Verizon Strike Expected to End Soon

Verizon Strike: As Delays Mount, It's Time for the Company to Bargain With Workers in Good Faith (Update: Strike May End Soon)

By Laura Clawson, Daily Kos
Posted on August 20, 2011

Update: According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, "Verizon Communications Inc. and union leaders will announce today that employees will return to work starting Tuesday morning, ending for a time, the longest and largest strike in recent labor history."

Though Verizon has claimed that its managers and replacement workers would be able to keep up with the workload of striking workers, reports of significant service delays are spreading. And with inexperienced people trying to do complex work and not knowing what they're doing, as seen below, no wonder.
 

In that video, striking workers actually step in to help prevent injury or damage. Another video shows replacement workers blowing a transformer, and that's not the end of the problems striking workers have witnessed. So no wonder that while "Verizon acknowledges 'minor' disruptions since the strike began on Aug. 7," Steven Greenhouse goes on to report some issues that sound less than minor.

Mr. Marsh, who just graduated from Buffalo State College with a degree in urban planning, wanted to order Verizon’s FiOS Internet and television services for his new apartment on West 49th Street in Manhattan. 

"They let me go through the whole signup and then at the end they said, 'There are no installation dates available. Someone will contact you,' " Mr. Marsh said. "That was probably a week ago. They were trying to make it seem like everything is O.K., like the service is there but it’s not. I thought it would be a couple of weeks, but it might end up being a couple of months. I decided to go with Time Warner instead."

Meanwhile, Verizon workers have taken the pickets to the homes of top executives, saying:

"One can't possibly go up to the mansions in Mendham and not be struck by the grossness of destroying the standard of living of working-class operators and technicians while living in the lap of luxury. It is worth marking the contrast," said Hetty Rosenstein, CWA's New Jersey director. [...]

Blackwater Mercenary Security For Verizon

by Unions.org

Wait. What? Blackwater? That private, for-profit, trigger-happy army that killed 17 civilians in Nisour Square in Baghdad in 2007? Yeah. THAT BLACKWATER.

I have just confirmed with Communications Workers of America (CWA) Local 1104 that Blackwater is indeed being contracted by Verizon for security purposes. At this moment, CWA Local 1104 was not able to say how many security contractors have been hired or where they will be working. I’m sure more information will follow.

Blackwater, now called Xe, is considered to be the world’s largest and most powerful mercenary army. In 2004, they had 2,300 men actively deployed around the world and another 20,000 contractors ready to go. They claim that they have trained tens of thousands of security personnel since 1998.

In the aftermath of hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, The Nation’s Jeremy Scahill reported that, “I saw Blackwater mercenaries speeding up and down the streets in unmarked cars, heavily armed with M4 machine guns, flak jackets, other weapons strapped to their legs.”

The New York Times reports:

The company and its executives and personnel have faced civil lawsuits, criminal charges and Congressional investigations surrounding accusations of murder and bribery. In April 2010, federal prosecutors announced weapons charges against five former senior Blackwater executives, including its former president, Erik D. Prince.

Nearly four years after the federal government began a string of investigations and criminal prosecutions against company personnel, some of the cases have fallen apart, burdened by legal obstacles including the difficulties of obtaining evidence in war zones, of gaining proper jurisdiction for prosecutions in American civilian courts, and of overcoming immunity deals given to defendants by American officials on the scene.

But in April 25, 2011, a federal appeals court reopened the criminal case against four former American military contractors accused of manslaughter in connection with the Nisour Square shooting in 2007.

At the onset of the strike, Verizon employed the services of the NJ State Police to escort trucks and non-union workers through picket lines. Now, Verizon’s hiring of a for-profit army during the strike proves two things. First that this is indeed a war on the middle class, and second, that Verizon will bear any expense to win this war.

Can you imagine a country where the billion dollar corporations have the world’s largest and deadliest private, for-profit army at their disposal? What would Blackwater guards actually do on a picket line? I guess we will find out soon enough.

I already wrote about how the un-trained, non-union replacement workers are violating Verizon safety rules and costing the company thousands by making mistakes on the job, most notably by destroying a Verizon bucket truck. In addition to that, Verizon spent $20,000 in postage to mail letters to striking union workers stating that they are terminating their health care on August 31. A union delegate for the IBEW also said that Verizon is offering contractors in Florida $75 an hour, plus hotel rooms, to come up north to work as non-union replacements, but they refuse to keep the terms of the previous union contract.

Verizon said that the concessions they are seeking on the striking union workers from the IBEW and CWA will save their company $1 billion a year. So far, Verizon has refused to budge on these demands. I wonder how much longer Verizon can refuse to sit down at the bargaining table before their union busting activities exceeds that $1 billion mark. For a company sitting on $100 billion in revenue with net profits of $6 billion last year, $1 billion seems like chump change.

The Verizon Strike as the Next Wisconsin

Saturday, August 13, 2011 by Dissent Magazine

by Mark Engler

 

The picket lines are up. This past weekend 45,000 Verizon workers on the East Coast, represented by the Communications Workers of America (CWA) and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), went on strike. The cause of the strike was the company’s attempts to win massive concessions from the unions. Verizon argued that the employees should give up gains they had won over many years of struggle and negotiation in previous contract fights.

As the Wall Street Journal put it, “Verizon Communications Inc. is seeking some of the biggest concessions in years from its unions.” Demands include the weakening of health-care benefits, cuts in pensions, reduced job security, and elimination of paid holidays such as Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. This despite the fact that the company reported billions in profit last year, and that, in the words of New York Times reporter Steven Greenhouse, “Verizon’s top five executives received a total of $258 million in compensation, including stock options, over the last four years.” The unions argue that Verizon has made some $20 billion in profit in the same time period, and Citizens for Tax Justice has pointed out that the company has done so while paying little to nothing in corporate income taxes.

Without a doubt, this is a conflict of national significance. As Bob Master, CWA District 1 legislative and political director, explained Wednesday in a conference call with supporters,

This is an enormously profitable company, which we believe is trying to take advantage of an anti-union environment and, in a sense, to replicate at a giant private-sector corporation what the governors of Ohio, New Jersey, and Wisconsin have been trying to do to the public sector. Our members feel very strongly that we need to draw a line here.

The parallel to Wisconsin is apt for several reasons. First, like the Republican elected officials in their attacks on unionized schoolteachers and other public employees, Verizon is taking aim at one of the last bastions of the American middle class. As a main strategy in its public relations, the company is trying to stoke resentment about the fact that the CWA and IBEW workers actually have living-wage jobs. It is hoping that “I don’t have a pension, why should they” logic will carry the day.

Accordingly, on Wednesday Verizon took out a full-page ad in the Philadelphia Inquirer suggesting that a typical employee makes $80,600 in annual pay and $42,000 in benefits. The union disputes this claim, contending that salaries are generally in the $60,000 to $77,000 range, and that benefits are less costly than the company would suggest. But, regardless, the debate over numbers misses some critical questions: What’s wrong with workers sharing in the profits of a healthy corporation? Isn’t that the way our economy is supposed to work?

(On a side note, it’s always a treat when companies plead poverty at the negotiating table and then turn around and spend big bucks on media spots, anti-union consultants, and pricey PR firms—but that’s another story.)

The fate of 45,000 middle-class jobs is a big deal for all of America. Last month, the entire U.S. economy had a net gain of only 117,000 jobs. Not only is that for the whole country, it represents a pretty decent month given the numbers from the past year. Furthermore, almost all of the new jobs now being created are low-wage. Given these realities—and the fact that concentrating all wealth in the hands of the rich is a very bad strategy for creating the kind of demand the economy needs to rebound—what happens to the Verizon workers is a matter of broad public concern.

Bob Master is right that Verizon’s aggressive bargaining stance, like Governor Scott Walker’s public-sector power grab, is the product of a political climate in which corporate interests feel they can do whatever they want to working people, and employees will have no recourse. The Verizon strike is unfortunately akin to Wisconsin in that it is a defensive battle—an effort to stop tragic rollbacks in previously established standards of fair employment.

The background for the contract dispute is that Verizon is now making most of its profits from its wireless services. While a small number of wireless technicians are involved in the strike, that part of the company is mostly non-union. In an ideal world, CWA and IBEW would be able to “bargain to organize,” balancing any concessions at the negotiating table for current union members with agreements that the company will remain truly neutral and allow workers at Verizon Wireless to make their own decision about whether or not to unionize. But this is not an ideal world. Like in Wisconsin, labor and its allies face a difficult fight merely to stave off the worst of a rabidly anti-union assault.

That said, there is a case for hope. The mass protests in Madison earlier this year gave some cause for optimism that a new type of energetic, broad-based, community-labor mobilization might become a lasting force in that state’s politics—and become a model for movements in other parts of the country. Wisconsinites’ success this week in recalling some Republican State Senators (although not as many as hoped) suggested that the struggle will be a long one, but that progressive efforts could have some real legs.

As for the strike, all those who have been wondering when working America will be fed up enough to finally stand up and fight should not sit this one out. If the Verizon strike becomes a rallying point in this country for a movement against runaway corporate power and for a fairer economy, it could have much broader implications than what contract terms are ultimately hammered out for those now walking the picket lines. That these workers are not rolling over in the face of company insistence on concessions is important and courageous. And they deserve widespread support.

***

Those on the East Coast can find a picket line to visit here.

Supporters all over the country will soon be able to “adopt a Verizon Wireless store” in their area and help to organize pickets at that location.

Finally, without even leaving your computer, you can sign the petition in support of the 45,000 CWA and IBEW workers on strike.

Verizon Strike

So Who Really Stands to Benefit from AT&T’s T-Mobile Takeover?

Friday, July 1, 2011 by SavetheInternet.com
by Jenn Ettinger

 

Last week, a group of 76 Democrats made a small splash inside the Beltway after they signed a letter touting the alleged benefits of the AT&T-T-Mobile merger for rural communities and workers. The problem with the letter, though, is that it’s full of lies that have been trumpeted by AT&T and are being echoed by its supporters, despite being swiftly debunked by Free Press and others.

While it does not outright endorse the merger, the letter claims the deal would bring the benefits of broadband to rural communities that would otherwise not have access. But that’s not true. On June 10, AT&T reported to the FCC that, even without the merger, it already plans to deploy next generation "4G service to 97 percent of the population by the end of 2012."

The letter also suggests AT&T's takeover will generate billions of dollars in additional investment and create thousands of jobs. But AT&T has told Wall Street the merger will result in less investment and more layoffs.

So if these claims are false, who really does benefit from this merger? (Don’t worry, this won’t take long. It’s a short list.)

AT&T

The most obvious beneficiary of this takeover is AT&T. By eliminating a competitor, AT&T would gain millions of subscribers, a cache of valuable wireless spectrum and a spot alongside Verizon in a massive wireless duopoly. (So massive in fact that these two companies would rival the market dominance of the top 10 oil companies combined.) AT&T’s shareholders are also poised to reap the benefits of the post-merger “synergies” which translate into tens of thousands of laid off workers and billions less investment. While AT&T tells Congress the merger will lead to more investment and jobs, it’s telling Wall Street the opposite. It’s probably not lying to Wall Street.

Deutsch Telekom and T-Mobile

Deutsch Telekom has been seeking to unload T-Mobile for a few reasons. T-Mobile has been slowly falling behind Verizon and AT&T, thanks in large part to the slanted regulations and unfair playing field that the duopolists have ordered up from friendly lawmakers. The investment necessary to bring it up to speed is not that large compared to the merger price, but it may be more than Deutsche Telekom wants to put in. Additionally, in order to expand its coverage and improve its network, T-Mobile needs more and better spectrum, and has trouble getting it because AT&T and Verizon are so dominant in that arena, too. AT&T’s offer of $39 billion was enough for Deutsche Telekom to unload the company and focus on its European business.

CWA

Communication Workers of America has been ceaselessly urging progressives to support the merger, calling it good for jobs and investment, but what it really means is that the merger is good for the union. CWA has been trying to unionize T-Mobile’s workforce for the last four years, and under AT&T it would have access to those workers. T-Mobile's workforce of course should be free to join unions. But what CWA doesn’t mention in its plugs for the merger is that a significant number of T-Mobile’s workers won’t even have the chance to join the union, because they’ll be laid off. The only benefits those downsized workers will see are unemployment benefits.

Congress

AT&T is one of the biggest contributors to congressional coffers, and it has spent nearly $54 million in campaign contributions over the past 25 years, and over $142 million on lobbying in the last 15. After the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, the cost of running for Congress has spiraled upward, giving contributing corporations even more power to dictate policy to money-hungry elected officials. The signers of this week’s letter have received a total of nearly $1.8 million from AT&T, a number that probably helped the signers avoid taking a long look into the letter’s claims.

To be sure, the list of real beneficiaries is small, and noticeably missing are consumers in the wireless market, which after the loss of a key competitor will see less innovation. Everyday Americans will pay for this merger with higher bills and will have fewer choices in carriers, phones and plans.