News

  • Learning From a Union Win in Richmond

    Learning From a Union Win in Richmond

    By Glenn Daigon

    Over the summer, Laborers Local 804 won a breakthrough tentative collective bargaining agreement with Richmond Public Schools [RPS].  The Local represents over 200 school bus drivers.  The win came after passage of a Virginia law allowing municipal public employees the right to organize and the union reinstating five fired bus drivers, known as the RPS5.  Correspondent Glenn Daigon interviewed organizer Chris Hollis on the campaign.  Below is an edited transcript of the interview.

    Daigon: It was a few years ago that the Virginia Legislature gave public employees the right to organize at the town and municipal levels. In early June 2023, Local 804 won the right to represent over 200 Richmond public school bus drivers. Why did it take two years to get a tentative agreement?

    Hollis: There are a lot of factors that play into getting this tentative agreement. One of the most important factors is the fact that Virginia is considered part of the South and you are dealing with Jim Crow laws. A lot of people were hesitant when the law passed. So, there was a lot of, I’ll say, bureaucracy going on, alignment with certain City Council members who want to support it.  A lot of issues with the budget. Would they be able to afford it? So the can was kicked down the road until, I think it was Alexandria who initiated and then certain cities started following lock-step with that.

    Daigon: Do you think that old habits die hard? These towns are not used to dealing with unions, making it much harder to secure a first contract.

    Hollis: Correct. Again it’s just a stark history of anti-collective bargaining laws, Jim Crow laws, and people became accustomed to that. One of the biggest obstacles is that when workers hear the word union, instead of being encouraged, they’re fearful. They think that, due to lack of education, that they don’t have the right to unionize in the workplace. But if they understood the First Amendment rights of the Constitution, they have freedom to petition, the freedom to protest, and concerted activity.

    So, they always had the right to unionize, but it’s like sort of having a mouth with no teeth. So without collective bargaining, you really don’t have any teeth to bite down on anything and make it tangible. So, when the law was enacted and municipalities started to adopt it, it started to become real to a lot of workers. Now they have a chance to have a fair grieveable process and also a right for recognition.

    So, it’s a cornerstone in which right now we have a collective bargaining task force in Newport News.  It is the first Tidewater city to support collective bargaining. And so, based off of the heels of Alexandria, [in] Richmond, we are using those blueprints to establish collective bargaining in Newport News.

    Daigon: Alexandria and Richmond were the first dominoes to fall.

    Hollis: Exactly.

    “It’s just a stark history of anti-collective bargaining laws, Jim Crow laws, and people became accustomed to that. One of the biggest obstacles is that when workers hear the word union, instead of being encouraged, they’re fearful. But if they understood the First Amendment rights of the Constitution, they have freedom to petition, the freedom to protest, and concerted activity.”

    Daigon: You mentioned that workers were fearful of the union and I’m sure there were other obstacles as well. How did you overcome that obstacle in your drive and the other ones as well?

    Hollis: One of the key elements of building mobility and power is educating workers about their labor rights, about their workplace policies. Really educating them that they do have a right to come together in concerted activity to organize their workplace.  So, when they understood that and a lot of the reality came to them when they were getting fired and suspended, and we were coming in and representing them under the 14th amendment, their due process. And winning their jobs back, overturning disciplines, getting them back-pay wages due to the unfair policies. And that’s when they realized, I need a damn union.

    Daigon: So, in other words, actions speak louder than words.

    Hollis: Exactly.

    Daigon: You won a three-year tentative collective bargaining agreement. What specifics in this agreement do you think will boost the workers?

    Hollis: I think the fact that they have a contract just speaks volumes. You can have a good contract, a bad contract, a mediocre contract, but the fact that there’s an agreement between the municipality and the workforce is empowering. It’s not business as usual anymore. There are terms of a tentative agreement that both parties agree to in order to have a productive workforce with fairness and equity. And it allows the workers to have dignity and respect with their labor.

    Daigon: It looks like over the course of a three-year agreement, the total wage increases are averaging over 20 percent and the average salary is going to be boosted to over $50,000 a year. Do I have the numbers right?

    Hollis: You are exactly correct. I say I’ve looked at other contracts like the Teamsters, REA [Richmond Education Association], those other unions that are actually in Richmond, and I will say that hands down, RPS has the best contract out there. For a three-year period, they received a 22 percent raise increase. Yesterday, when we had the press conference, we agreed upon 23 percent. So 10 percent last year, 6 percent this year, and the last year will be 7 percent. So that’s the biggest wage increase that I’ve seen in any collective bargaining agreement.

    Daigon: And when will the rank and file be voting on this for ratification?

    Hollis: Within the next two weeks. I’m scheduling that for the end of the month. All of the members will be coming down to one location, the MLK school. [Ed.: The union members subsequently approved the deal.]

    A lot of them were pretty much anti-union. We received calls from those individuals that stated, you know what, reinstating the Five showed me I need to join this union. And unions fight for workers. And those were some of the sentiments that were given to me early this morning. Just personal phone calls from workers giving me my flowers. And I’m just humbled. So, I see how it’s really affected the masses because their termination struck fear in a lot of drivers.

    “I think that the sense of unity speaks volumes.  Workers are organized, they can get things done. I have a metaphor I always use: An attack against one is an attack against all. When workers come together in solidarity over a struggle, it challenges everyone.”

    Daigon: And for our readers, these five workers were fired for what reason?

    Hollis: They were allegedly fired for a violation of state code 55, which is basically a strike code that states that two or three workers are gathered together in concerted activity for the purpose of work stoppage, they will be penalized to the degree, just paraphrasing, of loss of all benefits or immediate termination.  They cannot work for municipal government for a 12-month minimum period of time.

    Daigon: Obviously, getting them rehired was a major shot in the arm for you guys and the workers as well.

    Hollis: Yes.

    Daigon: What lessons do you think that these public employee unions who are trying to organize in purple and red states, can get from your drive?

    Hollis: I think that the sense of unity speaks volumes.  Workers are organized, they can get things done. I have a metaphor I always use: an attack against one is an attack against all. So we cannot allow our brothers and sisters in our union to fall prey or be victimized by the system that really doesn’t respect them outside of the laws that are created to keep workers held back. So when workers come together in solidarity over a struggle, it challenges everyone.

    But when they have a strategic plan of action and they are well organized militantly, then they’re going to get some things done. They’re going to challenge the system without fear because they believe in their leadership.

    Daigon: You touched on this already, but does MAROC plan to use this successful campaign, not only to organize other public employees in Virginia, but as part of the broader drive for LIUNA’s drive for 1 million members?

    Hollis: I wholeheartedly agree with that. Right now, based on the RPS5 being reinstated, the success of contract negotiations, a lot of work that Keon and myself and the team has really done behind the scenes and on the front lines has been really galvanizing. I think that it shows a lot—the system will be fearful when workers challenge it.

    And these five workers challenged the system. They are the first ones out of all RPS in the history of RPS to ever lose a job on termination and be reinstated. It has never been done. Unprecedented.

    So, I think that the takeaway from this is you have to fight for justice.

    At the end of the day, workers have a right to unionize. Municipal, private sector, it doesn’t matter. When you’re coming together to make changes on your job, it’s going to affect not only you, but your co-workers, your family, the community, and that’s when everybody pulls together. I think that there were a lot of elements that came together to make this very successful and it was a hell of a PR [public relations] campaign. Dubbing those five workers as the RPS5 was my first thought because it made me think about the Central Park 5. How those gentlemen were wrongfully accused of a crime they didn’t commit. And it just made me deja vu with these five.

    They were charged with a crime they didn’t commit, but they fought for the justice they were seeking and it all came together in the end. So I think when you get the community and social organizations involved, when you get all your family members involved, even the children came out to speak at the school board meeting, how bad they missed their bus drivers. It’s when you do some galvanizing of the base, then you’re going to yield some results. 

    So, power always yields to pressure. And it was a hell of a pressure campaign to yield that RPS administrative school board power to come to the bargaining table in the end.

  • P.S. POV: Confederate Memorials

    P.S. POV: Confederate Memorials

    Cartoon showing a Southern politician with a red MAGA hat reinstalling a Confederate monument while tipping over statues labeled "Health care," "Education" and "Jobs."

    Rick Baldwin is a humorous illustrator, fine artist, writer and podcaster living in the Atlanta area. His cartoons can be found at rickbaldwincartoons.com and on CartoonStock.com.

  • P.S. POV: The Voting Rights Act

    P.S. POV: The Voting Rights Act

    Rick Baldwin is a humorous illustrator, fine artist, writer and podcaster living in the Atlanta area. His cartoons can be found at rickbaldwincartoons.com and on CartoonStock.com.

  • P.S. POV: The Texas Map

    P.S. POV: The Texas Map

    We are thrilled to welcome cartoonist Rick Baldwin as a Progressive South contributor! Rick is a humorous illustrator, fine artist, writer and podcaster living in the Atlanta area. He is former editorial cartoonist for Knoxville, Tenn.’s Metro Pulse and Chattanooga, Tenn.’s The Pulse, and a three-time winner of SPJ’s “Golden Press Card Award of Excellence” for Editorial Cartoons. He is creator of the comic strips “Outta Toon,” “All the World,” and “Scotty Wallace and his Irresistible Kilt of Freedom.” His cartoons can be found at rickbaldwincartoons.com and on CartoonStock.com.

  • The ‘DEI’ Canard in Southern Legislatures

    (Adapted from a portion of this week’s HEADLIGHTS podcast.)

    Many Southern state legislatures have ramped up attacks on diversity efforts over the past five years, as they have become favorite targets of conservative commentators and culture warriors. These attacks prefigured and in many ways laid the groundwork for the broader assault on DEI currently being waged at the federal level by President Donald Trump and his appointees.

    The 2025 legislative session has brought a fresh round of anti-DEI bills across the South, many of which share a central irony — or perhaps it’s more accurate to just call it cynicism. In seeking to limit efforts to foster diversity and reduce socioeconomic disparities, they are using the language of the civil rights movement to attack its core achievements.

    Most conservative-dominated states in the South have seen a range of bills in recent years aimed at public schools, universities and state agencies, all alleging in various ways that any efforts to recognize or remedy the legacies of legally enforced discrimination in the South — or in some cases even to discuss that history — amount to forms of discrimination themselves.

    This year’s statehouse sessions have been no different, although not every anti-DEI bill passed.

    In Georgia, for example, the state Senate approved a bill that would have placed a raft of restrictions on how schools talk about race and gender and American history. Among other things, it would have forbidden public schools and universities to promote or maintain “any programs or activities that advocate for diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

    As examples for colleges and universities, it restricted any institutional support  for a laundry list of terms conservative lawmakers apparently find offensive, including:

    “unconscious or implicit bias, cultural appropriation, allyship, gender ideology or theory, microaggressions, group marginalization, Antiracism, systemic oppression, social justice, intersectionality, neopronouns, heteronormativity, disparate impact, racial privilege, sexual privilege, or any similar or related formulation of these concepts.”

    In other words, the state where Martin Luther King Jr. was born into a legal system of racial oppression was proposing to make it legally hazardous for universities to talk about systemic racial oppression.

    But after clearing the Senate in the final days of the session, the bill stalled in the state House, which was scrambling to finish its own priorities. It could well return next year, of course.

    Another anti-DEI bill is moving through the Louisiana Legislature, hitting on some of the same themes as the Georgia bill. It would restrict any hiring preferences in state agencies based on race, sex, gender identity or sexual orientation.

    It would also restrict state universities from mandating course content dealing with certain topics — again, including a list of conservative rhetorical bugbears:

    “​​Instructional content that relates to critical race theory, white fragility, white guilt, systemic racism, institutional racism, anti-racism, systemic bias, implicit bias, intersectionality, gender identity, allyship, race-based reparations, or race-based privilege.”

    The bill does have language protecting individual faculty members’ rights to shape their own curriculum and choose their own instructional materials. 

    It also says that it will still be legal to teach about U.S. historical events including slavery, the forced removal of Native Americans and Japanese-American internment during the 2nd World War.

    Still, as in Georgia, it is remarkable to see a state like Louisiana take issue with concepts like systemic or institutional racism.

    New Orleans was one of the national centers of human trafficking in enslaved people up until the Civil War. It was also home to Homer Plessy, famous as the losing plaintiff in the case of Plessy vs. Ferguson, in which the U.S. Supreme Court gave its blessing to Jim Crow regimes of racial segregation. It is hard to think of more obvious examples of systemic and institutional racism.

    That bill is up for a vote this week in the Louisiana State Senate.

    In Tennessee, meanwhile, the state’s General Assembly passed a set of bills in April aiming to “dismantle DEI” in state and local governments and education systems.

    Tennessee had already passed versions of curricular restrictions in previous years, forbidding the teaching of what it calls “divisive concepts” around race and gender.

    This year’s bills focused more specifically on hiring practices, prohibiting the consideration of race, gender or other personal characteristics in employment decisions. They also forbid state or local governments or schools from maintaining departments or programs to promote diversity, equity and inclusion.

    The Texas Legislature is considering a bill much like Tennessee’s, although it is limited in scope to the state’s public schools. It forbids the consideration of race, sex or ethnicity in hiring decisions, or the assigning of diversity, equity and inclusion duties to school employees.

    That bill passed the Texas Senate and is awaiting a vote in the state House.

    If all of these bills sound fairly similar, so does the rhetoric surrounding them. 

    The Republican legislators who have sponsored the bills uniformly depict them not as attacks on diversity but as protection against state-mandated discrimination.

    In Georgia, state Senator Max Burns said that his anti-DEI legislation should be embraced by people who want to see racial equality.

    According to the Georgia Recorder, on the Senate floor Burns said, “DEI is the antithesis of equality. If you believe in equality, if you believe in equal opportunity, this bill does not strip you of that. It enhances it.”

    The sponsor of the Louisiana bill, state Representative Emily Chenevert of Baton Rouge, responded to criticism of her bill from other lawmakers by saying, “This is not divisive. This is protecting every Louisianian. This is about equality for all.” 

    And in Tennessee, state Representative Aron Maberry said his “Dismantle DEI” bills were similar to past efforts to fight workplace prejudices. “If discrimination in the past was wrong, and I agree, it was; it is, then discrimination today is wrong,” he said.

    And here’s where the rhetoric around all of these bills becomes tricky. Like Maberry, the bills’ sponsors — and conservative anti-DEI pundits and activists in general — suggest either explicitly or implicitly that they are fighting against some kind of widespread patterns of discrimination under the guise of DEI programs.

    They allege that diversity, equity and inclusion efforts — which can include everything from workplace anti-discrimination training to job fairs that aim to reach traditionally underrepresented groups — actually end up promoting a different kind of bigotry.

    They rarely say it explicitly, but what they mean is that majority groups or groups that have traditionally been overrepresented in government workplaces or in leadership positions — which is to say white people in general, and white men in particular, and especially straight white men — are now themselves victims of discrimination.

    The problem with that assertion, and perhaps the reason it is rarely stated quite so directly, is that there is very little evidence to support it.

    The reality is that any kind of discrimination in hiring on the basis of race, ethnicity or gender is already illegal throughout the United States — and has been since the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    That act, of course, was one of the crowning achievements of the Civil Rights Movement — and was fiercely opposed by white Southern conservatives. The same political demographic that is now passing their own versions of anti-discrimination laws, but with a very different class of alleged victims in mind.

    Like everyone else in the country, white men are already protected against employment discrimination on the basis of race or gender. Like everyone else, if they believe they have been discriminated against, they can file complaints with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

    And some of them do! Just … not that many.

    A large study in 2019 found that about 25 percent of Black women said they had experienced some form of workplace discrimination, compared to 18 percent of Black men and 16 percent of white women. Only 11 percent of white men said they had.

    Meanwhile, a 2023 study of U.S. Fortune 500 companies found that 59 percent of company executives were white men, even though they make up only about 30 percent of the total U.S. population.

    20 percent of Fortune 500 executives were white women, 14 percent were men of color, and just 6 percent were women of color. 

    The breakdown of company board members and people in corporate governance followed nearly identical patterns: Over and over in the American workforce, white men remain overrepresented in top-tier positions and underrepresented in reporting incidents of being discriminated against.

    It may not surprise you to know that another place white men are overrepresented is among Republican state legislators in the South.

    In Georgia, for example, 96 percent of the Republicans in the General Assembly are white, and 85 percent are men.

    In Tennessee, 86 percent of the GOP supermajority in the Legislature are white men. 

    In other words, these bills alleging discrimination against white men are being written and passed by Republican majorities that are overwhelmingly — and disproportionately — made up of white men.

    That’s why the political minority parties in Southern state houses — which also include most of their legislators who are women and people of color — have tended to see the anti-DEI movement’s true aims as perpetuating racial inequities rather than fighting them.

    They allege that what the bills are really trying to do is create chilling effects that will make people in state agencies and schools think twice about hiring anyone who isn’t a white man, and afraid to discuss any kind of racial or gender disparities.

    In Georgia, Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harold Jones the 2nd, who is Black, accused the state’s Republicans of wanting to “take Georgia backwards — backwards to days when people did not have full rights.”

    In Louisiana, State Representative Edmond Jordan said the state’s anti-DEI legislation was “an anti-Black bill,” and his fellow Democratic State Representative Candace Newell of New Orleans said, “This is the most racially oppressive piece of legislation that I think I’ve seen.” 

    Jordan and Newell are both Black. So is Tennessee state Representative Antonio Parkinson, a Democrat from Memphis, who said during debate on the “Dismantle DEI” bills that Republicans had created a false narrative around DEI.

    “It is simply to show you that we exist,” he said. “It removes the invisible cloak from veterans, disabled individuals, Black people, women and others. We exist.”

    And that is maybe the most irrational thing about the wave of attacks on diversity in the South — most of these states are pretty diverse. Non-White residents make up one-third or more of the population in 9 out of 12 Southern states. 

    In Texas, non-Hispanic white people make up only an estimated 39 percent of the total state population. In Georgia, it’s 49 percent, and in Louisiana it’s 56 percent. Even Tennessee, one of the whiter states in the country, has a nonwhite population of nearly 30 percent. 

    And like the U.S. overall, we’re getting progressively less white. Every Southern state has become more racially and ethnically diverse over the past 30 years. Whatever else the anti-DEI movement accomplishes, it doesn’t seem likely to change that.

    — Jesse Fox Mayshark