wrote: “The claims allege constitutional harms, which are necessarily irreparable. The balance of equities and the public interest likewise tilt in favor of enjoining a law that implicates core constitutional rights.”

The temporary injunction blocks Atty. Gen. Tom Horne from enforcing SB 1365.
Local 99 brought the lawsuit against SB 1365, which is misleadingly dubbed the Protect Arizona Employees’ Paychecks from Politics Act

“SB 1365 and other efforts are just attempts to silence the voices of the middle class who depend on Arizona’s working families to engage elected officials on important issues,” Local 99 President Jim McLaughlin said.

The union argues that the law is discriminatory and an unconstitutional attack against the free speech rights of labor unions and their members.

Enacted in April, SB 1365 tries to prevent unions from making political contributions and participating in other political activities funded by its members through paycheck deductions.

No similar legislation was enacted or introduced that would require corporations from getting specific approval from its employees to use their involuntary payroll deductions for political purposes.

“SB 1365 was just another attack on working people,” McLaughlin said. “Honest conservatives recognize that the First Amendment protects people they don’t like, including organizations that stand up for the rights of working people like labor unions.“

Workshops across Arizona prepare stewards

A series of Steward Workshops were held throughout Arizona from Sept. 12 through Sept. 15.                                                   
The main theme of the meetings was to connect the battles members face at Local 99 with the battles going on throughout the nation — for fair wages, for decent schools for children, for security in old age and other issues.

“We discussed the role of politics in all this, not just the need to vote for candidates who support working families, but also politics in the larger sense,” said President Jim McLaughlin.  “The role of unions in creating the middle class and the decline in numbers of union members directly correspond to the decline in the income of the middle class as a whole.”

Additionally, all stewards participated in group exercises by coming up with the best answers for such questions as “What would you tell a new employee why they should join the union?” or “What reasons would you give someone for not shopping at Walmart?”

The Steward Workshops were held in Tucson, West Phoenix, the East Valley and Flagstaff.

Southern California grocery workers ratify contract

Supermarket talks continue in Northern and Central California

UFCW unions representing 60,000 grocery workers in Northern and Central California are engaged in contract negotiations with three of the largest supermarket companies in the region.

Representatives of UFCW Locals 5, 648 and UFCW 8-Golden State have been meeting with officials of Raley’s, Safeway, Save Mart and affiliated chains for several months.

“This is the most challenging round of talks we’ve faced in decades,” UFCW 8 President Jacques Loveall said. “The economy, health care reform and the creep of non-union competitors are all straining the process.”

The workers’ previous contract, which expired on Oct. 8, is currently on extension.

Walmart closes Marketside format

Albertsons LLC eliminating self-checkout

Safeway creates new position: Chief Medical Officer

The people of Ohio voted overwhelmingly on Nov. 8 to repeal Senate Bill 5, the controversial state law that limited public-sector workers’ ability to bargain collectively.

Issue 2, a referendum to confirm SB5, was defeated by a vote of 61 to 39 percent.

The vote is seen as a harsh blow to Republican Gov. John Kasich’s career and as a sign of labor unions’ resurgent power in state politics.

SB5 was hurried through the Republican-controlled legislature earlier this year when GOP governors pushed similar bills in Wisconsin, Indiana, New Jersey and other states.

The bill, which Kasich signed into law at the end of March, restricted the bargaining rights of 360,000 public workers in Ohio and compelled them to pay more for their benefits.

Mass protests against the law washed over the state and union members quickly gathered more than a million signatures to repeal SB5.

“One message rang loud and clear tonight in Ohio and across the country: those who spend their time scapegoating workers and pushing a partisan agenda will only strengthen the resolve of working people,” AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka commented.

“From the very beginning, it's been clear that Gov. Kasich, and indeed many politicians, were pushing an agenda that was about politics, not about solving our nation's problems or creating jobs.”

While Gov. Kasich said it was time for him to “take a deep breath” and reevaluate his positions, Republicans in the state legislature vowed to introduce similar bills when they reconvene in January.

Doing so, however, might put their own job security at risk.

Youngstown Political Science Prof. Paul Sracic said that while rejecting a single issue on the ballot doesn’t mean the state is shifting its political allegiances, “this could turn Ohio voters against Republicans and that can have an effect on 2012.”