mmt labor local 768 newsletter summer 2013

7/27/2019 MMT Labor Local 768 Newsletter Summer 2013

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mmt-labor-local-768-newsletter-summer-2013 1/8

Local 768

(Continued on pg. 2)

LOCAL 768 STEWARD TRAINING BULLETIN

Health Services Employees, Local 768, District Council 37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO • 125 Barclay Street, New York, N Y 10007

Tel. 212-815-1935 • Emergency Hotline: 718-930-0175 www.local768.org • SUMMER, 2013

A Series of Three articles by Michael Merrill, dean of theHarry Van Arsdale Jr. Center for Labor Studies

WE CAN AFFORD PROSPERITY!An economic historian by training, Dr. Merrill has writtenwidely on economics, history and on contemporary environmentaland labor issues. An instructor in the History Department atPrinceton from 1984 to 1985 and an assistant professor inthe Rutgers Department of Labor Studies and EmploymentRelations from 1985 until 1997, he was appointed the firstDirector of Education and Training for the New Jersey State AFL-CIO in 1997. There he he lped unions in the construction,culinary and communications industries secure state funding tocreate apprenticeship programs and to recruit more women andminority candidates into the building trades. In 2002, he becamedirector of the George Meany Memorial Archives (AFL-CIO),and then worked at the Meany Center for Labor Studies untilJuly 2004, when he became dean of the Van Arsdale Center.

THE general public has beentaught for thirty years andmore to think of government as a burden on themselves

and others, and therefore an obstacleto our shared prosperity. Anti-gov-ernment propagandists have not onlykept up a steady drum beat against any notion of public service that is not minimal, but they have also worked toslash government spending whereverand whenever possible. Meanwhile,

they promise that, if only we are pa-tient, prosperity and happiness forall will emerge, from the ruins of ourpublic life.

They are wrong. And they alwayswill be wrong. Cutting taxes and gov-ernment social programs does not guarantee broadly-shared prosperity.It guarantees broadly-shared misery.And obstructing government effec-tiveness does not reward work. It rewards greed. Less government isnot the path to more opportunity. It

is the path to less.None know this more clearly than

public employees, who do the work of government: it is the ground fromwhich prosperity grows, that whichmakes the pursuit of happiness pos-sible. As such, it is absolutely essentialto our mutual well-being. Without good government, there can be noprosperity. They entail each other:the deeper and broader the govern-

ment, the deeper and broader ourprosperity.

What then do we do whenever theprivate sector cannot or will not de-liver the goods? We mobilize govern-ment agencies to do what needs tobe done-for example, provide jobsto the people who want to work, andessential services to all who have noaccess to them.

Take any service of choice: educa-

tion, health care, communication,transportation, employment, or what-ever. The government can, and prop-erly ought, to ensure that they areavailable to everyone.

Take jobs. We can and should a pro-vide job for everyone who wants towork; and we can and should ensurethat such jobs pay a living wage. Sucha job program is not a pipe dream ora wild fantasy. We have had them be-

fore—during the 1930s, for examplewhen the New Deal created jobs formillions of Americans; and duringWorld War II, when the need to ighfascists on two fronts in a global con-lict required that every able-bodiedperson be enlisted in the effort.

There is simply no good reason notto initiate such a program immediately, and every good reason to do soIt is not only the right thing to do. It

is also possible. And it will certainlymake us better off, not worse.

Those who disparage the idea of anactive government dissent from thisview. They insist that a job and wageguarantee would sap the moral iberof the nation. They, too, are wrongThere is no reason to question, forexample, the moral character of thevast majority of members of the armed

Esbeth BradleyFitz Reid Michele Wilson Shelly-Ann Mitchell-HoldeKari Wolf Caroline Hilton

1



Fitz ReidPresident

Esbeth BradleyExecutive Vice President

Michele Wilson1st Vice President

Kari Wolf 2nd Vice President

Caroline HiltonTreasurer

Shelly-Ann Mitchell-HolderSecretary

Executive Board MembersIvonne Gomez

Harry Polite

Lorraine BaileyDelegates to DC 37

Fitz ReidEsbeth Bradley

Shelly-Ann Mitchell-HolderRick Hendrick Robert PorterAnn Munroe

Albert Willingham

Delegates to CLCRick Hendrick Gary Gaynor

Jaeme CannonAndre Johannes

TrusteesMagaly Polo

Heather EdmonsonReginald Jackson

Sergeant-at-ArmsWilliam Abraham

DC 37 RepsNola Brooker – DirectorEddie Gates – Asst . Dir.

Maynard Anderson – Asst . Dir.Cynthia Keyes-Padilla

Jennifer WhiteMarianela Santana

Grievance Reps

Local’s AttorneysLichten & Bright, P.C.

forces. And yet they have both a job anda wage guarantee. There is no contradic-tion between working for the public andbeing a good worker.

Can we afford such programs? Eventhose who support government actionto put the unemployed to work, worrywe can't—that doing the right thing willcost too much money. Aren't taxes alreadytoo high? Isn't the debt already too big?Won't the combination bankrupt us or

our children? Even though we are therichest nation in the history of the earth,there are many children in the US who goto bed hungry and many others who arehomeless. And if we can’t afford to feedthe hungry or house the homeless, howcan we afford to employ the healthy—andat a living wage, no less?

These fears, too, are misplaced. They arethe effect of either a failure to understandhow modern money economies work ora cynical refusal to accept our respon-sibilities. The poverty or misfortune of

some is neither a necessary conditionnor a necessary effect of the wealth andfortune of others.

In fact, as I explain below, we can affordto do what we need to do. The government,considered as a whole, is not restrictedto spending only the money it raises intaxes or borrows from creditors. On thecontrary, it creates the money it spends.It can pay cash—its own, not ours—for

whatever it needs.How is this possible you wonder? Isn’ttaking such a view just laying the ground-work for over-spending and run-away in-lation? No. The doomsayers are wrong andwe will see below why they are wrong. Weactually have more to fear from austerityand deicit-mongering than from respon-sible spending and a healthy public sector

The upshot of it all is that so long as thegovernment manages its money-makingcapacity responsibly—in particular, solong as there is a government and it

only pays people to do things that needto be done, then it can never run out ofmoney and therefore never be forced todefault—i.e., be unable to pay what it owes

In other words, we can afford to do theright thing, ensure that everyone whowants to work has a job and makes a livingwage; that everyone who is qualiied to goto school can do so; that everyone whoneeds healthcare can get it. Let’s see why

We Can Afford Prosperity! ...Continued from page 1

President Fitz Reid and Local 768 Leaders at a General Membership Meeting

EDUCATE!ORGANIZE!MOBILIZE!STRUGGLE!

Local 768

2



Local 768

3

Union Leadership Institute

Thursday, September 12 - WORKING FOR NEW YORK What is happening to our jobs and what does it mean for our city?

Wednesday, September 18 - LIVING IN NEW YORK What is happening to our city and what does it mean for our union?

Wednesday, October 2 - STRENGTHENING OUR COMMUNITY AT WORK

Why do unions grow and what makes them strong?Wednesday, October 9 – WORKING TO STRENGTHEN OUR COMMUNITY

What do unions do and how can we do it better?

Wednesday, October 23 - MAKING OUR GOVERNMENT BETTERWhom do we serve and how do we serve them better?

Wednesday, October 30 - MAKING OUR CITY BETTERWhat can we do and where do we start?

Dr. Michael Merrill Henry Garrido,

DC 37 Assoc. Director

Meaghean Murphy, Esq.

DC 37 Asst. Gen. Council

Stuart Lichten, Esq.

A Strong Union, a Good Government, a Better City

INTERLUDE: Wednesday, September 25:Public Sector Labor Law and Contract Administration

STUART LICHTEN and MEAGHEAN MURPHY

Eight weekly classes are scheduled beginning September 12, 2013 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Van Arsdale Center, SUNYEmpire State College, 325 Hudson Street, New York 10013. For more information, please contact AFSCME Local 768 presi-dent Fitz Reid ([email protected] 718-930-0175) or the Van Arsdale Center’s program development coordinator, AlecMeiklejohn ([email protected]).

IT’S EASY TO GET THERE:The Harry Van Ardsdale Jr. Center for Labor Studies is located in Manhattan at 325 Hudson St., on the sixth loor, at thecorner of Vandam and Hudson Streets. The entrance for 325 Hudson Street is on Vandam Street. By subway: C or E trainsto Spring Street; and 1 or 9 trains to Houston Street.

INTERLUDE: Wednesday, October 16:The New York City Budget and How We Affect It

HENRY GARRIDO



Local 768

Understanding

Modern Money

4

MANY of us believe that living-wage job guaran-tees, publicly-providedbeneits and services,

and well-funded, stronger enforce-ment of the laws and regulationsalready on the books, is pie-in-the-sky. We have been taught to think that such guarantees cost too muchmoney and that we can't afford them,even if we agree that they would begood things to do if we could.

We have been taught wrong. We

can afford such programs. And wecan afford them without imposingan unfair tax burden on anyone.

The reason we can is that a legiti-mate, well-run government like theUnited States does not depend onthe money it gets from others. Onthe contrary, it issues the money it needs, as it requires.

Here's how it works. When thenational government wants to pay forsomething, it does so with a check or

money order, a thing of value, drawnon the US Treasury and payable bythe Federal Reserve. The recipient of this check, in turn, either cashesor deposits the check at their owninancial institution.

Where does this money comefrom? It does not come from taxes.Or at least not in the way we usu-ally think it does. The government has money to spend even before it receives any taxes. It does not spend

money that other people make. It spends money that it makes itself—which it can do not just because it wants to, but because of everythingelse it also does.

The government can create moneybecause people want the products andservices that government provides,and they are willing to pay for them.

To help them pay governments havelearned to issue currencies, whichthey promise to accept at tax time as

legal tender for the payment of theamount due. This money has value, isworth something, because, like any-thing of value, it is useful to people.

In the irst place, citizens can useit to pay their taxes, which the gov-ernment ensures by declaring itsmoney to be the only form in whichtaxes can be paid.

Second, other citizens also accept the government’s money in payment for goods and services because they

too need it to pay taxes, and becauseother poeple will accept it in turn, etc.

Finally, the government’s moneyis worth something, even to non-citizens, because they can use it topurchase goods and services fromcitizens, who will use it, etc., etc.

In this way, the money createdby the national government can be

used to meet each and everof the government’s obligawhatever they might be. It

because we accept the goment’s legitimacy and agpay taxes to it. And, in retugovernment agrees to let uthe money it has issued tothe means to pay our taxesresult is a virtuous circle ofgiven and received.

The notion that governmakes the money it spendbit hard to get one’s head aat irst. It seems like magic

is it possible?I ind the following analogy

ful: think of the United Statany sovereign country, for thater) as an elaborate extravagaa great big show; and think ounit of a government’s mona ticket that can be used to

(Continued on



Local 768

5

ve Taylor talks about our union contract.

Modern Money: Resources For more about “modern money theory”see www.neweconomicperspectives.org

There you can watch the video-taped series of lectures

entitled "Modern Money and Public Policy," which were

delivered at Columbia University in 2011-2012, or the

three-day conference on "Modern Monetary Theory," in

Rimini, Italy, in February 2012 and attended by thousandsof activists and citizens

Or, if you do your best thinking, as I do, with a book in

hand, then you can also check out Modern Money Theory:

A Primer on Macroeconomics for Sovereign Monetary Sys-

tems by L. Randall Wray, which was published last year.

dmission to the show. Each suchcket, each unit of money, has value,worth something, because every often the ticket collector—i.e.,e tax man—comes around and

ollects the number of tickets, in

roportion to our position or place,e each must have to remain ine show.To the extent, then, that the gov-nment provides the goods and ser-ces everyone needs or desires, andthe extent that everyone agreespay their taxes, which they gen-ally do, the government's money

as value. It is worth somethingecause people want a government.is in demand . And they are willingpay for it.We need to be very clear about l this because one of the most

mportant implications of the gov-nment’s money power is that its

udget is not strictly limited to theum it can raise from taxes or byorrowing. The government hase power to create money of valuehenever it needs to do so.That the government can issue

l the money it needs, however,oes not mean that there are nomits to the amount it can spend.cannot, for example, simply giveoney away for free. If it did, itsoney would be worthless. Rathere government must use its moneygood purpose, or lose the abilityissue it. It has to put on a show

at people want to see or be part . Otherwise they will not want to

ay the price of admission.

The same holds for taxes. If theovernment’s money is going to beorth anything, it must tax its citi-ns enough to preserve the value of

s currency. But it does not need too so to an amount exactly equal

what it spends. Indeed, if the money it issues hasher uses than just to pay taxes—

for example, if people use the moneyprovided by the government to con-duct their own individual businesswith one another, as we all certainlydo—then the amount of money thegovernment spends MUST BE larger

than what it collects in taxes .Nor does it have to borrow what-

ever it can’t raise in taxes. The gov-ernment does not need to borrowmoney. It makes money. The onlyreason the government borrowsis so that it can affect the interest rate. Depending upon how muchit borrows, it can drive the interest rate up or down.

It is also very important to notethat ONLY the national government has this kind of iscal lexibility. Onlythe national government has thesovereign authority to issue cur-rency. State, county and municipalgovernments must live on theirrevenue or their borrowing, just likehouseholds and businesses must.

But just like households, busi-nesses and federal agencies, state,

county and municipal governmentsalso can and do receive direct moneypayments (transfers or entitlements)from the national government. Thereis nothing but politics preventingthe national government from fund-

ing the essential services of stateand local governments.

The conclusion is clear: there isno iscal constraint on spending togood purpose for the government as a whole, certainly none that theimmediate ability of people to paytaxes imposes. There may not be afree lunch. But there can be a goodlunch. We must spend responsibly.But we can spend.

In the third and inal section, I willexplore the implications of this per-spective for municipal workers andtheir unions, and for our understand-ing of what the government is anddoes. What can we do, what should wedo, to ensure that the general publiccan learn to see the government asan asset to be treasured rather thanas a liability to be shunned.



Local 768

6

T

HE theory of modern moneysummarized above is not just another perspective on themonetary system. It is also

another perspective on government.In this inal article, I want briely toexplore the implications of this alterna-tive approach to government, especiallyas it relates to public sector workersand their unions.

According to the conventional wis-dom, government is a burden that ought to be avoided rather than anadvantage that ought to be embraced.Of course, even die-hard libertariansallow that some government is nec-essary, so long as it costs as little aspossible. But generally, it is cursed.The best government, we are alwaystaught, is the least.

The theory of modern money putsall this in a different light. Government,it helps us to see, does not just incurcosts that are properly minimized. It also confers beneits that a properlymaximized.

In other words, while government can be a problem, it can also be thesolution. And it is up to us, as govern-

A Government for the Peoplement workers, to eliminate its problemswhile implementing its solutions.

Let me take just one example. Every-one willingly supports government do-

ing everything it can to ensure nationalsecurity. I have been arguing here that we ought also to support the idea of government doing everything it canto ensure national prosperity.

Government should do so becauseit is the right thing to do. And govern-ment can do so because, as modernmoney theory makes plain, it has themeans, the money, to make it happen.

It is simply not true that government is forced to spend only the money it receives in taxes or borrows from themoneyed. Government can meet itsobligations with money that it has thepower to create.

To put the point differently, gov-ernment is not a wealth taker. It is awealth maker. What’s more, the wealthit makes is not just its own. Generallyspeaking, people create much morewealth with the aid of government than they do without it. We don’t irst become rich and then decide to forma government. First we form govern-

ments. Then and only then can webecome rich.

Without a strong government thatworks for all, it is not possible to have

a strong economy that works for allThey go together.

This important insight is actuallyinscribed in the preamble of the USConstitution, where “to promote thegeneral welfare” is listed as one ofthe principal purposes of our federagovernment, along with establishingjustice, insuring domestic tranquilitydefending the nation and securing theblessings of liberty.

We need to take the idea of a duty topromote the general welfare to heartand we need to embrace it as one of themost fundamental duties of a demo-cratic government, which properlyincludesboth our duly-elected oficialsand our duly-delegated civil servantsand public employees.

One of the best ways to promotethe general (i.e., universal) welfare—the welfare of everyone—is to use althe necessary and proper powers ofgovernment to ensure that all thosewho want to work have a job; that

everyone who works makes a livingwage; that the sick and the aged arecared for, the hungry fed, the nakedclothed, the homeless sheltered, andthe weak protected.

These goals are part of the purposesof government, which properly in-cludes, as the US Declaration of Inde-pendence put the point, to secure foreveryone their right to “life, libertyand the pursuit of happiness.”

The principal purpose of these shortessays has been to argue that we can

afford to use the full powers of gov-ernment to ensure a broadly-basedprosperity. The modern money sys-tem enables the government to spendwhat it needs to spend in order bothto ensure that every citizen can enjoya fully productive and happy life, andalso to provide, at an affordable priceall the goods and services that citizensdeserve.

(Continued on Page 7)



Local 768

What can those of us who agree withthis point of view do to make it a morelikely prospect? In particular, what canthose of us who are public workers do?

We do not have to wait for others.We can start with our own under-standings and practices. Public sectorunionists have borrowed a model of unionism from the private sector that is inappropriate to our situation and itschallenges. We can start by re-thinkingwho we are, what we do, and why wedo it. Having satisied ourselves on suchpoints, we can begin to enlist others.

Private sector unions are primarilyconcerned with ensuring an equitable

distribution of their enterprise’s rev-enue among all those who contributedto it. In the pursuit of such equity theyoften act in ways that enhance thewell-being of the whole. But that is not their primary purpose. Their primarypurpose is to win equity and fairnessfor themselves.

Public sector workers are in a dif-ferent situation. As trade unionists wetoo are inspired by the principle that an injury to one is the concern of all.

But as public sector workers, we

also have a responsibility to the public,“the all,” that goes beyond concern.An injury to the public is the direct responsibility of each and every oneof us. Why? Because we don’t work FOR the government. We work for the

A Government for the People....continue from pg 6

public and ARE the government.What then is to be done? We—and

by “we,” I mean, “we public workers”—need to change the conversation, not only among ourselves but also amongthe general public. As a irst step wecan embrace a theory of government

that takes its role as both a doer of goodand a creator of wealth for granted.

We know irst-hand that it does both,for we participate in the doing of both.But we don’t do a good enough job of explaining what we do to others.

We can do better. We need to continue to educate ourselves not onlyabout what the government does bualso about what it could do. And wneed to incorporate these lessons intowhat we do and say. We need to lead agrassroots movement for good gover

ment. We need to reject the naysayerswho insist that we can’t manage, orcan’t afford, such a thing. Yes, we canAnd we need to reject the doomsayerwho insist that nothing will ever changeor get better. Yes, it will!

On Workers Rights

“Workers rights are not deined by law or contract. Workers rights are deined by struggle.You will win what you are willing to ight for; nothing more.” —Gregg Shotwell

“Derechos de los trabajadores no estàn deinidos por ley o contrato. Derechos de lostrabajadores se deinen por la lucha. Usted va a ganar lo que usted esté dispuesto a luchar, y nada màs.” —Gregg Shotwell

7



Local 768

P

UBLIC SERVANTS are among the most powerfuland persuasive defenders of good government.That is why right-wing ideologues and anti-government activists want to weaken if not

destroy them. By denying public workers representationand a voice, the anti-government forces can more easily push theirown agenda--which is to eliminateall public services EXCEPT thosethat beneit the rich and powerful.

What can we do to resist theirefforts? The most important thing we can do is to educate ourselves about theiragenda, develop effective counter arguments, and thenorganize ourselves to acquaint our members and thegeneral public with the truth. Then, armed with the

truth, we will be able to determine and take more ef-fective measures together.

As a irst step in this direction, the leadership of the Health Services Employees Local 768 of AFSCME

District Council 37 has enlisted the Harry Van ArsdaleJr. Center for Labor Studies at SUNY Empire State College todevelop a 8-week Union Leader-ship Institute for local leadersand activists.

Entitled “A Strong Union, AGood Government, A Better City,”

the Institute will include self-contained modules onthe principles of trade unionism, the development of the labor movement, economics for working people,organizing for change, and winning back the public.

Union Leadership Institute

Both the Professional Division

of DC 37 (212-815-1040) and Local

768 (212-815-1935) have returned

to 125 Barclay Street, New York, NY

10007. The Council Reps remain

Sisters Cynthia Keyes-Padilla, Mari-

anela Santana and Jennifer White.

WE ARE BACK:

8

mmt labor local 768 newsletter summer 2013

Documents