Guest worker proposals divide America's unions

[Algorem]

http://www.cleveland.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/1144312505224340.xml?nnusa&coll=2

Thursday, April 06, 2006
Elizabeth Auster
Plain Dealer Bureau

Washington - ...

"Guest worker programs are a bad idea and harm all workers," AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said in a written statement. "They cast workers into a perennial second-class status."

Sweeney said guest worker programs encourage employers to convert good jobs into temporary ones that exploit foreigners willing to accept low wages and bad working conditions.

The 1.8 million-member Service Employees International Union, however, has endorsed the committee bill. The SEIU, which led a breakaway movement from the AFL-CIO last year, says the bill's guest worker program would create an orderly process for future immigration and be a vast improvement over the alternative - a continuing flow of illegal labor.

Eliseo Medina, executive vice president of SEIU, says he understands concerns about guest worker programs exploiting immigrants because his father came to the United States under such a program in the 1940s. But Medina said the committee's version of a guest worker program would address such concerns by giving immigrants full protection under health and safety laws and the right to switch jobs...


http://www.valis.cjb.cc.nyud.net:8090/bushesgnn.jpg

[Lib Grrrrl]

1. I Agree With Sweeney On This One

As an unemployed American, the last thing I want here are more immigrants fighting for fewer jobs, and the "race to the bottom" this causes in terms of wages. No thanks. Sorry, but, until I have a nice, safe, secure, well-paying job, I am against immigration...legal or otherwise! Does that make me bad, because I am looking out for my interests first?

If someone here holds a different opinion, I'd like to hear it.

Can someone please explain to me how it is not against my own self-interest to allow more and more immigrants to come here...immigrants who will accept lower wages, and less benefits...how does this not hurt me? As much as I'd like to see other people do well, I do not wish to see them do well at my expense. Does that make me a bad person?

I'd love to write Auntie Pinko on this one, but I'm almost positive I would never get printed...

[The2ndWheel]

2. You're just human

Which is why we're losing.

See, the corporation doesn't care if it does better at another corporations expense. It can just buy out the other corporation, and continue whatever it is that it does. Humans can't meld together into one giant organism. If we could, we'd have a chance.

It's easy to divide us. Because you want to have a good life, and want others to as well, just not at your expense, that can be exploited. I'm not saying it's your fault. We all do it, in one way or another. But again, that's why we're losing.

It's why poverty will never go away. It's why we rolled over the natives as America had to expand. It's why the fight will never end. Civilization will steal our time, we'll waste our lives fighting the same fight again and again.

[Lib Grrrrl]

3. Well, At Least You Don't Hate Me For It

I feel lousy, feeling the way I do about this issue, but I just cannot help myself.

I mean, I am a lifelong liberal Democrat...and I know most liberals hold the opposite view I do on this, and that makes me feel like a traitor to the liberal cause.

But I just cannot MAKE myself support something I know will economically harm me.

As much as I would like to see others do well...I just don't want them to do it AT MY EXPENSE. I wish there was some way I could, like...not feel horrible about feeling the way I do on this issue...but I just can't make myself.

I can see nothing in this proposed "guest worker" program that does anything other than harm me and my chances at a better life. I just can't make myself vote to harm myself economically.

I'm willing to make a lot of sacrifices for the greater good...but I am not willing to be pauperized for it.

I'm glad you do not think that this makes me a bad person, or a lousy liberal...or that this does not call my other liberal credentials into question. I truly feel horrible about the way I feel on this issue, but I just cannot help it.

I can't make myself support something I know will benefit others at my expense. If there was a way it would benefit others, but not hurt me, I could support it.

[Cobalt Violet]

4. Your not a "traitor to the liberal cause" because of this.

In fact, Liberals are very divided on this.

[The2ndWheel]

5. This is the world we live in

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002259109_oilpressure01.html

"A third of humanity doesn't want to ride bikes anymore," she said. "That has profound geopolitical implications."

6.5 billion people are now competing to survive. Competing to have a better life. It's not as if you're alone in your thinking.

[MrPrax]

7. Just curious...

Why would you post a story on the oil industries global strategies when the topic is about 'guest workers'? Not seeing the connection...'competing to have a better life'?

Surely you must see a profound difference between 3.8 billion people living below 1000 calories a day and--um--the average American citizen and their 2 or 3 cars?

In pursuing your rationale, then the guest worker program should be allowed because the US consumes far far more of everything when compared to it's southern neighbors--it's a matter of fairness, no?

[The2ndWheel]

16. Because it's all connected

Be it Mexican, Indian, Chinese, American, we all want "better" lives.

What's the different between a Mexican worker, and an Indian worker? Nothing. They're human beings trying to make a "better" life for themselves.

A third of humanity doesn't want to ride bikes anymore. Mexicans want to make more money than they can in Mexico. The world trade institutions don't make things easy, and neither do governments that sign up for those agreements. They need cheap energy to continue to circle the globe finding more people to exploit.

At my core, I don't think countries or corporations should exist, let alone grant guest worker status to desperate human beings, that were made that way because the wealthy class around the globe signed a few papers with a pen.

[primavera]

9. For what it's worth...

... it's by no means a given that immigration reform will economically harm you. I know, I know, everyone, including many here, just take it as rote that immigration harms US workers. But what is almost universally overlooked is the fact that immigrants create jobs at the same time they fill them. While they're here, they consume goods and services just like anyone else does, that creates a new market for goods and services that was not previously in existence, that creates jobs to provide those goods and services. Many jobs exist (or are created) because immigrants are performing certain services. For instance, if migrant farmworkers allow US agriculture to produce goods for a lower cost which is competitive on an international market, that creates new opportunities in international trade which would not be there if the cost of produce were higher and, as a result, unable to compete with, say, Argentinian or Chilean produce. Cheaper food products allows Americans to spend less on food and have more disposable income to spend on other goods and services. If you change that equation and food prices go up, that means Americans will have less money to spend elsewhere and other industries will lose jobs as a result. I don't want to overstate this as there may or may not be an adverse affect on US workers coming from immigration, in honesty, the jury's still out on that issue. The results from scholarly studies on the subject have been mixed, so it's hard to know who is right. All I'm saying is that it's not necessarily a given that immigrants are harmful to the economy and/or jobs. If the US were an economy of 100 Americans with 100 jobs, and it grew to 100 Americans plus 20 migrants and 120 jobs, there would be no change in the availability of jobs, as the number of jobs would have grown proportionate to the increase in population. Whether that's the case, again, I honestly don't know, but I do know it's a mistake to look at the job market as a constant quantity which must be split amongst the population. The number of jobs waxes and wanes in accordance with a bazillion different factors, the overwhelming majority of which have nothing to do with immigration. So I would urge you to keep an open mind that immigration may not actually constitute the dire economic threat you perceive it to be.

[Lib Grrrrl]

11. I Thank You For A Perspective I Did Not Consider

however, I am still fearful that this "guest worker" program will cause more harm than good for American workers. I cannot help my fear. I admit, I am afraid.

[primavera]

15. Understandable, these are scary times

There are fewer jobs, jobs pay less than they did, benefits dwindle, and the chasm between rich people and poor people gets ever wider. None of that is in dispute. But remedying the problem requires correctly identifying the causes giving rise to the problem. Congress recently passed a law providing tax incentives for US companies which lay off US workers and outsource their jobs overseas - your taxpayer dollars at work. Surprise, surprise, the number of jobs in the US went down as a result. That has nothing to do with immigration, so barring immigration won't undo that damage. GM decides it's cheaper to use robots to build cars than it is to employ people, so it automates its factories and lays off its workers. Again, no surprise when the number of jobs drop and again, it has nothing to do with immigration. Federal monetary policy, the astronomical deficit, re-direction of spending away from domestic infrastructure and towards concocted wars on innocent foreign countries, all of these things and so many other factors play roles in the ill health of the economy and the job market. I don't know, I just think it's important to know what's causing a problem so that you can direct your reform efforts to where they'll do the most good and it's not clear that going after immigration would fix anything.

[Lib Grrrrl]

17. OK

BUT, is immigration going to HELP...or HURT FURTHER...the cause of the American worker? Maybe "going after immigration" as you put it, will not solve the problem of a rotten economy...but, will NOT GOING AFTER IT cause the economy to get worse...or have no effect...or improve the economy?

I see no real way that this "guest worker" program REALLY benefits American workers. so all it can do, in my view...is have no effect...or hurt us. I'm not willing to risk the potential negative impact.

Unless someone can show me, and assure me...that this will NOT have a negative impact on the American worker...I just plain can't support it.

I do want to see all people do well, even immigrants, even illegal ones...but I do not want them to do well at my expense. I see no way in which this proposal does anything other than allow these illegal immigrants to do well...AND AT MY EXPENSE.

Or, at the very least, I do not see any short- or long-term benefit for me...or for other American workers in my same boat.

I hatye to sound like "ugly American" but...you know what? My attitude is...To hell with the rest of the world...us first, THEN everyone else. Does that make me bad...or just human....and very scared for my future? specifically...scared for my economic future?

[primavera]

18. It depends upon how we handle our economy

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. It's as true in public policy as it is in physics. Say we clamp down on immigration as you propose. Certain sectors of the economy which currently rely upon migrant labor will suddenly no longer be able to rely upon that labor. How will they respond? Will they raise wages to the point that they can attract US workers to some very unpleasant jobs? Bear in mind, the popular perception that these are minimum wage jobs is mostly mythical, the majority pay considerably better than US workers working in Mal-Wart, for instance, will make, yet US workers are not rushing to fill those jobs because they are bloody unpleasant jobs. How much would someone have to pay you to get you to work in a poultry processing plant, for instance? Personally, I'm not sure there's any wage that would draw me to such a job. So wages would probably have increase considerably. Profit margins in the argicultural sector are already pretty thin: to the best of my knowledge, there are no billionaire farmers out there jacking up the cost of goods by paying themselves $50 million/year salaries. Labor is the number one cost of production. All of this means that, if wages go up substantially, prices will go up. How will we American consumers respond? Will we pay extra to buy US grown produce or will we buy cheaper imported produce? If we do what, let's be honest, we mostly have been doing and supporting the Mal-Warts of the world as opposed to the businesses which treat their employees decently but have to charge higher prices as a consequence, we're probably going to stop buying US in favor of the cheaper imports. If there's no demand for US goods at the higher prices, how will those businesses continue to operate? If they shut down altogether, it will cost us a great many more jobs than illegal immigration costs us.

Alternatively, what if businesses respond by moving their businesses offshore? It may be that illegal immigration has some adverse impact on US jobs, it's not a given, but it's admittedly a possibility. What is absolutely, positively certain is that when a business moves offshore and takes all of its jobs with it, that is extremely harmful to the US economy. At that point, not only are all of the jobs being outsourced, but the taxes being paid by the businesses, the consumer spending spent by the employees, the taxes paid by those same employees, as well as any the supplemental jobs which go along with that industry (such as, for instance, distribution and marketing), all of those direct and indirect benefits go not to the US, but to the overseas host country - it is a 100% total write off from the point of view of the US economy. Outsourcing is truly catastrophic as the US derives no benefit other than cheap goods, the proceeds from the sale of which leave the US economy forever. So, if US businesses were to respond to increases in labor costs by outsourcing, then, yes, absolutely, shutting down immigration could have a profoundly negative impact on the US economy.

That's the bad outcome. Personally, I don't think it has to be that way. If we were to pump our money into education and re-direct our economy away from the production of low cost goods and recapture our strength as a global high-tech leader, then, hell, we can afford to buy our agricultural goods from poor countries because we'll be exporting goods and services of much greater value. Unfortunately, for that rosy scenario to come to pass, we would have to adopt a progressive system of taxation more along the lines of that used in Europe which would generate the revenues needed for large-scale infrastructure investments, we'd have to scale back our military spending to a sane level in order to free up monies for domestic investment, in other words, we'd have to adopt a regulated form of capitalism similar to that which prevails in the developed world, rather than our every man for himself, let them eat cake, unfettered cowboy capitalism which we're so fond of in this country. You've probably guessed by now, I'm not a fan. I do believe there is a better way. Unfortunately, I think the chances of us committing ourselves to that better way within the foreseeable future are slim to nonexistent. It's just the fucked-up country we live in, whether we like it or not. In the absence of a true solution, we're left with damage control, selecting between poor options. Which is the least worst option, immigration or outsourcing? I may be wrong, but if that is in fact the choice we face, immigration is by far the lesser evil.

By the way, welcome to DU! :hi:

[Lib Grrrrl]

21. You Make A Decent Argument

but you still have not allayed my fears that immigration would HURT me and millions of other unemployed Americans more than it would help us.

You have certainly given me something to think about, and a possible different perspective.

My problem, basically, is I cannot, as an unemployed American, get over my fear of "WHAT IF??"

WHAT IF...this hurts my chances of getting a decent job?

WHAT IF...this hurts my short-term and long-term economic security?

If there was only some way we could be reassured, and guaranteed that there would be no negative consequence to the American worker, I might be more receptive to your ideas.

You are appealing to my intellect only...you are doing nothing to allay my fears...you are doing nothing to appeal to the EMOTIONAL side...you are doing nothing to address my fears as being valid, or reasonable.

I'm not sure you understand, right now, how the unemployed American feels right now. I can tell you: WE ARE SCARED SHITLESS!!

[primavera]

22. You and me both, sister, you and me both

Believe me, not a day goes by that I don't grapple with the urge to flee to Canada. I've lived, studied, and worked in DC for 15 years now and I think what most disappoints me is the realization that, quite often, the people responsible for public policy - on both sides of the aisle - actually know what good policy would be, yet will not even discuss it because it's not politically viable.

I don't know how to re-assure you that comprehensive immigration reform won't entail any costs. Nothing in life is certain. What I do know is that the current system has its costs as well. Personally, what I see as the main benefit of a guestworker program is that it holds out the promise of diminishing the undergound, sweatshop-based economy associated with immigration, which is what I see as the primary threat to US workers. If aliens are working for $15/hr picking tomatoes, I worry much less about wage effects than I do when they're working in sweatshops producing garments for $2/hr. But you'll never persuade people to emerge from the sweatshop economy if all you're willing to offer them is a nice long cozy stay in a federal prison, they'll stay right where they are, thank you very much. If you can provide the workers who fuel the underground economy with a more attractive option, I've never met an illegal alien who would not vastly prefer to be a legal alien if given any reasonable alternative. Once you start to bring that black market out into the light of day, then you can regulate it. You can insist that workers be paid fair wages and provided with decent working conditions. If they're hiding out underground, you have no influence over their behavior at all. So I do think there is some cause for optimism that a guestworker program could actually improve things. Without it, a bad situation will only get worse, and we definitely know that's not helping.

But it's just one part of the puzzle. For any of this to be meaningful, it has to be accompanied by stiffer penalties for the employers who hire illegal workers, employers have to have a reliable, cost-effective way of identifying who is and who is not authorized to work, and border integrity needs to be improved. Personally, I think there is a better chance of success in going after employers who break the law than there is in trying to beef up border security. We've been adding more guys with guns to the border by the thousands every year for many years now and how much good has it accomplished? The US is simply too large a country to be able to watch every inch of border every minute of every day. And as long as there are jobs to be had here which pay 20 times what jobs south of the border pay, people will try to come here and some will be apprehended, but many will continue to slip through the cracks. I firmly believe that we could devote the entire US military to protecting the border and some people would still manage to get in anyway. But if there were no jobs to be had here, there would be no reason for them to try. And, while there are a lot of employers in the US, I still think it's a more managable task to keep an eye on them than it is to try to watch every inch of border. Of course, those companies are also the ones who fund campaign war chests, so who knows whether Congress will have the balls to do the right thing. All we can do is hope, and keep our passports handy in case we need to flee to Canada after all. :-)

You make some good points, Lib Grrrl, and you've given me something to think about as well. I look forward to seeing your future posts here on DU. Good luck and good night.

[Lib Grrrrl]

23. Likewise, You Have Given Me some Things To think About!!

And of all of them, the post I'm now replying to contains what I think is the best idea you have had yet!! GO AFTER THE EMPLOYERS WHO BREAK THE LAW!! Go after employers who force workers into unsafe work environments at sub-standard pay!

I just fear that...legal or not...aliens will always demnd lower wages than Americans do...and that having more immigrants will exert a downward pressure on wages.

How do we address that possible effect, while at the same time, making a system fair, just, and equitable for everyone?

I think there is definitely room for both of our opposing views to be discussed, and both of us make valid points to consider.

The point is...where do we go from here? Since we KNOW they are gonna come here anyway (and who can blame them, given circumstances back home??) HOW do we deal with this in a way that is just for all...and at the same time, does not hurt the American worker, by driving wages down? How do we do that?

As I said, I believe that you have a very important key idea in your last posting...and that is going after the employers who exploit the illegal status of these aliens, and thus force them into unsafe work environs and sub-standard wages.

That said...I think this has been a very good educational opportunity, and, while you haven't changed my mind, you have at least given me a different perspective...and some good ideas on the subject.

I'm still against the idea, because I think it will encourage EVEN MORE immigrants...and they will be competing for EVEN FEWER jobs...and that will put downward pressure on wages, thus negatively impacting the american worker...and the unemployed American.

But SOMETHING has to be done. We both agree that continuing to do the same thing, expecting a different result...is not a viable solution.

[doc03]

10. "Unions" The Unions built this country and the middle

class. Unions actually were too successful, once union workers started entering the upper middle class they got selfish and started turning
Republican (Reagan Democrats) and labor has been on the defensive ever since. Maybe someday when the workers finally get fed up they will fight back but I fear it's far to late.

[brentspeak]

8. The country can't afford continued, almost unchecked illegal immigration

The only fair, rational thing to do would be to grant amnesty to most illegal immigrants currently residing in the U.S. (excluding criminals, etc.), while also closing the border (so to speak) to throttle the influx of illegal immigrants. I don't know who got it into their head that the U.S. is supposed to allow the whole entire planet into its borders.

[Bridget Burke]

24. Which immigrant took your job?

And, as a laid off construction worker, how can you afford a PC & internet access? Or--maybe you used to pick crops?

[DinahMoeHum]

6. "Guest-worker" is just a fancy name for "Bracero"

n/t

[Lib Grrrrl]

12. ???

Hey, I don't happen to have my copy of Funk & Wagnall's handy...mind defining the term "Bracero" for me, so that I can get the context of your words?

[DinahMoeHum]

20. OK, here's your history lesson. Welcome to DU, btw.

Link:
http://www.pbs.org/kpbs/theborder/history/timeline/17.html

Link:
http://www.farmworkers.org/bracerop.html


:smoke:

[trogdor]

13. Auf Deutsch, "gastarbeiter"

These were the Turks and the Greeks and the Italians invited to West Germany after the war to help rebuild. Many of them (and their descendants) are still in Germany.

I am afraid this will be nothing more than a "Wal-Mart Labor Relief Act" that will displace Americans at or near the bottom of the ladder with foreigners. Americans won't work at Wal-Mart for $5.15/hr., but I bet they can find a busload of guest workers who will.

Now, if there was some provision in the bill that limited the absolute number of these people, as the H1B program does, to what we could comfortably absorb, I'd feel a little better, but I haven't forgotten who runs the show in Washington.

[IndyJones]

14. They should also limit the number of them per region, for example,

CA has more than it's share of a flooding of them into our market. The infrastructure costs are huge and CA taxpayers can't keep up. Other states need to take them in as well - not just the border states. And, the feds need to help with the costs.

[scout123]

19. (Related): John Edwards held a minimum wage news conference today in D.C.

http://blog.oneamericacommittee.com/story/2006/4/6/91841/85535

Senator Edwards and Senator Kennedy's rally to raise the minimum wage

And wouldn't it be nice if he woild speak out like his wife did in January
about the all the lies...especially today with the news breaking about the CIA leak--

Elizabeth's rant

[cap]

25. let's look at history...

what did the unions do in the between 1920-1950 to absorb new immigrants from Poland, Italy, Eastern and Southern Europe?