Sunday, June 19, 2011


 

Right to Work Legislation

By Harry Berndt

Sitting at home on St. Patrick's Day I couldn't help thinking about all the efforts around the country, and here in Missouri, to weaken unions by the passage of Right to Work Legislation. The Irish in the Northeast and in Missouri were early and strong union members and organizers. They held low paying jobs in the clay pits of St. Louis, in railroad construction in the East and in most manufacturing industries. They were discriminated as being Irish and Catholic and they understood that union membership would bring better wages and safer working conditions.

The argument put forward by Right to Work advocates that Right to Work brings in new industry is fallacious. Tennessee, A Right to Work State is often pointed to as a success in bringing in new industry, Japanese Auto for example. But it wasn't Right to Work that encouraged these companies to locate in Tennessee. It was lucrative packages of tax incentives, infrastructure construction, and other inducements offered by the state and local communities. Companies are not encouraged to locate in states because of low wages. In addition to tax and infrastructure inducements, good schools, available housing, and low crime rates provide necessary incentives for locating in a community.

In 1978, Monsignor John Shocklee, Director of the St. Louis Archdiocesan Human Rights Office, along with the Missouri Catholic Conference, led the fight to defeat proposed Right to Work Legislation. Because there was much misunderstanding of just what was meant by The Right to Work, the Human Rights Office, under the direction of Msgr. Shocklee, scheduled eight educational seminars for the diocese. Letters announcing the seminars also stated, "The effect on a worker's paycheck is directly related to the existence of the Right to Work laws. Statistics indicate that workers earn less in the RTW states because they are unable to effectively organize and maintain unions." An editorial in The St. Louis Post dispatch on September 3, 1978 stated that the arguments by the right-to-work leaders are often self-serving and some downright hypocritical. The editorial asks if Missouri wants to follow states like Arkansas and Mississippi, which have RTW laws or Illinois that doesn't. "Right to work does not really offer the progress claimed for it. It offers, instead, a long step backward toward days of open shop and bitter industrial discord. Missouri can do without it." Comparison wage statistics for 2009 for eleven Southern RTW states and eleven Northern states without RTW laws show an average wage for the Southern states of $16.61 and $18.45 for the Northern states. Lower paychecks are not really good for the economy.

Worker Priests, many Protestant Ministers, and Jewish Rabbis have worked diligently for the rights of workers. Every Papal Encyclical since Pope Leo XIII, RERUM NOVERUM, supports the workers' right to organize and the importance of Unions for the protection of workers rights. A discussion of their efforts can be found in Only a Priest: A Biography of Monsignor John Alexander Shocklee, Chapter Four, The Worker Priest – on-line at whmc St.Louis, Harry Berndt.


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

LABOR DAY 2010 And Catholics


 

By Harry E. Berndt


 

In this year of high unemployment and sacrifice by workers in almost all levels of employment, it is fitting that Catholics celebrate this Labor Day by reviewing Catholic social teaching. As citizens, Catholics should try to understand how Labor Day came about and how Catholic social teaching relates to workers

On May 1, 1886, when Chicago workers went on strike demanding an eight hour day, May 1 was set aside to honor and support workers. May Day originated in the United States as the International Day of Labor and is celebrated in every country but the United States, Canada, and until 1994 South Africa, when post Apartheid laws became effective. Workers' Day in Canada and Labor Day in the United States are officially celebrated on the first Monday of September. Although not an official holiday, the International Day of Labor, May Day, is still celebrated by many workers in both Canada and the United States. There are those who think that the creation of Labor Day was an attempt to keep American workers separated from workers in those countries that celebrate May Day as the day to honor workers. In 1955, Pope Pius XII established May 1 to be the Feast of St. Joseph the Worker to provide a model and protector for all workers.

It is the Bible that provides the direction and the roots of Catholic social teaching, and it is the Papal Encyclicals that have continued to emphasize the need for justice for workers. The Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII, RERUM NOVERUM, set the stage for the encyclicals that followed. In the United States, and indeed in other western democracies, there has always been a debate about whether and how much support the government should provide for its citizens. The encyclicals of the Popes all express the position that the government has a special responsibility to provide a satisfactory quality of life for all. Pope Leo said, "When there is question of defending the rights of individuals, the poor and badly off have a claim to special consideration. The richer classes have many ways of shielding themselves, and stand less in need of help from the State; whereas the mass of the poor have no resources of their own to fall back upon, and must chiefly depend upon the assistance of the State. And it is for this reason that the wage-earners, since they mostly belong in the mass of the needy should be especially cared for and protected by the government."

Pope Pius XI in the Encyclical QUADRAGESIMO ANNO, On Reconstruction of the social Order, said, "Labor, as our predecessor explained well in his encyclical, is not a mere commodity. On the contrary, the worker's human dignity in it must be recognized. It cannot be bought and sold like a commodity." Pius XI affirmed the contention of Leo that the poor and workers are in need of government protection. He also continued Leo's position on the rights of workers to form associations and unions. Pope John Paul II emphasized, as did his predecessors, the right of workers to organize and to strike but more than past Popes, he discusses the concern of the Church for workers in poor countries being exploited for higher profits. His is a strong statement for the solidarity of workers around the world.

Many cities in the United States have priests they call their labor priest. Most are not known outside their own parish or city, but some have attained national and even international recognition. The Papal encyclicals, all taken together, point to the sacredness of work and the worker, the need for justice in the treatment and remuneration of the workers, the right of the worker to form associations and unions, and the use of the strike to gain worker rights and just compensation. The labor priests took these ideas and applied them to their societies.

Monsignor John A. Shocklee, now deceased, was referred to by many as the St. Louis labor priest. He led the fight against the "Right to Work" legislation and is largely credited with its defeat in Missouri. Monsignor Shocklee's participation in matters related to labor and labor unions was deep and constant over his entire tenure as a priest. One of his more public stands was with Caesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers and their boycotts of lettuce and grapes.

No one should accept the present unemployment rate, especially not Catholics. The Papal encyclicals since Leo XIII in 1891 all shared the dictum that wage-earners should be especially cared for and protected by the government.


 

787 Words.

Harry E. Berndt,.

150 Parsons Ave.

Webster Groves, MO. 63119

Email: hberndt1926@sbcglobal.net


 

This article was sent to the St. Louis Review several weeks before Labor Day with the request, written and over the phone, that I would be notified if the paper was not interested in printing the article. Since it did not appear in the paper, I queried the editor as to why he never let me know he would not use it. His answer, "I didn't read it. I have so many articles submitted and can't get to all of them."


 


 


 


 


 

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

February 25, 2005


 

the quallity of life


 

By Harry E. Berndt


 

When economists write concerning the health of the economy, they often look at factors such as gross domestic product (GDP), unemployment, the trade deficit, interest rates, and stock market performance to gage the health of the economy. Many people translate those indices as an indication of the quality of life enjoyed in a country. Economists seldom mention factors such as availability of health care, public transportation, child care, education costs, vacation time, average hours of work experienced by workers, or the availability of housing as the determiner of the health of the economy. Their concern is with the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. They do not address the quality of life produced by the economic factors addressed. It is taken for granted that if there is a high GDP, low unemployment, low interest rates, and a strong stock market, then the health of the economy is good. But is it? If all of those indicators are in the positive column, does that necessarily mean that the quality of life provided is also in the positive column

living with american mythology


 

                             By Harry E. Berndt


 


 

In all historic periods, people have had their myths and legends, and we are no exception. But we like to think we are. We are an advanced society, high tech, and we have left barbarism behind. Or, have we?


 

As a nation we are steeped in mythology, mythology that is promoted by politicians and media. There is the myth of equal protection under the law; the myth that we have the best medical care system in the world; the myth that democracy is only possible under capitalism; the myth that we are a peace loving nation; and finally, as individuals we are all middle class.


 

There is no doubt that there are many good people among us; people who believe in helping those less fortunate, people who oppose war and violence, people who give time and money for the benefit of those they will never know. But yet, as a nation state, around the world we are viewed as barbaric, war mongers and weapons purveyors, the only Western Industrial country that has capital punishment, and the country with the most citizens in prison. We are the country that is critical of other nations' human rights policies, but we are criticized for policies that accept torture, capital punishment and coercion, and social, and economic inequality for women; a lack of legal aid to the poor; and discrimination against ethnics and homosexuals. How is it that we, individually, are mostly people who believe in peace and believe in helping others, and yet we are able to close our eyes to much of the suffering that exists as a result of actions done in our name? Is it because we live under a system that stresses individualism to the exclusion of all other considerations, which results in a majority being removed from the reality of those in need? Is it because it is a system that encourages the idea that each of us individually has total responsibility for our own well being, rather than that each of us is a part of the whole society which can create a quality of life that is at least adequate for all?


 

The budgetary discussions going on today are a case in point. Politicians on both sides of the aisle claim to be fiscally responsible, yet neither the Democrats nor the Republicans offer solutions that directly address the problems of unemployment, care for those living in poverty, overcrowded prisons, and an out of control health care system. In all these areas, the myth that if the private sector is given tax incentives and less government regulation unemployment will be addressed by increased private sector investment, and that the privatization of prisons and health care will increase efficiency and reduce costs. A Keynesian concept of mixed economies where the government addresses human needs and the private sector addresses consumer needs is called socialism. Government programs such as the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA), which provided employment in not for profit organizations and government offices, and programs like the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), which provided employment in our National Parks for many young men unable to find employment during the Roosevelt Administration, could at least provide some employment for those who want to work but are unable to find employment. Also, the government could provide incentives to corporations to hire additional people by creating job sharing programs or, in the case of manufacturing firms, to employ four six hour shifts rather than three eight hour shifts. All of these programs create jobs, and could be put in place if we really were the creative country we claim we are. Corporations might also hire more employees rather than require overtime. It is no secret that Americans work more hours than do employees in other Western countries.


 

A single payer system would be a major stimulus to the economy. This period of financial stress for our country provides an excellent opportunity for Congress to pass a single payer health care package. The burden of the cost of health care would be taken off the backs of industry and off the backs of small business, and the cost of health care to our country would be reduced. The auto industry indicates it cannot be competitive with foreign manufacturers because of the high cost of their health care programs. This would no longer be the case. Small business indicates that employers cannot hire more people for the same reason. This would no longer be the case. A single payer system would save billions of dollars by the elimination of the administration costs of the insurance industry and of healthcare providers forced to administratively deal with numerous insurance companies' policies and procedures. This, of course, is labeled socialism and demonized by Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats.

As a nation, most of us believe that we are peace loving, and we consider war as a last resort. Our president has told us that war is only contemplated as a last resort. However, this seems to be a hard sell when we look closely at how we act. Nearly every state depends significantly on the manufacture and sale of arms or the infrastructure that supports the arms industry - euphemistically referred to as the defense industry. The United States is responsible for over 45% of the global weapons expenditures. Legislators find that it is impolitic to vote against weapon appropriations, fearing political opponents will brand them as unpatriotic, or that voters will turn them out if jobs are lost.


 

Both our State Department and Defense Department are sales representatives for the arms industry, funding weapons shows and twisting the arms of foreign politicians to convince them to purchase arms manufactured by our arms corporations. The Pentagon is a major supplier of used armaments to third world countries.


 

We have trained and armed armies around the world. In Latin America, our College of the Americas has trained the militaries and the police of many of the South and Central American countries. We even supported Saddam Hussein's war against Iran. Now we are in the process of privatizing war, which translates into war for corporate profit. As a greater portion of our society becomes dependent on war, we will soon, if we haven't already, create war without end.


 

People around the world fear us, and our actions convince no one that we are a peace-loving nation. That is, we have convinced no one, other than ourselves, that we are a peace-loving nation.


 

Equal protection under the law has long been taught as the hallmark of our criminal justice system. But our system is one where economic considerations often outweigh considerations of justice. The bail system favors those with wealth. They can be released on bail while they await trial, but those without the means must remain incarcerated until they are found to be innocent or are remanded to our prison system. Ours is a prison system that is over-crowded and where first time non-violent offenders are often placed with violent repeat offenders. Because of the plethora of victimless crimes on the books, we have more people in prison than any other industrial country. Many states are privatizing their prisons, ostensibly for budgetary reasons, and placing prisoners at the mercy of those whose basic concern is for the bottom line. We view people in prison as "them", not realizing that "them" might one day be us - or one in our family. Therefore, most of us favor punishment and vengeance, rather than rehabilitation and humane treatment. Prisoners are placed in positions that exclude privacy and any but the most minimal relationships with the opposite sex. When released they are labeled so that they have very little opportunity of getting any but the most menial jobs. In some states their rights of citizenship are taken away, and most often those who had professional status have their licenses removed. In other words, we do everything to create in them the need to return to crime. Finally, polls indicate that a majority of us favor capital punishment, thought of as barbaric by all other Western industrial societies. A punishment so opposed by some countries that they refuse to honor their extradition treaties with us if the return of a person will result in execution.


 

The United States has the resources and wealth to care for all of its citizens. Our problem is not one of fiscal responsibility; our problem is greed. What happened to the capitalist concept of supply and demand? The oil industry speculators are driving the economy into the ground. We all know that there is no shortage of oil, but rather an industry manipulated by those who create a faux shortage. A reduction of the cost of oil and gasoline reflecting the actual relationship between supply and demand would be a major incentive for increased investment and expansion of industries.


 

It is time that our politicians act like the statesmen they would have us believe they are, rather than the captives of ideological mythology and the minions of Wall Street.

    


 

Berndt musings

    I have been sitting on my front porch most of this morning and early afternoon, and I marvel at the beauty that surrounds me; the tall Oak trees, smaller Dogwoods and Redbuds, and the medium height Tulip and River Birch. The weather today is the closest to perfection that it ever gets, and sitting on my porch on such a day is just that – perfect!

    Sitting here on my porch, watching the birds and the squirrels scrambling around for food and whatever, being very well at 84 years of age, I couldn't but wonder why I am so blessed. It certainly is not due to anything that I have done or not done, although I have participated in my society, as have most people. It obviously has nothing to do with worthiness, since I am not more worthy than other humans.

    If I am not more worthy than those others who suffer from war, poverty, lack of food and potable water, and closer to home the unemployed, and those suffering from the injustices endemic in our society, what about you? Are you more worthy? I suspect Not!

Monday, June 6, 2011

LABOR DAY 2010 And Catholics

By Harry E. Berndt

In this year of high unemployment and sacrifice by workers in almost all levels of employment, it is fitting that Catholics celebrate this Labor Day by reviewing Catholic social teaching. As citizens, Catholics should try to understand how Labor Day came about and how Catholic social teaching relates to workers
On May 1, 1886, when Chicago workers went on strike demanding an eight hour day, May 1 was set aside to honor and support workers. May Day originated in the United States as the International Day of Labor and is celebrated in every country but the United States, Canada, and until 1994 South Africa, when post Apartheid laws became effective. Workers’ Day in Canada and Labor Day in the United States are officially celebrated on the first Monday of September. Although not an official holiday, the International Day of Labor, May Day, is still celebrated by many workers in both Canada and the United States. There are those who think that the creation of Labor Day was an attempt to keep American workers separated from workers in those countries that celebrate May Day as the day to honor workers. In 1955, Pope Pius XII established May 1 to be the Feast of St. Joseph the Worker to provide a model and protector for all workers.
It is the Bible that provides the direction and the roots of Catholic social teaching, and it is the Papal Encyclicals that have continued to emphasize the need for justice for workers. The Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII, RERUM NOVERUM, set the stage for the encyclicals that followed. In the United States, and indeed in other western democracies, there has always been a debate about whether and how much support the government should provide for its citizens. The encyclicals of the Popes all express the position that the government has a special responsibility to provide a satisfactory quality of life for all. Pope Leo said, “When there is question of defending the rights of individuals, the poor and badly off have a claim to special consideration. The richer classes have many ways of shielding themselves, and stand less in need of help from the State; whereas the mass of the poor have no resources of their own to fall back upon, and must chiefly depend upon the assistance of the State. And it is for this reason that the wage-earners, since they mostly belong in the mass of the needy should be especially cared for and protected by the government.“
Pope Pius XI in the Encyclical QUADRAGESIMO ANNO, On Reconstruction of the social Order, said, “Labor, as our predecessor explained well in his encyclical, is not a mere commodity. On the contrary, the worker’s human dignity in it must be recognized. It cannot be bought and sold like a commodity.” Pius XI affirmed the contention of Leo that the poor and workers are in need of government protection. He also continued Leo’s position on the rights of workers to form associations and unions. Pope John Paul II emphasized, as did his predecessors, the right of workers to organize and to strike but more than past Popes, he discusses the concern of the Church for workers in poor countries being exploited for higher profits. His is a strong statement for the solidarity of workers around the world.
Many cities in the United States have priests they call their labor priest. Most are not known outside their own parish or city, but some have attained national and even international recognition. The Papal encyclicals, all taken together, point to the sacredness of work and the worker, the need for justice in the treatment and remuneration of the workers, the right of the worker to form associations and unions, and the use of the strike to gain worker rights and just compensation. The labor priests took these ideas and applied them to their societies.
 Monsignor John A. Shocklee, now deceased, was referred to by many as the St. Louis labor priest. He led the fight against the “Right to Work” legislation and is largely credited with its defeat in Missouri. Monsignor Shocklee’s participation in matters related to labor and labor unions was deep and constant over his entire tenure as a priest. One of his more public stands was with Caesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers and their boycotts of lettuce and grapes.
No one should accept the present unemployment rate, especially not Catholics. The Papal encyclicals since Leo XIII in 1891 all shared the dictum that wage-earners should be especially cared for and protected by the government.

787 Words.
Harry E. Berndt, Ph.D.
150 Parsons Ave.
Webster Groves, MO. 63119
Phone: 314-962-1749
Email: hberndt1926@sbcglobal.net