(Strikers in Union Square, New York City, May Day, 1913)

With regard to the strike of Transport Workers Union in New York City on December 20, 2005, I'll gladly walk 4 hours to work if it means my fellow middle class members, specifically the unionized workers, get a better arrangement from the MTA. The alternative is that we all work for corporations like Wal-Mart, who refuse their workers to unionize.

I got up early this morning and reviewed some of my favorite union-related literature. It is the unions that helped workers gain a voice against profit mongers. The unions aided in the struggle for suffrage, led the charge against the exploitation of underage workers, and fought for minimum wage, an 8-hour workday, immigrant rights, and workplace safety. The list goes on.

It is no coincidence, then, that the union is despised by corporations and profiteers. It is no coincidence that unionizing is banned in many workplaces. And it is no coincidence that media conglomerates report "OUTRAGE" at this Transport Workers strike. (No mention of the "OUTRAGE" we should feel about the MTA's 2 sets of books, one for the public, and one for themselves.) The public perception of unions is crucial to capitalists. More importantly, if the public perception of a union is dampened, then so is the solidarity of the working class. If you can't organize, you don't have a voice.

I turned on the television this morning to see if there was a way for me to get from my home in Brooklyn to my job in Manhattan. A special news report (touting "Full Coverage from Every Angle") interviewed people who'd been waiting in line over 2 hours at the Jamaica, Queens Long Island Railroad (LIRR) station. An older woman, when asked what she thought, said, "I need to get to work, but the transit workers need to be taken care of as well. We're both middle class." A younger gentleman, when asked the same question, said, "This is ridiculous, I need to get to work. This ain't right."

The importance of unionizing that is generally in the minds of older folks is not present in the youth. More and more, people are taught to think of themselves first, if not solely of themselves. All the special television reports focused on the "crippling effect" the strike had on you. There's an overwhelming sense of individualism today. Today's New York Times headlines ("N.Y. Strike Turns Morning Trips Into Treks," "Cabs With Strangers, and Other Ways to Work," "Millions Are Left to Make It to Work Any Way They Can," "Voices From the Commute," "A Frenzied Rush Hour That Came Around Midnight") are all about the individual. Nothing about the living wage. Nothing about working poverty. Nothing about the people who are jealous of what the TWU workers have because they make even less and have no insurance. This strike is about how this affects your Christmas shopping. "Let's cut to Dave in the chopper and hear what he has to say about your commute."

I re-read a pamphlet from the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) this morning. One Big Union. At one time, The IWW, at a moment’s notice, could have an entire town on strike. The working class could fold its arms and shut down industry if it needed to. From the IWW pamphlet (circa 1924):

Eugene Victor Debs, who was later jailed for his involvement with the IWW (and nearly became this nation's president), wrote:

Thanks to Debs, and many others, the union as well the Socialist ideal, was promoted to many in the working class. Poor exploited workers saw light in the ideas of the union and Socialism. Workers were organizing, the women's suffrage movement was gaining momentum, people of color were accepted in many unions, and Socialism was spreading like the plague. Children who were working sixty-hour weeks in Textile mills in New York and New Jersey who went on strike had the ability to gain direct attention of President Roosevelt. The struggle was paying off.

One IWW members, Jack White, was arrested during a free speech rally in 1912 and sentenced to six months in jail. He was given only bread and water during his incarceration. During his hearing he was asked if he had anything to say for himself, and he did:

The story of John Ramy is also worth remembering today.

There was a strike of the American Woolen Companies four mills in Lawrence, Massachusetts in 1912. Workers, mostly poor immigrant Portuguese, Russian, Italian, German, Irish, Polish, Lithuanian, and Belgian -- who lived in crowded worker tenements -- wanted better working conditions and wages. After being docked again, the Polish women workers went on strike. Soon, workers from the other mills joined them. By day's end, 10,000 strikers powered down all the looms.

50,000 Lawrence residents were on strike. The population at the time was 86,000. The mayor called the militia....

The strike went on; food was brought in by train for the strikers and tent cities were set up. This went on for weeks. In January of 1912, a parade of strikers was attacked by police, which lead to rioting. Anna LoPizzo, a striker, was shot and killed by the police. The police denied involvement in the killing and instead arrested the organizer of the strike, Joseph Ettor, as well as poet Arturo Giovanitti. The charge? "Joseph Ettor and Arturo Giovanitti did incite, procure, and counsel or command the said person whose name is not known to commit the said murder...."

Once Ettor was in jail, 22 companies of militia and two cavalry troops were called into the city and martial law was declared. Citizens were forbidden to talk on the streets. On Tuesday, January 30th, 1912, John Ramy, a Syrian striker, was bayoneted to death. In response, Ettor said, "Bayonets cannot weave cloth."

The town tried to starve the strikers. Parents didn't know what to do, fearing for the health of their children on the strike lines. A Socialist newspaper, Call, put out word. Within days, people all over the country offered to care for the children of the Lawrence strikers. A hundred children left Lawrence on a train bound for New York City. When they arrived, five thousand Italian union members, singing "Internationale" greeted them at Grand Central Station. More children left Lawrence. The mayor said no more children would be permitted to leave. Despite this, 40 children prepared to leave for Philadelphia. When they arrived at the station, they were meet by a crowd of police.

A member of the Women's Committee described what happened next:

The children were about to make their way to the train-when the police closed in on us with their clubs, beating right and left, with no thought of children, who were in the most desperate danger of being trampled to death. The mothers and children were thus hurled in a mass and bodily dragged to a military truck, and even then clubbed, irrespective of the cries of the panic-stricken women and children.

The next week the cops clubbed a pregnant woman, causing her to give birth to a dead child.

Fearing public perception, the American Woolen Company conceded, offering a 5-11 percent raise to its workers.

People were willing to strike, to wither the elements for weeks on end, to send their children to other states, to face a militia, to risk death--all to help their fellow workers.

All workers of one industry in one union; all unions of workers in one big labor alliance the world over.

Granted, today's working conditions are not as deplorable as they were in 1910. But today's employees don't stay with the same company for 40 years, either. Job security is non-existent. Most employers use agencies to contract temporary employees, sometimes for years, without health insurance. Many companies hire illegal immigrants, using their own vulnerability against them and paying them below minimum wage. Not to mention the corporations are backed by a government that affords them the ability to do whatever they want with little or no consequences for the CEOs. As usual, the repercussions trickle from the top down to the workers at the bottom.

None of this is news. It happens everywhere. So why, at the announcement of this strike, are we talking about how long it's going to take me to get to work?

It’s insulting that the media conglomerates are trying to make you angry toward the striking transport workers. Mayor Bloomberg--who spent more on commercials for his re-election than a transport worker will make all year--called it a "morally reprehensible action." While the transport workers may have a better pension plan, better pay, and better health care coverage than you do, you shouldn't be angry with them. You should be angry that your boss (corporation) doesn't offer you the same. You should spend less time in media-sponsored outrage and spend more time organizing. Spend more time grieving, forming allegiances, writing petitions, and if need be, striking! It's morally reprehensible for a billionaire to call the thirty thousand workers who survive on less than fifty thousand dollars a year "morally reprehensible." The profiteers have shown throughout history that money is more important to them than human lives. They've enslaved, forced children into assembly lines, beat pregnant women, killed. The face of the profiteers isn't as visible today. They own your news, your stores, and your place of employment. They bank on you behaving in a way that continues to keep them rich.

After giving up on getting into Manhattan, my boss sent me an email stating we should be "in constant contact" throughout the day because there were many things that needed to get done by the end of the business day. Which was fine. However, I am not getting paid to work from home today. It qualifies as a "sick day." (No, my job is not unionized.)

Listen to Woody Guthrie today. It's been thirty-eight years, but his words are still relevant.