Leading By Example On Income Inequality

The leadership of the labor movement has finally gotten on board with the notion that beating the drum on income inequality is striking a chord with the populist trend that has been growing with the general public in the last year or two.

This is a smart move, but there is a downside to this strategy for many unions: the income inequality that exists in their own organizations. For instance, here are a few of the leadership salaries of some of the most well known unions in the United States:

Richard Trumka(AFL-CIO) -$298,542
James Hoffa(Teamsters) - $ $381,409
Randi Weingarten(American Federation of Teachers) - $543,150
Lee Saunders (AFSCME) - $350,058
Donald Moak(Airline Pilots Association) - $627,796
Robert Buffenbarger(Machinists) - $319,667
Edwin Hill(IBEW) - $400,968
Terence O'Sullivan(LIUNA) - $663,981
*Special Recognition to LIUNA for having ten officers making over $300,000
Mary Kay Henry(SEIU) - $295,870


I'll be the first to point out that these salaries are not even in the same universe as the outlandish corporate CEO levels out there.  That's not the point I'm making here.  While I'm not opposed to union officials making a good living, could anyone imagine Big Bill Haywood, Mother Jones, or Joe Hill taking home over half a million dollars a year?

I don't think so.

The labor leaders of the past we regard as heroes were true believers in the cause. They were leftist, usually broke, often arrested, some were deported, and some were even killed for the cause.

With salaries so much higher than that of the average member of their respective unions, labor leaders run the risk of looking more like the Chamber of Commerce than Big Bill Haywood, Joe Hill, and Mother Jones.

The leaders of the labor movement have an opportunity to lead by example by voluntarily capping their own pay, and investing that money in new organizing campaigns to grow the movement.  Think of the contrast to the excess and greed of corporate America this action would demonstrate to the American public.

In Solidarity,

Joseph Riedel

NUHW-CNA: A Real Match Made In Heaven

Some time ago, I wrote about the proposed affiliation between the International Association of Machinists(IAM) and the National Union of HealthCare Workers(NUHW).  While that proposed partnership never came to fruition, NUHW and the California Nurses Association(CNA) recently made their affiliation public.

I always held the opinion that CNA was a much better fit for an affiliation with NUHW than the Machinists, for various reasons.  The most obvious is that CNA is a healthcare union that would help bridge the gap between organizing professional and non-professional employees.  The partnership with NUHW sort of fills the doughnut hole, if you will. Secondly, as much as IAM would have liked to assist NUHW in the upcoming Kaiser election re-runs, I don't believe they would have brought as much to the table as CNA does.

For NUHW, this partnership brings two very big benefits:

1. By affiliating with an AFL-CIO member union, NUHW is protected by Article 20 of the AFL-CIO constitution.  Article 20 protects member organizations from being raided by other AFL-CIO affiliated unions.  While this won't help to keep SEIU from trying to raid their chapters, it is one less thing to worry about.  On a side note, I believe this clause makes the split between SEIU and the AFL-CIO almost permanent.

2. This partnership will bring much needed resources to NUHW in their ongoing struggle against SEIU.  They will certainly need CNA's organizing and financial assistance if they hope to have a chance to be victorious in the Kaiser fight.

I believe that this is a pivotal moment in the history of the American labor movement.  The Kaiser election will help to shape the direction of the labor movement for years to come.  Only time will tell which way it will go.

In Solidarity,

Joseph

Labor's New Odd Couple, Or A Match Made In Heaven?

There is the familiar old adage, politics makes strange bedfellows.  The recent announcement that the NationalUnion of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) and the International Association of Machinistsand Aerospace Workers (IAM) are discussing a possible affiliation may have some people reworking that statement to include the labor movement.   

Like many in the labor community, I have to admit I was puzzled when I first heard of this possible partnership.  Why would an independent union of healthcare workers who are locked in an epic struggle against what is arguably the most undemocratic union in modern labor history consider teaming up with a union that has no history of representing healthcare workers, and frankly, has had its own issues in the past with internal democracy?

            According to John Borsos (Vice-President of NUHW), “IAM shares NUHW’s vision to build a national healthcare union.”  The fact that IAM is not involved in healthcare is seen as something of a plus to NUHW, as Borsos believes this will afford his organization a greater level of autonomy.  Of course, all of these issues are yet to be hammered out by the two unions, and any affiliation would be subject to approval by the respective memberships. 

So why would NUHW choose IAM over another independent union, such as the United ElectricalWorkers (UE) or another healthcare union like the California Nurses Association(CNA)?  While Borsos confirmed that there were other suitors who showed interest in NUHW, he declined to confirm specific organizations who expressed interest. 

While detractors will likely speculate that the NUHW-IAM alliance is based solely on the fact that NUHW needs resources for the upcoming rerun of the Kaiser Permanente elections, it is important to point out that if there were the case, why wouldn’t NUHW just affiliate with Unite Here, who, according to the Department of Labor, gave NUHW $4.8 million in 2010?  When asked about what kind of support IAM would be giving NUHW in the upcoming elections, Borsos would only say that IAM would be offering assistance – “Both financial and otherwise.” 

While there is no question that NUHW will benefit greatly from this alliance, it should be pointed out that IAM will also benefit from its willingness to consider an affiliation with this upstart democratic union.  If they are committed to making their union more democratic, then this affiliation could be a step in the right direction.  While some may view this as the labor movement’s current version of the odd couple, skeptics should at the very least applaud the willingness of IAM to take on the purple monster, which is something that most unions have not had the intestinal fortitude to do thus far.   

(SEIU did not respond to repeated requests for comment on this story)

Book Review: Civil Wars In U.S. Labor by Steve Early

 

Ever since Florence Reese wrote the lyrics to Which Side Are You On? in 1931, that question has been posed between labor and the bosses. With his latest offering, The Civil Wars in U.S. Labor, Steve Early will have workers and activists asking themselves where they stand in the labor movement.

In Civil Wars, Early, who is a well known critic of SEIU’s lack of internal democracy, meticulously dissects the various internal issues that have plagued the organization over the last several years. At the same time he also gives a historical background to provide adequate context for the reader to understand where the problems originated. Early discusses the failure of the MAC (Member Action Center) Call Centers in a chapter that is humorously titled, Dial 1-800-My-Union? The MAC line was a running joke during my time as an SEIU Organizer with District 1199 in West Virginia, as it consisted of an answering machine and an email being sent to the organizer to fix whatever issue had been reported.

While Civil Wars gives a very detailed account of the hostile takeover of United Healthcare West that led to the formation of NUHW (National Union of Healthcare Workers), Early also points out that while this trusteeship is by far the most publicized and biggest action by SEIU, it is certainly not the first. Early explains how Andy Stern crushed dissent in other locals by forcing their members into other locals who were either already under trusteeship, or under the leadership of Stern loyalists.

Early does not end his coverage of SEIU’s woes with internal issues. In a section titled How EFCA Died for ObamaCare, Early explains how SEIU burrowed into a position of influence inside the Obama administration and effectively elbowed out other unions. This is something that has put even more stress on the already fractured relationship SEIU has with the rest of big labor.

As a former SEIU staffer, I found myself cringing as I read Civil Wars, much as many rock stars must have cringed watching Spinal Tap for the first time. I believe this book should be required reading, not only for members of SEIU, who will find Civil Wars to be a disturbing peek behind the purple curtain, but also for anyone who cares about the future of the labor movement.  I found Civil Wars to be a disturbing validation of what I experienced firsthand as an organizer with SEIU.  The chickens have finally come home to roost after twenty years of shifting from a grassroots democratic union into a top-down bureaucratic corporation that places a higher value on political influence than it does on member representation.  

Civil Wars offers a unique look inside the challenging proposition facing NUHW that is all too familiar for IWW members – surviving as an independent union.  Among the major labor organizations in the United States, only a few, namely IWW and the United Electrical Workers(UE) have survived over the long-term.  NUHW’s recent partnership with the Machinists(IAM) demonstrates just how difficult it can be.

While Early focuses on SEIU, the issues that are raised in Civil Wars are faced by members in many other unions. When unions begin to look more like the corporations they are supposed to be fighting than the militant, democratic voice for workers that they are meant to be, it is only natural that the battle lines will begin to form, as Civil Wars clearly shows.

The real question Early seems to be asking is, very simply, Which Side Are You On?

National Mediation Board Changes National Railway Act Election Rules

This is a few weeks old, but I feel that this is still important enough to post. When I was in NYC attending the AFL-CIO Organizing Institute, we did an event with an IAM Lodge that is currently organizing Delta employees, and I was struck by their commitment to the rights of their members. The National Mediation Board(NMB) has ruled to change the archaic election laws in the National Railway Act.

After the Delta/Northwest merger, Delta began a fierce union-busting campaign against the IAM. Delta has been anti-union for years, and was trying not only to keep its employees from having union representation, but also trying to strip unionized Northwest employees of their rights as well. Thanks to this ruling, the union must get 50+1% of casted votes to win the election, as opposed to the previous standard, which forced the union to get 50+1% of all votes, whether the vote was casted or not. This meant that if you were sick and could not make it to vote, your vote was a no vote, even if you had intended to vote yes. This is a HUGE decision for the Machinists Union(IAM).

You can read the press release here:

http://www.goiam.org/index.php/news/press-releases/7271-machinists-respond-to-nmb-rule-change