Thomas Geoghegan, Which Side Are You On? Trying to Be for Labor When It’s Flat On Its Back

slaniel | Which Side Are You On?: Trying to Be for Labor When It' | Wednesday, July 2nd, 2008

Cover of Which Side Are You On: construction workers on some sort of building project. One of them in particular catches our eye; he seems to be looking up toward the heavens You know how some people say, “I don’t believe in religion, but I believe in God”? Thomas Geoghegan doesn’t necessarily believe in labor unions, but he believes in labor. Or maybe: he doesn’t believe ultimate salvation is to be found in unions, but that there’s no alternative to them for now, and that without them we’re … well, we’re in the state we’re in today, where workers are powerless and can be left unemployed and uninsured at any moment. A world without unions is a world where we’re scared.

This is just not the world we ought to be living in. There is a better way and a better world, of course. We know that we can’t get to this world on our own. On our own, we are isolated from the rest of those who are suffering. We are powerless so long as we are isolated.

It’s virtually an axiom, then, that some form of collective resistance to limitlessly powerful corporations is necessary. We simply cannot do it on our own. It does not follow, however, that labor unions are the ideal form of that resistance. It also doesn’t follow that government is the ideal form. But in their highly imperfect way, says Thomas Geoghegan, labor unions are far better than a world without them. He backs this up with story upon story about corporations absolutely crushing workers in the absence of any labor-union resistance.

Geoghegan himself is a labor lawyer who’s been fighting the fight alongside labor unions for a quarter century or more. He’s also often worked against them: he’s sued the Teamsters repeatedly, in essence fighting for more union democracy. He’s trying to get the unions that the employees deserve.

He’s not had much luck fighting against them. For a short time, Geoghegan’s heart leapt for joy when Ron Carey was at the Teamsters’ helm, but the Carey era ended quickly enough and James P. Hoffa (son of Jimmy Hoffa) took over.

As for fighting alongside them, that hasn’t worked very well either. Unions are down to 10% or so of the working population. Not coincidentally (as any reader of Paul Krugman knows well), the Democratic party is in a shambles and has been for at least thirty years. The Democrats need the unions.

What makes this book so agonizing is Geoghegan’s insistence that a few little changes would bring democracy to the unions, unions to the workers, and the Democratic party to power. One such change is a card-check system like the one Canada uses. Consequently, Canadian union membership has been consistently in the 30% range for at least a decade. When we dream of the better world that Canadians seem to inhabit, it’s well to consider how they got there.

The fact that just over the border is a country not much different than ours, but whose policies could hardly be more different, gives the lie to the notion that unions have disappeared in the U.S. because of changing workplaces. Yes, we’re now a service economy rather than an industrial economy. But so is Canada. Geoghegan dispenses with any number of commonplaces like this one.

In general, he spends the most time dismantling the idea that unions’ disappearance is in some sense “natural.” It’s not. It has a lot to do with Republicans and with conservative courts. It has to do with Taft-Hartley. It has to do with one law after another that smashed unions into the ground. There was nothing natural about it.

This book doesn’t give much in the way of solutions, but I’m not even sure that’s its point. Merely getting people — especially Democrats — to recognize a problem is plenty. Getting them to recognize a human-created problem is better still. Along the way, Geoghegan is impossibly funny, chatty, and self-deprecating. While I can’t quite call this book a “joy” — it’s too maddening for that — I do submit that it’s indispensible and should be on every American’s bookshelf.

(Thanks to Cosma Shalizi for the recommendation.)

3 Comments

  1. In Hunter Thompson’s “Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail 1972″ he made it seem like the McGovern campaign’s dismissal of the traditional democratic constituencies that FDR originally brought together was part of what created the split between labor voters and the democratic party (essentially by aligning with the student movement and blowing off the party apparatus. Anything in there supporting that? its always been confusing to me when the republicans got that segment of voters.

    Comment by Mike Jeffers — July 3, 2008 @ 8:08 am

  2. Geoghegan’s point is that the Republicans haven’t gotten that segment of voters, and that adding more union members would almost automatically add Democratic voters. The GOP knows this, which explains all the Republican anti-union measures.

    Comment by slaniel — July 3, 2008 @ 8:51 am

  3. [...] ThomasWhich Side Are You On?: Trying to Be for Labor When It’s Flat on Its Back (finished 28 [...]

    Pingback by Stephen Laniel’s Unspecified Bunker » Lists of previously-read books — July 25, 2008 @ 12:41 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Bad Behavior has blocked 679 access attempts in the last 7 days.