continue at Regnum NovumIn the context of the Wisconsin recall vote on Tuesday, Michael Sean Winters over at the National Catholic Reporter brings up, as many others have, the importance of labor unions in the tradition of the Catholic Church’s social teaching. While Mr. Winters has a point that the Church has been in support of unions, what he and many others fail to note are the parameters which the Holy Fathers have given for that support. There are limits, and these limits are almost always ignored.
Pope Leo XIII supported unions...up to a point.
The news out of Wisconsin yesterday morning was in some places headlined “Unions Lose.” Whether or not that’s true, it certainly betrays the perception that at the heart of the political angst in Wisconsin are the questions of public unions, collective bargaining and the closed shop rules that dominate. A “closed shop” means that you cannot work at the “shop” unless you belong to the union. Wisconsin public schools are a closed shop.
Because of the historic support for unions, many Catholics are lamenting the lack of support that the bishops are giving the Wisconsin unions. How dare they not use their pulpits, suggests Mr. Winters, to rally Catholic action against Governor Walker and his GOP hoods. But then looking at the actual social teaching ought to help us decipher the situation.
Let’s start with Pope Leo XIII, the founder of modern social doctrine, and his Rerum novarum which says:
A very good read. Sadly, the Church's social teaching has got a reputation of being "bad" because so many on the left continue to misrepresent it. The Church defines the teaching, not a particular political party.
5 comments:
Turning to history is one way Catholics can begin to restore unions to their proper role in society. In Rerum Novarm Pope Leo XIII not only praises the guild system of the past as a worthy model for this restoration but says it is to be desired that these associations become more numerous and efficient.
The Holy Father writes, "The most important of all are workingmen's unions, for these virtually include all the rest. History attests what excellent results were brought about by the artificers' guilds of olden times. They were the means of affording not only many advantages to the workmen, but in no small degree of promoting the advancement of art, as numerous monuments remain to bear witness. Such unions should be suited to the requirements of this our age - an age of wider education, of different habits, and of far more numerous requirements in daily life. It is gratifying to know that there are actually in existence not a few associations of this nature, consisting either of workmen alone, or of workmen and employers together, but it were greatly to be desired that they should become more numerous and more efficient. We have spoken of them more than once, yet it will be well to explain here how notably they are needed, to show that they exist of their own right, and what should be their organization and their mode of action."
Right, the NEA + WEAC is a monopoly, not really a union. Guilds trained their own workers, mentored younger memeber, ect. We don't have multiple teachers unions working together, we have one head disseminating it world view to the entire teaching "industry." How is it that one organization, the NEA, defines curriculum for the entire nation? I have the same problem with Bush's standardized testing. There should be no federal control over local teaching unions.
If this guild teaching was applied to education, I would expect a Classical Educators Guild, Modern Educators Guild, Catholic Educators Guild or something like that. But really, advanced education would always be handled by the trade guild. In other words, an Electrician Guild would have it's own location and method for training and educating new electricians, not to mention handling apprenticeships, ect. They would have a shared heath care system that applied to the risks of their particular trade. I could go on and on here.
The guilds would thwart the natural progression of capitalism to monopoly. They would encourage the ownership of the means of production - even insisting membership be granted only to those who do own the means of production - and by doing so, discourage wage dependency.
Matt, as you imply, the regulations and standards these trade guilds set would actually be recognized and enforceable. Requirements for entry into the trade, the number of apprentices, wages, and many other considerations that are currently either set by the governments or influenced by large corporations that can control the market, would then be in the hands of guilds.
Let us remember that guilds of the past encouraged the practicing of the faith. They were placed under the patronage of saints - the patron saint of the carpenters guild would be Saint Joseph, the artist guild Saint Luke - they encouraged the devotional life, acknowledged the proper role of the family in society. In order words, they were the antithesis of secularized unions of today.
Amen!
Some years ago I had a run in with a "lberal" Catholic who I called on for her claim about what the Ctholic Church taught. Her response, Catholic social teaching on the matter was different from what was taught elsewhere by the Church on the same subject.
About that time the Vatican came out with its Compendium of Catholic Social Teachings. I wish I had had that with me because it would have proved her wrong. I wonder how she would have handled that?
I bring this up because this has long been a battle for me as well. Here in Iowa we have a law that prevents people from being forced to join a union in order to work, open shop. A few weeks ago I was explaining to someone how that lined up with Catholic teaching that says unions can't force people to join them. Nearby was a postal worker who you could tell from the expression on his face, didn't like what I was saying.
Post a Comment