We Made a Promise We Swore We'd Always Remember

Marcus P I think that the film American Dream does an excellent job of illustrating just how harsh the market can be when it comes to labor. The film takes place in Austin, Minnesota, starting its story December of 1984, right as I was being born in Minneapolis, less than 200 miles north of the Hormel meatpacking plant where the P-9 workers held a picket line through snow, scabs, and the National Guard. As a small baby, I was unaware that the Hormel workers of Austin were on strike, much less the complex issues surrounding their strike. From a young age, however, I was aware that our nation was facing hard times - and not just from a fashion standpoint! Growing up, my family was fairly poor and I lived in a complex of low-income townhouses with my mother. Most of my childhood friends were in the lower income brackets and apparently still waiting to experience the “trickle-down” effect of Reaganomics. Looking back on the 1980’s from the perspective of an Economic major, I realize that the stagflation of the 70’s created high unemployment rates so that workers were in a poor position to bargain for better wages. Worse yet, inflation meant that the price of everyday goods had grown, even as wages stayed flat. I recall my next-door neighbor complaining that his mom, who worked a graveyard shift at a hospital, would not buy him a backpack when he started kindergarten. Although President Reagan is credited with ending stagflation and creating new jobs for American workers, many of those jobs were in the service sector, while the number of factory jobs actually decreased. What did this mean for the people at Hormel? Plant jobs were in high demand while workers were not. The executives at Hormel saw this fact and took advantage of it by lowering wages. Since the employees were easily replaced, they were in a poor position to bargain. Unfortunately, the meatpackers of Austin, MN did not see the larger picture, and many of them ended up taking far more than a $2 wage cut. At one of the rallies towards the beginning of the strike, one of the leaders quotes Bruce Springsteen: We made a promise we swore we'd always remember No retreat no surrender Like soldiers in the winter's night with a vow to defend No retreat no surrender Perhaps he would have been wiser to recite another Springsteen lyric: “Out here it’s just winners and losers and don’t get caught on the wrong side of that line.” Sadly, many of the workers were caught on the wrong side of that line and found themselves out of a job. In a rapidly changing economy, there are always winners and losers and the line that separates them is rarely clear-cut. The only question in my mind is whether I should race towards the side of the winners, or attempt to move the line altogether. ***************************************************************** Adam Schrank

Winner of the 1991 Academy Award for Best Documentary, “American Dream,” directed by Barbara Kopple, is a thorough account of the union’s battle to preserve current wages against the corporate giant Hormel. It was difficult for me to sympathize with the workers, because I felt like they were too naïve to see what was occurring. They should have realized sooner that many people, whom were willing and eager to work for Hormel, could easily replace their unskilled jobs.

The local union hired a consultant, Ray Rogers, whom they believed was their savior. Rogers turned out to be the union antichrist, making ridiculous claims and promising everything but the kitchen sink. Many weeks past PASS and Rogers was not progressing with Hormel, as some workers believed he should have been. As shown in Marx’s theory, greed took over the local union and they were unable to stay united, weakening their position. The company then demoralized the unions by permanently replacing all striking employees with scab labor.

I felt the film could have produced more facts about the situation; it would have been beneficial to view both sides of the strike more thoroughly. For instance, in 1985 Hormel had profits of almost 30 million dollars, and decided they should cut wages and benefits to remain competitive. This seems like a very greedy demand on behalf of the company, one worker even stated, “If they ask us to take this kind of cut when they show a profit, what will they do if they show a loss?" Peter Beckmann wrote, “Hormel’s $29million (if I recall correctly) could be 1% or 20% of total sales.” If it is 1% of total sales, then the company is not doing that fantastic and action was needed in order to stay competitive. On the other hand, if it was 20% of total sales, then Hormel was acting greedily with their employees. In fact, Hormel overcame a period of sluggish sales and earnings between 1979 and 1984 to record net earnings of $60.1 million in 1988, up from $29.4 million in 1984.

It was depressing to see the ignorance of just a few workers who were unwilling to negotiate with Hormel. A greedy few took away an opportunity for many workers who just wanted to go back to work and provide for their families. ************************************************************** Ravi M The first word which comes to mind after watching the film, American Dream, is ignorance. This film did a great job of aggravating me. The film portrayed a union struggle for a higher wage from three perspectives, the company, the local union, and the international union. The local union did an amazing job of digging themselves into a hole they could not get out of. In the process they also lost the support and the intelligence of the international union. Throughout the film, it seemed as if an ignorant person would get in front of the local union and say an idea, and everyone respond, “Let’s do it!!” They would give this response without thinking about the ramifications of the decisions. It seems as they if they fell into a mob mentality. A union should work together, but when they become sheep, they no longer have individual input, and that is what will make the union succeed. People going with the crowd become ignorant with time, it is the individuals in the group with an open mind as well and conflicting ideas that sparks ideas and creates growth and promise. One of my favorite lines in the movie is when someone gets up and says, “Belief will take you a long ways”. This shows how prepared they were, obviously with belief they could win the battle, there is no need for a plan or intelligent brainstorming. The unions attempt to close down every Hormel factory, as well as their attempt to rewrite their whole contract and throw away years of careful writing, were great examples of the vast amount of intelligence the local union had. The ending of this film was well suited; any film that provokes such emotion should be valued. ********************************************************** Curtis L American Dream is a documentary of a walkout by factory workers at the Hormel Company meatpacking factory in Austin, Minnesota. The film examines the countless struggles of the P-9, the local meatpacking division of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. The fight for a living wage affects the whole community in Austin, which causes disagreement between the local P-9 and its parent union, and ultimately leads to the fall of the union strike. The profound damage that results is an important lesson to learn. Do unions still work? There are many sides to this debate, and American Dream attempts to make this clear.

Local P-9 was successful for the first time in 52 years to shut down the Hormel factory in Austin due to a union strike. Ray Rogers of Corporate Campaign Inc. assured P-9ers that the strike, along with media attention, would put great economic pressure on Hormel. This led on unsuccessfully for months, with no apparent resolution. Workers did not know what to do with themselves, and eventually felt the pressure at home with their families. Hormel and the community of Austin both lost as a result. The unions are getting their teeth kicked in, said Guyette, local P-9 president. It was obvious that the bargaining power of P-9 was nothing compared to such a profitable capitalist like Hormel.

American Dream takes us to the factory, to the bargaining tables of the union, and inside the homes of those most affected by the strike. By the end of the film, a sense of defeat exists. The tradition of Hormel, and everything that is Austin, is ultimately changed forever. *************************************************** Andy D The film, “American Dream," was a documentary that shed light on the strike of the Hormel meatpacking plant in Austin, Minnesota in the 1980's. Hormel is one of the biggest meatpacking industries in America. Hormel lowered their employees’ wages to try to stay competitive in the industry. Like most employees, they felt like they were being ripped off because the year before Hormel earned $30 million. And that’s how Labor P-9 started. I know Labor P-9 tried to help the workers with their situation but it brought more harm than good. The Labor P-9 gave hope to the struggling workers that they could make more than $10 per hour. But why would Hormel increase their wage back to $10.69, since there are people willing to work their jobs for less money? It was most upsetting and ridiculous to see families and friends turn against each other. The Labor P-9 turned the hard working people into children. Every time someone turned their back against the union and crossed the picket line they would call them “scabs” and traitors. If their families were struggling and starving, they should go back to work to provide for their family. This film was so effective because it showed struggles of real people to make a living for their families. Also, this film showed how the need to make a living for ones family could turn good friends into enemies. ************************************************************** Randall J

This film is a raw look into the strife of a failing strike. When watching this film I couldn’t help but feel bad for these striking meat plant workers, they never really had a chance. Although in the beginning they had a lot of publicity and support, the fact that they were unable to inflict any damage to the company doomed them. The entire situation was exacerbated by their labor consultant, Ray Rodgers, who kept giving them false hope and stamping out any naysayer; even when they had constructive comments. While this is important to a certain extent, to maintain unity, it was excessive in this instance, and resulted in the loss of a democratic union. Ray Rodgers manipulated the emotions and sentiments of the workers. He agitated them to keep them active, but without any long-term plan, they just got angrier and more frustrated, and were not constructive. The community made of simple hard working people; they never knew what they were getting into until they were too late. It didn’t seem to me like anyone really did their homework on the situation, and the whole time they were running on each others energy, but running wont help you, unless you have some place to go. The biggest problem by far was actions against the parent union. The liberal perspective is that unions are a voice. They bring the issues that the labor has with their conditions to the bargaining table with the managers. The union speaks for all laborers. In the film, the workers went not only without the support of the parent union, but even in explicit defiance. This undermines the entire premise of unions, and their actions actually harm the union. It was like the negotiator said, when they wrote their own contract, they lost 40 years of bargaining in the language. The situation is an example of Marxist problems. Moneybags is too big and strong, and when a single worker, or this small portion of the labor force, tries to stand up, it is easy quashed. A successful stand requires the universal support, the parent union didn’t support them, they were on their own, and so they fail. Its as the saying goes, united we stand, divided we fall. On another note, I really enjoyed the style of filming. The editor picked out very good clips and put them together in a sequence that really told the story. The fact that it was clearly not a rehearsed, and was filmed as the events unfolded gave a really good perspective into the lives of the workers and how they were changed over the course of the strike. ********************************************************************** Melissa P Barbara Kopple, the director of the film American Dream, does a great job at letting the viewer develop his or her own position on the importance of unions in the United States with simple unbiased documentation. This film was hard for me to watch and a bit hard to understand because I am used to the style of documentary film where opinions are constantly shoved down the viewers' throat. In my four years at UCSC I have not learned all that much about unions. I was raised in a liberal household and was always taught that unions were good, strikes were even better, and one should never, ever, cross a picket line. Kopple's film made me doubt my preconceived notions on unions. I tried to think about where I would stand if I were a slaughterer or other laborer in Hormel's factory. I originally assumed that I would take the liberal side and unquestioningly support a strike if my company was threatening to lower my wages. However, when I saw the outcome of the strike, and how it devastated hundreds of families who supported it, I came to the realization that strikes and unions are not always useful ways to cause change in a society where the income inequality is brutally drastic between the boss and his employee. What good do strikes do if the company can afford to simply hire replacements? I am interested to know how the Hormel workers did without contracts, and how peace was ever attained. I still believe in unions and I think that they cause increases in production and less discrimination. I don't agree with the neoclassical view that if a worker is dissatisfied he can simply leave his or her job, instead, I believe in the collective voice. On the whole, I think unions do more benefit than cause trouble, but I now know that there are certain situations where this is not true. ********************************************************** Adam Sch There was something about the documentary, “American Dream” that was dreadful. Perhaps it was the idiocy of the local p-9 union members, the outlandish 80’s attire, or the never-ending close-ups of what actually goes into Spam. Due to the documentary’s uneventful nature, I found myself more consumed with the style of the 80’s then the discontent of the blue collared workers in Austin, Minnesota. Like a neoclassical economist, “American Dream” made me loose faith in today’s unions. It is unfortunate that the workers of the Hormel meat packing company were stuck in the uncompromising position between an equitable working wage and an employer that feels the burden of competition within the industry. Feeling the brunt of the burden, the factory workers became very determined in receiving an industry high wage of $10.69 an hour. It was their constant persistence and unwillingness to compromise with Hormel that would be the downfall of the local p-9 union and hundreds of stubborn Hormel workers. The first mistake by the local p-9 union was in the hiring of extremist Roy Rogers. It was Roger’s radical Marxist nature that would lead to the eventual failure of the workers strike. Roy Rogers, a labor consultant, took advantage of the local p-9 situation in the work place by trying to start a labor revolution nationwide. Instead of negotiating and working for the people he was representing, Rogers only intended on harassing, embarrassing, and bringing down the corporate giant. Rogers, mistakenly tried to take the fight to the people, and the people said no. The movie showed that if done correctly a strike could be a severe threat. Once in progress, it is imperative that the battle be won or else the consequences will be proven insurmountable. In the union’s case the obstacles were proven to be too difficult, and the monopolist perspective on unions prevailed. The union failed to meet their goals and their idiotic policies caused 80% of the original workers to be out of work permanently. Instead of compromising, the workers were forced to watch untrained scabs take their jobs at a lower wage. A neoclassical economist would most likely say that’s what you get for being in such an uncompromising union, and I would have to agree. *************************************************************** Lauren B

Seeing the pigs dismembered and packaged disturbed me deeply, I haven't been able to eat meat since we watched the film. The beginning scenes hit me so hard that I considered walking out; I couldn't take it. The film did not continue, however, in the way that I would have expected from the opening images. The film focused on the struggle between the Hormel employees, union officials, the consultant, and the executives. Looking back, I think Kopple used the slaughterhouse scenes to show how awful it was to work at Hormel. As I was watching the film however, I wondered if Kopple meant to draw a parallel between the executives exploiting the workers, and the exploitation of animals. Thinking back to La Ciudad, I remember several scenes that show how labor is de-humanized, seen only as input, not life. Years ago I saw an enormous pig. I looked into the pigs eyes, and they were blue. The pig blinked, and sent a shutter down my spine, the eyelids, the eyelashes looked so human. I was raised a meat-eater. I've eaten all sorts of animals. When I moved out of my parent's house, I became a vegetarian. I gradually became a raw vegan, then gradually returned to my old meat- eating ways. I remember driving past Harris Ranch in the late summer one year. The smell of dried cow manure and sweat hung in the air for miles before the farm came into eye shot. I remember a sea of cows standing shoulder to shoulder right next to I-5, sprinklers showering their coats. I felt I was seeing an animals' Holocaust. I didn't want it to exist, but I was powerless to stop it. Now I feel like a reluctant vampire. Morally, I'm against exploiting animals. Biologically, I need to. I can only stay on my high horse for so long at a time, before my body starts to crave more protein, more b12, more zinc...and I give in. For me, the film seemed to state that the workers were doomed, doomed to soul-crushing work for inadequate pay. Somewhat in accordance with my understanding of Marxist theory, the strike was unsuccessful because P-9 failed to bring all of the labor supply to their side. As passionate about their cause as some were, there were still more people willing to be exploited. So long as the workers could be replaced, Money Bags could tolerate striking. If no one were willing to work for Hormel nor buy its products, the company would have to change its ways, or sink. If every animal recognized its own strength and united against us, there's no way we could subdue them. ****************************************************************************** Glenn L The documentary American Dream depicts the growing disconnect between the management of the Hormel Corporation and its employees. The divide between the two groups becomes so large that negotiations break down and the Local Union P-9 goes on strike. During the strike the Hormel Corporation loses enormous amounts of revenue because of decreased production, and the P-9 members lose their weekly salary. Both sides would agree that when negotiations break down and cause a strike, neither side can be absolute winners, rather, much like war, nobody actually wins. Clearly there is a need for strategies to decrease the risk of future strikes. The film subtly suggests two major solutions. The first being a profit sharing plan. The hope of a profit sharing plan is that employees would feel more invested in doing what is best for the company. Employees might be more willing to forgo raises if they had a vested interest in the success of the company. In essence capital would be more evenly distributed. This was the case with employees of Southwest Airlines, and it seemed to have the desired affect, at least in the short term. The second possible solution is a much broader collective organizing strategy. At one point a union leader asks, “When will they realize our struggle is the same as their struggle?” The obvious answer to this question is when the union broadens its membership and represents the interest of all of its members. The union’s bargaining power was greatly diminished by the Corporation’s ability to hire replacement employees. I believe the union’s bargaining power could be greatly increased if they tried to unite all employees instead of using a trade unionism strategy. In Capitalism Money Bags can exploit employees, but this can be combated through collective organizing. I found the film American Dreams to be inspiring in both its critique of the union and its possible solutions. ************************************************************************** Nick B The film, American Dream, showed the dynamics of a union strike by following the workers of the Hormel meatpacking plant in Austin, Minnesota during the mid 1980s. By going behind the scenes between the workers, their union, and the Hormel moneybags, we were able to analyze everyones actions in the strike. Similar to a sportscaster reviewing a game, we are able to see what worked for each side, and what didn’t. The film did a great job of displaying some of the major issues that unions are confronted with when a group of workers within the union decide to strike. Seen through the eyes of those in Austin, the strike over decreasing benefits and wages seemed like the only thing to do. But seen through a broader, national perspective, the lower wages their employer proposed were still a fair amount higher than most of the wages around the country. Gaining support from the international union was almost impossible, because the local P-9 union in Austin was already striking before the international could even give them an opinion. The local P-9 displayed the monopoly view of unions, where the disparity between their union and those in the rest of the nation simply increased wage inequality. Although watching the strike fail caused me to feel frustration for the people of Austin, the Hormel receptionist put it best by simply stating, Is what the company doing legal? They were able to cause one Hormel plant to almost close completely, but the company simply shifted production to the other plants. The Local P-9 didn’t think to picket the other plants until 22 weeks into the strike, and although it worked, the strike was too far lost. They were good people, who wanted the best for themselves and their families. But pride and solidarity doesn’t always win strikes- the right strategy, and knowing who you’re up against can be even more important. ************************************************************* George Drake

When there are profits to be made, those in the upper echelons of business tend to put the burden on the unskilled, expendable labor. The documentary, “American Dream,” showed just how easily Hormel did without succumbing to union demands, and how the company recovered from a strike that led to one of their production plants being temporary shut down.

The city of Austin, Minnesota relied on this big facility for employment and when the average household income dropped rapidly, there were few options that Hormel employees could take. It bothered me to see the struggle between those who needed to work and those who would stand by their belief until the end. People in the strike would question the effectiveness of Ray Rogers’ campaign and if it would lead them to a new contract or just gain them news coverage. When hard times call for desperate measures, those who need the money would cross the picket line. Seeing a man accept low wage scab work while his brother stand out in the cold and help the company that is hurting the union was difficult to watch, as was hearing people in the strike saying they simply want to go back to work.

The problem with being a major in economics and learning about neo-classical theory is seeing where Hormel is coming from, rather than siding with the union. Hormel needed to lower their wages from $10.65 to $8.25 in order to stay competitive in the market. When the plant closed down due to the strike, the production only shifted to other locations. In order to prevent diminishing value on their Austin, MN capital, they simply hired unskilled labor to operate the plant for cheap. The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union did not want to get involved with P-9 and their strike, as their demands for higher wages still were much higher than other meat packaging factories, and raising one would mean raising them all. Many workers either left the city looking for new opportunities, and Hormel did not flinch.

Rogers knew after months of striking that their efforts were going nowhere. Hormel hired unskilled labor at low wages to fill every job that was abandoned, the halting of the factory did little in harming their business, and the company did not cave to a strike they did not see fit. Amazing to see this movie have an ending with closure. Never hearing about this labor war, I was shocked to see Hormel fill all positions and leave the strike to hang dry. The union stood by their beliefs and failed to deliver, but they did make a stand. ****************************************************************************** Josh W American Dream is a film that captivates the misled actions of the local meatpackers of Austin, Minnesota in their stand for higher wages against the multinational Hormel Corporation. In this film, the well informed capitalists dominating the naïve and gullible workers, is portrayed. Ray Roger, the labor consultant that the local union hired, sold the meatpackers on that fact that they deserved higher wages, because of the many years of dedicated service to the company. Anxious to receive what is rightfully theirs, the meatpackers adopt the harsh and rash tactics that Ray imposed. Even when Hormel revised the meatpackers contracts to $10.00 an hour for the next 3 years (which I thought was very generous) the meatpackers declined believing that they deserved more. The meatpackers were lead to believe that their loyalty in service to the company for many years meant that the company needed them, when in fact it was the meatpackers who had nowhere else to go. The meatpackers confused loyalty with necessity. The Hormel Corporation was very reasonable and possibly generous. Even after knowing the technical expertise (in this case none!) that each worker brought to the plant, Hormel still offered them $10.00 an hour, $3.50 more than what the scabs were willingly receiving, only to be turned down. The meat packers want to believe that through hard work, they can achieve the American dream. After watching the film, the American dream will always be a dream to the meatpackers. *********************************************************************** Maria L This is the first movie where I have seen that Americans are victims of the labor force in their homeland. Before watching this movie I thought that only immigrants faced unfair treatment. The movie, "American Dream," portrays that worker's bargaining power is crucial to achieving fair wages and benefits. Mr bags, MR. MONEY BAGS Hormel, is blind color and insensitive, his goal is maximizing his profits. Hormel wanted to pay the lowest wages that desperate workers were wiling to get. The capitalist system aimed Hormel to reduce its wages and benefits. I was frustrated and annoyed because Mr bags DITTOwon the battle. Marx would be happy to see the union failing and the reinvestment of profits in the extension of Hormel paying just $6.50 per hour. Hormel took advantage of the unemployed workers to replace the workers on strike. The Liberal perspective will not condone workers exploitation, such as cutting wages benefits. Some strikers had to decide between their families and the union, the workers had to cross the picketing line not because they wanted, they did it because they needed to support their families, so they did not have the choice to make a rational decision as the Neoclassical perspective suggested. *************************************************************** Robert M This week’s film, American Dream, was definitely a change from our previous films. True to Professor Kaun, this film did not just show a one sided view of a situation, but instead showed the three different perspectives of those involved. American Dream is a documentary from the mid 1980’s centered on a local union strike at a large meatpacking factory in Austin, Minnesota. Faced with drastic wage cuts from over ten dollars an hour to about six, the local union formed a united front to demand the wages be returned to their original amount. The filmmaker follows the process that the local union took, but also filmed from opposing perspectives. The international union leader made it clear that he did not support the actions of the local union, but was unable to deter them from digging their hole even deeper. Finally, we are given a corporate vantage point, where we could see the position of the owners of the factory, and their refusal of demands of the local union. This mess gets worse when the local union will not back down, and calls for an all out strike. Lasting almost a year, the battle tore family and friends apart in the small town, ending with huge job losses. While I did find the film quite interesting, I had a difficult time seeing past the mustache and mullets that most in Austin displayed. I did however have a full appreciation for the documentary as a whole. Following the moves of all the actors, it made it a lot easier to see who was being more irrational. I couldn’t help but compare the local union and its motivational leader to the brainwashing of cults. The mass of workers had such unity and blinding faith, that they held on to their dreams too long. Long enough to lose all their jobs. Losses could have been cut, but the leaders of the union were too proud to back off, or admit mistakes. It was sad to see these ordinary people get led down the wrong path, with such dyer consequences. The film opened my eyes to the fact that you must examine all sides to an argument before taking sides. For example, had this film only shown the local union’s fight, I probably would have been 100% behind them. But the fact is, after hearing from all sides, I did not stand by their decision at all.

****************************************************************************** Adriana K American Dream is a classic story of Moneybags versus the Windbags. The Hormel food company decided to cut costs by cutting workers pay in Austin, Minnesota. The workers of Local P-9 responded by following their big talking union leaders into a strike. The strike for fair pay quickly escalated into a war. War is exciting, and the people of Local P-9 were swept into its allure. The union outsourced its strategies and decision making to Ray Rogers, a charismatic vegetarian with a large vision. Rogers knows how to lead a crowd. He was able to talk a good talk. Because war cries carry far and strike deep, people were willing to fight for what Rogers thought was right. They stood together to fight for a just cause. They rallied collectively against their enemies. They quoted Bruce Springsteen songs. Their hearts were pumping. But after a while the high of war wore off. As one picketer described, when the day is done and you go back home you tend to get down. As time progressed things weren’t new or exiting anymore. People were forced to look at the issues that started the war. The members of Local P-9 were also forced to realize that no forward movements were taking place. In fact, they were losing ground and their jobs. The members started to realize a glorious victory may not happen. Lewie Anderson, a shunned union leader, took this time to pat himself on the back. He knew this was going to happen and he told anyone that would listen. But he took no productive action to prevent or help the situation. He did nothing but use crude metaphors and talk about how much he knew. And when things became worse he was able to sweep in and save the day, proving how right he was. It’s easy to focus on the failure of neo-classical system to prevent Moneybags from taking advantage of his workers. Its easy to see the Marxist view that Moneybags creates conflict within the union and the ultimate failure of the union. But it is harder to remember that war is new, and exciting, and even enjoyable at times. The key players were so caught up in the thrill of war that they forgot about the workers. In the end, the workers only want to cut and trim pigs to bring home the bacon. ****************************************************************************** ***** Emily C Barbara Kopple’s film, American Dream, effectively portrays the one-sided battles unions frequently fight against Moneybags in today’s profit-hungry capitalistic society. Hormel executives had their eyes on the bottom line when they decided to decrease their workers’ wages by nearly twenty percent. Hormel knew that to keep up with their competitors they needed to continue to increase profits, which, according to Marx, meant cutting wages. Marx’s theory emphasizes the unyielding power the successful capitalist possesses which can only be overcome when the working class unites and revolts. The meatpackers in Minnesota bravely engaged in a strike against Hormel when they felt they were being mistreated. While Hormel may have anticipated resistance, it is doubtful they expected workers to strike for half of a year at multiple Hormel factory sites. Unfortunately, meatpackers are easily replaced as many Americans found crossing the picket lines less difficult than failing to support their families. Moneybags again exhibits his abilities to maintain control and restrain the opposition. Although the workers were determined and organized, their struggles failed to even scratch the surface of the endless resources of the Moneybags in Minnesota, Hormel. The lower class, despite continuous efforts, is once again beaten into submission and the strikers are forced to go crawling back to Hormel, begging for their already filled jobs, after accomplishing next to nothing. ************************************************** Stephen B By presenting the hard facts about a worker strike in the 1980s, American Dream paints an undoubtedly bleak picture of the ability that grassroots labor strikes have to hold any real sway over large-scale employers. In an unbiased style, director Barbara Kopple does a wonderful job of capturing the human side of cost-cutting measures from the workers’ point of view; however, I wish we could have had a glimpse into the more personal sides of those executives who called the shots. How do they reconcile their actions with their consciences? Perhaps even they feel victimized in their situation! The pressure on companies to improve performance quarter after quarter in the effort to appease and attract investors is made clear in American Dream and certainly explains Hormel’s desire to cut costs. According to Karl Marx, this exact pressure to grow is what both typifies capitalism and spells its end. American Dream reminded me that I have very little knowledge of the industrial side of Middle America. Lately our nation has been so focused on the issue of immigrant workers that I feel like I’ve neglected the plights of those who have been working menial jobs here for decades, and whose parents likely did the same. Though the concerns facing the two groups are similar, the resources, means, and methods they have to organize and strike are largely different. In my opinion, the documentary style of American Dream makes it the most effective film we’ve watched this quarter. While scripted films are often intended to sway the viewer by tugging at their heart strings, documentaries rely on hard facts and thereby bear more credibility. I hope that the documentary, as both an art form and an educational tool, continues to be a mainstay of American media. *********************************************************************** Jonathan C In the film the American Dream, we see multiple struggles taking place simultaneously. First off, members in local union P-9 were fighting for higher wages through a strategy of embarrassing Hormel’s executives. P-9 was strongly opposed by an international union who thought that the strike was uncalled for at that time. Lastly, Hormel’s top executives were determined to keep wages low, no matter the circumstances. One cannot help but feel sorry for these poor, miserable workers, who are caught in between loyalty towards long-time coworkers and a devotion the their families. Witnessing the mental suffering endured by these workers was definitely a wake up call; it allowed viewers to observe firsthand the pain brought upon them by a faceless, heartless corporation. We catch a glimpse of what neither the international union nor the top executives are able to see; the shattering of a community. This film puts forth the shameful truth that our society is not governed on the grounds of social justice, but rather by politicians who are in the pockets of an old boys club. ****************************************************************************** Marin L In a way I am glad that the Union failed in their attempts to get a higher wage. I felt as though they were shooting too high and they were not willing to negotiate at all. The local union workers were infuriated when Hormel said it was unwilling to negotiate, but how is the union any different? I couldn't believe the union rejected Hormel's offer to give them $10.00 an hour for three years. Honestly what is a 69 cent lost compared to a $1.25 gain? I know that it is hard to give in when you feel like you don't deserve to take any losses whatsoever, but I feel like these people need to take a look around at the economic situation of other workers in comparable positions and realize they don't have it so bad. In fact the film told us that later on Hormel sold its factory (or part of its factory?) to another company that hired its workers for $5.00 an hour. I don't understand how losing your house and having to move away from your home, your town, and your friends and family is worth more than taking a 69 cent an hour pay cut.

I was amazed, on the other hand, at the ability of Roy Rogers to motivate these people into such an effective frenzy. Together the P9 union workers brought the nation into the picture and involved people from Hormel factories everywhere. I think this was a key strategy, however, like the international union workers said, all the motivation in world won't help if you can't dig deep into "money bags'" pockets. I was actually really surprised, with the null effect P9 was having on the loss of profits for the firm, and the ease with which the firm hired new employees, that Hormel even offered the P9 workers a $10 an hour deal! I think there is definitely a time for getting together and standing up to "the man", however, there is also a time to sit down at the negotiating table and give a little in return. **************************************************************** Spencer J

The film, “American Dream,” is a documentary about the struggles of striking meat packers in Austin, Minnesota. The conflict begins when Hormel Foods decides to cut hourly wages and benefits by about twenty percent for the next labor contract. The Local P-9 Union does not accept these new terms and threatens to strike. To bring media attention to the conflict, the union brings in Union consultant, Ray Rogers. He and P-9 chief, Jim Guyette get the union fired up over the prospect of creating a mass media campaign to bring Hormel to its knees. Lewie Anderson, a VP of the International Union, seems to know that the Guyette-Rogers plan is doomed for failure well before it is apparent in the film. He makes an interesting statement that the most dangerous people are the ones with the most conviction that what they are doing is right. This statement is true for the local union leaders. Another example can be seen today with our very own president. With the Roger’s led campaign underway, the battle in Austin turns into a symbolic battle for unions across the country. However, the company does not budge at all to Roger’s tactics. Over time, with no results seen and a demoralizing strike continuing, some members cross the picket line and return to work. The number strikers who return keeps growing, even though P-9 leaders insist they are winning the fight. This also sounds like our president’s administration with regards to Iraq. In the end, the ones who went back to work got to keep their jobs at nearly the same wage rate as before, while those who did not were put on a waiting list, which was unlikely to ever get them their jobs back. Finally, the film left me with the message that one of toughest things to do in life is to realize that one’s choice was a mistake and accept this. Those who realize, accept, and try to amend their blunders the soonest are the survivors. While those who do not, will keep sinking until they are submarines too far sunk to ever see sunshine again. *****************************************************************