The
media hailed the summer 1997 strike at United Parcel Service (UPS)
as a major victory for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
In fact, the strike was little more than a brief public relations
coup for organized labor, particularly the Teamsters. As the
unions' public relations gains evaporate in the course of ongoing
investigations, a review of the UPS settlement indicates that
workers failed to benefit, and that underlying economic trends
presage a continuing deterioration of union power.
A
careful review of the settlement garnered by the Teamsters shows
that it did not produce gains for UPS employees, even for the
part-time laborers who ostensibly had the most at stake. The
Teamsters promised the settlement would produce a greater number of
better-paying jobs. In contrast, the settlement actually:
-
Cost union members thousands of
dollars in lost wages and profit sharing;
-
Will fail to create new full-time
positions for part-time UPS workers;
-
Will not change the ratio of full-time
to part-time workers at UPS; and
-
Resulted in a pension plan that is
significantly less generous than the plan offered by the
corporation prior to the strike.
The
Teamsters' claim that the terms and conditions of employment at UPS
necessitated the strike belies the strike's real origins: Teamster
President Ron Carey's now-discredited 1996 reelection. Having
barely won the election against James P. Hoffa, Jr., Carey sought
to use a strike at UPS to solidify his control of the union.
Carey's plan failed when federal monitors overturned his election
and barred him from participating in future elections because of an
illegal campaign funding effort. The scandal implicated not just
Carey, but prominent members of other unions and a Clinton-Gore
campaign fundraiser in an elaborate scheme to funnel illegal
contributions to Carey's reelection campaign.
The
politics of the strike went beyond machinations by officials of
organized labor. President Bill Clinton's decision not to invoke
the Taft-Hartley Act to interrupt the strike constituted a
significant departure from precedents established by Clinton
himself and by his predecessors.
Organized labor as a whole supported the
strike in order to fulfill optimistic proclamations of a union
resurgence under the new president of the American Federation of
Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations, John J. Sweeney. An
objective assessment of unionization trends, however, indicates
that the UPS strike would have been insufficient to cause a genuine
resurgence even if Carey's misdeeds had remained secret.
Globalization and increasing economic competition have made, and
will continue to make, unions less significant economically.
Changes in the labor force, from industry to services and from
blue- to white-collar occupations within traditional industries,
are making unions less relevant to American workers.
To
prevent the types of abuses that led to the Carey campaign scandal
and, in turn, the pointless strike against UPS, Congress
should:
-
Reform the law on collectively
bargained pensions to provide union members with security,
choice, and maximum return on investment;
-
Require unions to make more thorough
disclosure of receipts and expenditures, including dues money
and funds spent for non-collective bargaining purposes, especially
politics;
-
Enact paycheck protection
legislation so that union leaders do not spend dues money on
politics without annual written consent from union members; and
-
Increase federal oversight of labor
unions.
Leo Troy is
Distinguished Professor of Economics at Rutgers University in
Newark, New Jersey.