Ronald Reagan, Enemy of the American Worker

signalmankenneth

Verified User
By Dick Meister * Wednesday 02 February 2011

The 100th anniversary of Ronald Reagan's birth is coming up in February, and before the inevitable gushing over what a wonderful leader he was begins, let me get in a few words about what sort of a leader he really was.

Ronald Reagan was, above all, one of the most viciously anti-labor presidents in American history, one of the worst enemies the country's working people ever faced.

Republican presidents never have had much regard for unions, but until Reagan, no Republican president had dared challenge the firm legal standing labor gained through Democratic president Franklin D. Roosevelt in the mid-1930's.

Reagan's Republican predecessors treated union leaders much as they treated Democratic members of Congress - at times, as adversaries to be fought with, and, at others, as people to be bargained with. Reagan, however, engaged in precious little bargaining. He waged almost continuous war against organized labor and the country's workers from the time he assumed office in 1980 until leaving the presidency in 1988.

Reagan had little apparent reason to fear labor politically. Opinion polls at the time showed that unions were opposed by nearly half of all Americans, and that nearly half of those who belonged to unions had voted for Reagan in both of his presidential campaigns.

Reagan, at any rate, was a true ideologue of the anti-labor political right. Yes, he had been president of the Screen Actors Guild, but he was notoriously pro-management in that position. He led the way to a strike-ending agreement in 1959 that greatly weakened the union. Under heavy membership pressure, he finally resigned as union president before his term ended.

Reagan's war on labor as US president began in the summer of 1961, when he fired 13,000 striking air traffic controllers and destroyed their union.

As Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson noted in 2004, the firing was "an unambiguous signal that employers need feel little or no obligation to their workers, and employers got that message loud and clear - illegally firing workers who sought to unionize, replacing permanent employees who could collect benefits with temps who could not, shipping factories and jobs abroad."

Reagan gave dedicated union foes direct control of the federal agencies that were originally designed to protect and further the rights of workers and their unions. Most important was Reagan's appointment of three management representatives to the five- member National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

The appointees included NLRB Chairman Donald Dotson, who declared that "unionized labor relations have been the major contributors to the decline and failure of once healthy industries" and have caused "destruction of individual freedom."

A House committee found that under Dotson, the NLRB abandoned its legal obligation to promote collective bargaining, in what amounted to "a betrayal of American workers."

The NLRB settled only about half as many complaints about employers' illegal actions as it had during the previous administration of Democrat Jimmy Carter. Most of the complaints were against employers who responded to organizing drives by illegally firing union supporters. The employers were well aware that, under Reagan, the NLRB was taking an average of three years to rule on complaints - and that, in any case, the board did no more than order that discharged unionists be reinstated with back pay, which was much cheaper than operating under a union contract.

The board stalled equally as long before acting on petitions from workers seeking union representation elections and generally stalled for another year or two after such votes before certifying winning unions as the workers' bargaining agents. Also, under Reagan employers were allowed to permanently replace workers who dared exercise their legal right to strike.

Reagan's Labor Department was as one-sided as the NLRB. It became an anti-Labor Department, virtually ignoring, for example, the union-busting consultants that many employers hired to help them fend off unionization.

Very few consultants and very few of those who hired them were asked for the financial disclosure statements that the law demands, yet all unions were required to file the statements that the law required of them, and that imbalance could be used to advantage by their opponents. Although the Labor Department cut its overall budget by more than 10 percent, it increased the budget for such union-busting activities by almost 40 percent.

Among Reagan's many other outrages, there were his attempts to lower the minimum wage for younger workers, weaken the child labor and anti-sweatshop laws, tax fringe benefits and cut back programs to train unemployed workers for available jobs. He also tried to replace thousands of federal employees with temporary workers who would not have civil service or union protection.

Reagan all but dismantled programs that required affirmative action and other steps against discrimination by federal contractors, and he seriously undermined job safety programs. He closed one-third of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's field offices, trimmed the agency's staff by more than one-fourth and decreased the number of penalties assessed against offending employers by almost three-fourths.

Rather than enforce the laws, Reagan appointees sought "voluntary compliance" from employers on safety matters - and generally didn't get or expect it. Reagan had so tilted the safety laws in favor of employers that safety experts declared them virtually useless.

The same could have been said of all other labor laws in the Reagan era. A statement issued at the time by the leaders of several major unions concluded that it would have been more advantageous for those who worked for a living to ignore the laws and return to "the law of the jungle" that prevailed a half-century before.

The suggestion came a little late. Ronald Reagan had already plunged the nation's labor-management relations deep into the jungle.

Yet Reagan will nevertheless be honored in centennial celebrations throughout the United States, in Europe and elsewhere in coming days. He's become a much beloved mythical figure, and nothing will change that - certainly not the unheard or unacknowledged facts of his presidency and its disastrous effects on America's working people, many of whom, ironically, will be among the celebrants.
sgen111l.jpg


efin70l.jpg


twin595l.jpg
 
By Dick Meister * Wednesday 02 February 2011

The 100th anniversary of Ronald Reagan's birth is coming up in February, and before the inevitable gushing over what a wonderful leader he was begins, let me get in a few words about what sort of a leader he really was.

Ronald Reagan was, above all, one of the most viciously anti-labor presidents in American history, one of the worst enemies the country's working people ever faced.

Republican presidents never have had much regard for unions, but until Reagan, no Republican president had dared challenge the firm legal standing labor gained through Democratic president Franklin D. Roosevelt in the mid-1930's.

Reagan's Republican predecessors treated union leaders much as they treated Democratic members of Congress - at times, as adversaries to be fought with, and, at others, as people to be bargained with. Reagan, however, engaged in precious little bargaining. He waged almost continuous war against organized labor and the country's workers from the time he assumed office in 1980 until leaving the presidency in 1988.

Reagan had little apparent reason to fear labor politically. Opinion polls at the time showed that unions were opposed by nearly half of all Americans, and that nearly half of those who belonged to unions had voted for Reagan in both of his presidential campaigns.

Reagan, at any rate, was a true ideologue of the anti-labor political right. Yes, he had been president of the Screen Actors Guild, but he was notoriously pro-management in that position. He led the way to a strike-ending agreement in 1959 that greatly weakened the union. Under heavy membership pressure, he finally resigned as union president before his term ended.

Reagan's war on labor as US president began in the summer of 1961, when he fired 13,000 striking air traffic controllers and destroyed their union.

As Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson noted in 2004, the firing was "an unambiguous signal that employers need feel little or no obligation to their workers, and employers got that message loud and clear - illegally firing workers who sought to unionize, replacing permanent employees who could collect benefits with temps who could not, shipping factories and jobs abroad."

Reagan gave dedicated union foes direct control of the federal agencies that were originally designed to protect and further the rights of workers and their unions. Most important was Reagan's appointment of three management representatives to the five- member National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

The appointees included NLRB Chairman Donald Dotson, who declared that "unionized labor relations have been the major contributors to the decline and failure of once healthy industries" and have caused "destruction of individual freedom."

A House committee found that under Dotson, the NLRB abandoned its legal obligation to promote collective bargaining, in what amounted to "a betrayal of American workers."

The NLRB settled only about half as many complaints about employers' illegal actions as it had during the previous administration of Democrat Jimmy Carter. Most of the complaints were against employers who responded to organizing drives by illegally firing union supporters. The employers were well aware that, under Reagan, the NLRB was taking an average of three years to rule on complaints - and that, in any case, the board did no more than order that discharged unionists be reinstated with back pay, which was much cheaper than operating under a union contract.

The board stalled equally as long before acting on petitions from workers seeking union representation elections and generally stalled for another year or two after such votes before certifying winning unions as the workers' bargaining agents. Also, under Reagan employers were allowed to permanently replace workers who dared exercise their legal right to strike.

Reagan's Labor Department was as one-sided as the NLRB. It became an anti-Labor Department, virtually ignoring, for example, the union-busting consultants that many employers hired to help them fend off unionization.

Very few consultants and very few of those who hired them were asked for the financial disclosure statements that the law demands, yet all unions were required to file the statements that the law required of them, and that imbalance could be used to advantage by their opponents. Although the Labor Department cut its overall budget by more than 10 percent, it increased the budget for such union-busting activities by almost 40 percent.

Among Reagan's many other outrages, there were his attempts to lower the minimum wage for younger workers, weaken the child labor and anti-sweatshop laws, tax fringe benefits and cut back programs to train unemployed workers for available jobs. He also tried to replace thousands of federal employees with temporary workers who would not have civil service or union protection.

Reagan all but dismantled programs that required affirmative action and other steps against discrimination by federal contractors, and he seriously undermined job safety programs. He closed one-third of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's field offices, trimmed the agency's staff by more than one-fourth and decreased the number of penalties assessed against offending employers by almost three-fourths.

Rather than enforce the laws, Reagan appointees sought "voluntary compliance" from employers on safety matters - and generally didn't get or expect it. Reagan had so tilted the safety laws in favor of employers that safety experts declared them virtually useless.

The same could have been said of all other labor laws in the Reagan era. A statement issued at the time by the leaders of several major unions concluded that it would have been more advantageous for those who worked for a living to ignore the laws and return to "the law of the jungle" that prevailed a half-century before.

The suggestion came a little late. Ronald Reagan had already plunged the nation's labor-management relations deep into the jungle.

Yet Reagan will nevertheless be honored in centennial celebrations throughout the United States, in Europe and elsewhere in coming days. He's become a much beloved mythical figure, and nothing will change that - certainly not the unheard or unacknowledged facts of his presidency and its disastrous effects on America's working people, many of whom, ironically, will be among the celebrants.
sgen111l.jpg


efin70l.jpg


twin595l.jpg

Ronald Reagan was the antithesis of FDR, Harry S. Truman and John F. Kennedy...

"Harry Truman once said, 'There are 14 or 15 million Americans who have the resources to have representatives in Washington to protect their interests, and that the interests of the great mass of the other people - the 150 or 160 million - is the responsibility of the president of the United States, and I propose to fulfill it.'"
President John F. Kennedy


Even the antithesis of his own party's most successful President...

"Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower
 
I've never been in a position where even when I've worked in Union Shops that I've been part of a collective bargaining unit. So I've never been a member of the union but one of the most lasting impact of Reagan and his labor policies is this attitude of employers of "Your civil rights end when you walk in our door.". Fortunately I've been in a position where if the work environment is to hostile I can walk away and go to work for someone else that isn't.

Reagan had a willing collaborator in the dismantling of unions and their political influence. They are called "The working class". Most white blue collars workers I know are conservative Republicans. They mainly know precious little about economics or public policy and most have political beliefs based on identity politics and/or wedge issues. I've seen them time and time again vote against their best economic interest for conservative politicians who are going to stand up for them on gays, guns and abortion. Problem is, no one is taking away their guns, abortion is still legal and gay relationships are well on the way towards being recognized in civil law.

They've paid a pretty substantial penalty too. Median income when adjusted for inflation has not risen for working class Americans since Reagan. That was the first generation of Americans this has happened to. In reality, median income has declined substantially for the working class because prior to Reagan one persons income provided for the household. Now it takes two persons to make the same income. This has had significant social consequences for the working classes too with higher divorce rates and the lack of parental supervision, due to both parents working with, correlating to other social ills for their children (higher drop out rates, higher teen pregnancy and drug use rates, etc).

It's hard for me to feel sympathetic for them cause to this day most white working class, particularly white men, that I know still continue to support these same conservative politicians who undermine their well being. So hey, if this is what they wanted, more power to them.
 
How do we go back to a time where workers from China, India etc. were not in competition with the American worker? Can we turn the clock back or do we have to go 100% protectionism as Azzhat suggests?
 
How do we go back to a time where workers from China, India etc. were not in competition with the American worker? Can we turn the clock back or do we have to go 100% protectionism as Azzhat suggests?

You make things better, faster and cheaper than them. Simple market rule.
Of course there are few Americans who would work for $3,300.00 pa including board and lodging. But I'm afraid that's where we are at.
Play the winners. What do you do that they cannot? Medicine, bio-technology, ... there must be more... er....er.....
 
How do we go back to a time where workers from China, India etc. were not in competition with the American worker? Can we turn the clock back or do we have to go 100% protectionism as Azzhat suggests?
No we can't and though I do deplore the lopsided and unfair nature of these so called "Free Trade Agreements" and the race to the bottom they represent I have to admit that the impact on jobs and income for working class people is over stated. First, most of the businesses who have left for China and other third world nations we have trade agreements with have been industries that produce products with low profit margins. Shoes, clothes, bicycles, consumer electronics, etc, etc. These industries were hardly driving our economy or creating jobs and in heavy industry and manufacturing with high margins of profits it's been automation and technology which has reduced substantially the need for high cost labor. I would site a particular steel plant in East Chicago Indiana as an example. This one blast furnace can annually produce 1/4 of the quantity of steel produced in our nation during the peak of WWII. Just that one plant! The fact of the mater is, the US is still the worlds leader in manufacturing and manufacturing produces large profits, it's just that with modern technology and automation and efficiencies, it's not a major job creator anymore.
 
Last edited:
You make things better, faster and cheaper than them. Simple market rule.
Of course there are few Americans who would work for $3,300.00 pa including board and lodging. But I'm afraid that's where we are at.
Play the winners. What do you do that they cannot? Medicine, bio-technology, ... there must be more... er....er.....
Exactly! The jobs we've lost to China are not the kind of high paying jobs we'd want anyways. Though, again, I do deplore the unfair nature of these so called free trade agreements, their impact on the American economy and jobs is certainly over stated for political reasons.
 
Reagan may have ruined some unions, but he did pass the Right To Know act which protects workers from environmental issues.

The MSDS book in every shop allows workers to see what chemicals they are exposed to in the workplace. No small thing.
 
So, we have a situation wherein union labor has, over the years, grossly inflated unskilled and semi-skilled wages, which in turn is a direct factor in the exportation of millions of manufacturing jobs, thanks to NAFTA, GAFTA, etc. being emplaced without any safeguards - in fact giving corporations tax dollars to help them move over seas - and it is REAGAN who is the American workers' worst enemy?

You fucking liberal twits really have let your brains turn to sludge. Quit eating the donkey shit and wake the FUCK UP!
 
You make things better, faster and cheaper than them. Simple market rule.
Of course there are few Americans who would work for $3,300.00 pa including board and lodging. But I'm afraid that's where we are at.
Play the winners. What do you do that they cannot? Medicine, bio-technology, ... there must be more... er....er.....
Lawyers. We're the best at that too.
 
Reagan may have ruined some unions, but he did pass the Right To Know act which protects workers from environmental issues.

The MSDS book in every shop allows workers to see what chemicals they are exposed to in the workplace. No small thing.
Yea, that was SARA Title III in 1986. Give credit. It was a democratic congress which proposed amending the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 with the Superfund Amendment Reauthorisation act which included the subtitle 3 amendment that created OSHA Standerds under the Federal Registrar 29 CFR 1910.1200 which included the employee right to know rules incorporating the requirement for MSDS's and Reagan, to his credit, did sign it into law. Reagan signed quite a few substantial environmental laws into place. As I posted in another thread. Most of our major environmental laws were signed into law by Republican Presidents and were the result of broad bipartisan support.
 
So, we have a situation wherein union labor has, over the years, grossly inflated unskilled and semi-skilled wages, which in turn is a direct factor in the exportation of millions of manufacturing jobs, thanks to NAFTA, GAFTA, etc. being emplaced without any safeguards - in fact giving corporations tax dollars to help them move over seas - and it is REAGAN who is the American workers' worst enemy?

You fucking liberal twits really have let your brains turn to sludge. Quit eating the donkey shit and wake the FUCK UP!
Dude, you've probably walked acrossed a factory once. You simply don't know what the hell your talking about. Unions, for good or bad, are largely responsible for building the middle class in this country. It sure as hell wasn't some reactionary ranchers from Montana. You're just another right wing ideologue who hates the middle and working classes and seem to obtain some perverse joy in denying people their hard earned share of the profits they have earned. Unions don't inflate wages. Unions collectively organize to do what any capitalist organization does. Charge what the market will bear for their services. Technology and automation have done far more to decrease the number of manufacturing jobs by far then Reagan or Trade Agreements have. Reagan's legacy isn't one of lost jobs. Reagan's legacy is one of lost rights in the work place and any fucking fool who's ever walked up or down the line in a factory would know that ya fucking fool. Why don't you try working in a factory before you come here and lecture us on a topic you don't know that first fucking thing about.
 
Last edited:
He wasn't a demon, he was just an actor turned politician, fully human, good at rally America around the flag.
 
the ENEMY....yeah, no demonization there :rolleyes:

its not true and you should know better
Well what do you expect? The facts of history are quite clear. Reagan was a ferocious opponent of Unions and worked diligently to undermine the labor movement in this nation and his anti-labor, pro-management legacy is very much in evidence to this very day.
 
Well what do you expect? The facts of history are quite clear. Reagan was a ferocious opponent of Unions and worked diligently to undermine the labor movement in this nation and his anti-labor, pro-management legacy is very much in evidence to this very day.

Yep, I think it's a hoot given that reagan was twice president of the Screen Actors' Guild, a (gasp!) union.
 
Back
Top