Joseph Sabino Mistick: Unions for America | TribLIVE.com
Joseph Sabino Mistick, Columnist

Joseph Sabino Mistick: Unions for America

Joseph Sabino Mistick
1600905_web1_VND-LIV-FANNIE
Photo courtesy Mary Cronk Farrell
Fannie Sellins

By the time Fannie Sellins was killed outside a mine near Brackenridge on Aug. 26, 1919, the widowed mother of four children was already a veteran union organizer, a fierce fighter for the poor and a fearless picket-line marcher.

Sellins’ life was celebrated last week in the Allegheny Valley at an event sponsored by the Battle of Homestead Foundation, the United Mine Workers and the United Steelworkers. Her story is about sacrifice and the sanctity of hard work.

When she was widowed, Sellins started working in a garment factory in St. Louis, becoming a union leader and negotiating on behalf of 400 factory employees during a lockout. Later, she was arrested in West Virginia for disobeying an injunction against picketing, and then she was arrested again for getting right back on the line after her release.

In the summer of 1919, while Sellins was managing picketing for the United Mine Workers, she saw company guards beating a miner to death. When she intervened, the guards turned on her and shot her twice in the head, and then they bludgeoned her.

In “The Point of Pittsburgh,” labor historian Charles McCollester writes that Sellins said her work was the distribution of “clothing and food to starving women and babies, to assist poverty-stricken mothers and bring children into the world, and to minister to the sick and close the eyes of the dying.” She saw it as part of her union service.

Early industrialization had led to deepening conflicts in the nation, with management versus labor and nativists versus immigrants and rich versus poor. As long as the workers were divided, they were easily defeated. As unions became stronger, unity among workers increased.

Successful fights for fair wages, safety rules, pensions, sick days, vacation and holiday pay, weekends, overtime pay, compensation for injuries and health care — guaranteed by law or by contract — effectively ended the factionalism that had torn America apart. And a working middle class began to take shape.

But, since 1980, things have changed. In a recent Forbes article, Mark Travers wrote, “The average CEO-to-worker pay ratio has increased from 20-1”, throughout the 1960s and ’70s, “to a whopping 312-1 in 2017.” And middle-class wage growth has been stagnant for decades.

Using census data, it is easy to chart the decline of union membership and the drop in middle-class income. A report by the Center for American Progress Action Fund shows both falling steadily and in tandem for over 30 years. And, as the working and elite classes grow further apart, America is split more and more deeply.

James Madison described the nature of factionalism. In Federalist No. 10, Madison cited wide differences in wealth and property ownership as the principal causes of faction. He said it is in the “nature of man” to embrace self-interest over public interest at the expense of others.

This Labor Day, Fannie Sellins’ story reminds us of the need for strong labor unions to defeat factionalism. The promise that corporate tax cuts and corporate welfare will trickle down to the workers has proven again to be empty. And, unless there are unions fighting for the workers, closing that inequality gap will be impossible.

Joseph Sabino Mistick is a Pittsburgh lawyer. Reach him at [email protected].

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.