This article is in the May/June 2014 edition of the Union Democracy Review. You can become a subscriber here:
http://aud2.uniondemocracy.org/pubs
WE ARE THE UNION?
By
Joseph Riedel
The
Oxford dictionary describes a labor union as, “An organized
association of workers, often in a trade or profession, formed to
protect and further their rights and interests.” Labor unions were
born out of the struggle and common purpose of the working class in
order to protect and advance the collective interest of the workers.
This struggle was, and is fueled by the fact that the interests of
the workers is often quite different than the interests of
management.
But
what if the group of workers are the actual staff of the union
itself? This is the unique situation that staff unions find
themselves in. Staff unions might very well be the only labor entity
whose interests are simultaneously identical and opposite of the
interests of management.
Origin
of Staff Unions
Staff unions are by no means a
recently developed phenomenon in the labor movement. The origins of
staff unions in the United States dates back to at least 1951, when
the Labor Management Relations Act(LMRA) was deemed by the National
Labor Relations Board(NLRB) to be applicable to unions as employers
in the case of the staff of the Airline Pilots Association(ALPA).
This was followed by several
cases and appeals until the matter of unions as employers under LMRA
was settled by the Supreme Court in 353 US 313. In its ruling, the
court asserted that when unions find themselves in the role of
employer, the Taft-Hartley Act “Applies to its operation just as it
would to any other employer.”
With their status as employers
established, several unions, as well as the AFL-CIO itself contested
the status of union staff as employees under the act. In 1958, the
AFL-CIO fought against an organizing petition filed by the Field
Representatives Federation to represent organizers and field
representatives. In 120 NLRB 969, the AFL-CIO argues that it would be
“Contrary to the best interests of the labor movement for the
AFL-CIO to recognize a union of its organizers.” The NLRB rejected
the Federation's arguments and ordered an election. The AFL-CIO
complied with the ruling and has engaged in collective bargaining
since that time. The current position of the AFL-CIO according to
their Communications Department is that they “Strongly support
staff unions.” Staff at federation headquarters are covered under
contracts with several unions including OPEIU, CWA, and IBEW, among
others.
Aside from the aforementioned
arguments over whether the union is an employer, and that union staff
are employees under the law, another early argument used by unions in
opposition to staff unions was that staff unions are not actually
labor organizations at all. Such was the claim made by the Retail
Clerks International Association in 1965 in its opposition to the
organizing efforts of the Agents and Organizers Association(AOA).
The RCIA also raised the claim of dual unionism as a disqualifying
factor for employment. Although this claim was dismissed by the
NLRB(RCIA vs. NLRB), it has been used by the United Mine Workers, as
well as other unions in opposition to staff organizing campaigns.
It should be noted that not all
unions fought the desire of their staff to engage in collective
bargaining. After the Union of Airline Pilots Association
Employees(UALPAE) was chartered in 1951, several unions, including
the International Union of Electrical Workers(IUE), Newspaper Guild,
and AFSCME all voluntarily recognized staff unions representing their
employees.
However,
not all early efforts ended in eventual recognition by union
management. In 1960, the Federation of Union Representatives(FOUR)
petitioned for an election involving some 260 organizers employed by
the International Ladies Garment Workers Union(ILGWU). Instead of
complying with the NLRB ruling in FOUR's favor, as well as the
subsequent election results in favor of the staff union, the
leadership of ILGWU refused to recognize the results of the election
and instead of bargaining with FOUR, chose to pursue its case to the
US Court of Appeals. After lengthy court battles with ILGWU
management depleted their resources, FOUR disbanded in 1966 without
ever settling a contract.
In some cases, union management
have chosen to bypass legal challenges in favor of outright refusal
to comply with the National Labor Relations Act(NLRA), committing
Unfair Labor Practices that they are usually fighting against in
order to decimate organizing efforts. The American Guild of Variety
Artists in 1967, and Machinists District 8 in 1965 are two notable
examples.
After the early battles between
staff unions and some union management, relationships between staff
unions and labor leadership settled into a fairly copacetic period in
which staff unions continued to grow and coexisted with management in
an environment mostly free from the public strife of the 1960's.
There were a few exceptions, such as the 1986 strike by the employees
of the Food and Allied Services Trade Department(FAST). This
resulted in several AFL-CIO officials being placed in the awkward
situation of having to cross the picket line.
"In
1976, Steve Early, now a labor journalist and author of Save
Our Unions,
was editing the daily proceedings of the United Mine Workers(UMW)
Convention at which the union's national officers were directed to
cease all negotiations on a first contract with a headquarters staff
union formed just the year before. UMW lawyers sought to excise this
action from the official record of the convention because, as Early
notes, “the several thousand delegates were committing a mass
unfair labor practice, probably the most blatant by any union, acting
as an employer, since passage of the Wagner Act.” After the UMW's
1976 convention, negotiations with the union's professional staff
were never concluded; the unionization effort petered out as many
original bargaining unit members, like Early, a UMW Journal staffer,
and now AFL-CIO president Rich Trumka,then a UMW lawyer,left their
headquarters jobs for employment elsewhere."
UUR Members Picketing SEIU Headquaters
Purple
Problems
While there is no shortage of
examples of friction in recent years between staff unions and union
leadership, the most public clashes have been within SEIU. In 2007,
the staff of SEIU Local 1, which is represented by the Teamsters,
went out on strike over low wage levels. There have also been high
profile cases of staff unions openly disagreeing with union
leadership over the direction of the organization. In May, 2008, the
Union of Union Representatives(UUR), which represented around 200
International staff at SEIU passed a unanimous resolution announcing
their opposition to their members being used in the internal conflict
between the leadership of SEIU and SEIU-United Healthcare West. The
resolution stated, “In accordance with our contract, UUR members
should not participate in work that interferes with the ability of
UHW-West members to express their opinions on issues that concern
them.” SEIU leadership subsequently pushed through an amendment at
its convention to reallocate organizing resources to various Locals,
which UUR is barred by its contract from organizing. In early 2009,
SEIU announced it would layoff 75 of the 210 members of the UUR
bargaining unit.
In
2011, after two previous failed attempts, the staff of SEIU/District
1199 WV/KY/OH were able to gain recognition of their staff union.
Staff Union 1199 was successful in negotiating their first contract,
but less than two years later, management ran a successful campaign
to decertify the staff union in late 2013, dismissing some of the
pro-union staff members the very day the staff union was decertified.
(full
disclosure: the author was a charter officer of Staff Union 1199)
Even the oldest staff union in
the United States, UALPAE has had recent friction with management.
In 2011, the NLRB ruled that ALPA committed Unfair Labor Practices
alleged by the staff union when it implemented unilateral changes
before reaching impasse.
Staff
Unions are not a phenomenon strictly limited to the United States.
According to Derek Blackadder, Regional Director for the Canadian
Union of Public Employees(CUPE), staff unions are very common in
Canada. Andrew Casey, a LabourStart correspondent based in
Australia, informed me that the Australian Services Union represents
union staff as well. There are also forms of staff unions in the
United Kingdom and India as well, but they seem to follow a system
used by the United Steelworkers in which staff are members of the
parent union, so that everyone is a card-carrying member.
Progressive
or Regressive?
So
if union staff are indeed workers just as the members they represent
are workers, how do they serve the interests of their members, as
well as their own best interest at the same time? What purpose in the
labor movement as a whole can they serve? Are staff unions a
progressive or regressive force in the labor movement? To gain some
insight into these questions, I reached out to Bill Fletcher,
longtime labor activist and educator, as well as the author of
Solidarity
Divided,
and the recently released
“They're Bankrupting Us!” And 20 Other Myths About Unions.
On the question of the role staff unions can play in the labor
movement, Fletcher responded that they have the ability to be both a
positive and negative force. They can be a positive force by being
“Partners for change, working with elected leaders to help change
the direction of the organization as well as stopping arbitrary
conduct of some leaders.” Fletcher also cautioned that there
exists the possibility to be a negative force by “Freezing ways of
doing work even if it doesn't serve the purpose of the union.”
While there are certainly a
variety of positions regarding exactly how staff unions fit into the
labor movement, a consistent sentiment expressed by everyone
contacted for this article was the necessity of staff unions.
Fletcher, who identified himself as a strong supporter of staff
unions, expressed the reason staff unions are necessary is that “In
any organization that is cause driven, there is a tendency to treat
the staff as almost disposable quantities, and it is OK to burn them
out in service to the cause.” Since the beginnings of organized
labor in the United States, one simple philosophy has united labor
organizations of every kind. As I used to hear J. David Cox,
President of the American Federation of Government Employees(AFGE)
say: “If you've got a boss – you need a union.” It should not
matter who the boss is.
If
labor unions are to remain the vanguard of the working class, it is
imperative that they remain true to the ideals of the labor movement,
both in theory, as well as in practice. All members should look at
their union and ask, which
side are you on?