TPP And The Labor Wars To Come

As Varys said in the blockbuster series, Game of Thrones, "Men of talent have a part to play in the wars to come," I believe all men and women will have a part to play in the labor wars to come.

President Obama fired a shot across the bow at progressives this past weekend when he was attempting to sell the secretive NAFTA 2.0 Trans-Pacific Partnership(TPP).  Obama claimed, "I agree with Elizabeth(Warren) on a host of issues, but she's wrong about this."  If you're trying to prove someone else is wrong and you are right, it doesn't help if you are purposely keeping the details confidential.  This is why the labor community almost unanimously opposes TPP.

After being hoodwinked on how NAFTA would be great for American workers by the last Democratic president, unions are rightfully wary of being so trusting this time around.  This is probably the most likely single issue to cause a split between the Democratic Party and labor unions, but there are a few other under-the-surface issues as well.

The biggest of these issues is the continued focus of labor unions on political lobbying over direct action.  While unions were able to stick their thumb in the dam for a while to stop the hemorrhage of union density, the Citizens United ruling has made it impossible for unions to compete long-term, which we are already seeing with the anti-union legislation that has passed in Wisconsin, Indiana, and Michigan.  It should be no surprise that the Koch Brothers recently proclaimed Scott Walker as their preferred candidate.

With lobbying no longer a viable long-term solution, the obvious(and possibly only) solution is a return to non-partisan, direct action that was so effective in the early part of the 20th century.  The times are ripe for the return of general strikes, and other forms of mass demonstrations.  Inequality is at an all-time peak.  If the labor movement cannot galvanize now, then perhaps it may be too late, and it will have to die and be reborn.

In Solidarity,

Joseph Riedel

Shutdown...or Lockout?

We are now into week two of the full blown circus that is the government shutdown of 2013.  For some 800,000 federal employees who are being furloughed, there is another word for this situation: lockout.

lock·out

[lok-out] Show IPA

noun

the temporary closing of a business or the refusal by an employer to allow employees to come to work until they accept the employer's terms.

The only difference between this situation, and the definition from our friends at dictionary.com is that the federal employees do not have the means to accept the employer's terms.  This is because they are being kept off the job by a few dozen extremists in the House of Representatives who do not care about the livelihood of 800,000 people.

The American Federation of Government Employees(AFGE) is the largest of the labor organizations representing about 300,000 dues paying members.  While AFGE President J. David Cox has made some media appearances, and there have been a few rallies on the Hill, AFGE has not yet started treating this like the lockout that it is.

In most cases, when unions are locked out by management, they immediately set up a picket line and pull out all the stops to force an end to the stalemate.  So far, there have been a few small rallies and a membership drive that allows members to earn a $100 rebate for signing up new members.  While I'm all about membership drives, and was active in them during my years as an AFGE member, perhaps a more militant, in your face approach might be appropriate given the task at hand.

My good friend, Bill Preston, President of AFGE Local 17, is spearheading a rally this Friday.  Here is the pertinent information:

Join Local 17 of American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) for a Rally at the Capitol to Protest the Government Shutdown and Support your Fellow Workers

When: Friday, October 11, 2013 from 12:00 Noon until 3:00 PM

Where: The West Front of the U.S. Capitol Building  The attached map from the U.S. Capitol Police gives the exact location: It is the demonstration permit area marked # 1.

Who: All Federal employees* and their friends and families and allies, including veterans (Local 17 represents workers at the VA's Central Office)

Bring any homemade signs to express to Congress your feelings about the shutdown.

I've applied for a permit to hold the Rally.  

* Federal employees may attend this Rally if they are:

- in a furlough status;

- taking annual leave; or

- attending during their regular 30-minute lunch period.

Please note that furlough–exempted employees (those still working due to continued funding) should take annual leave if they plan to attend for longer than the 30-minute lunch period.  Furlough–excepted employees cannot take annual leave, but may still attend during their regular lunch period.

Come help make this a successful Rally!!  We look forward to seeing you on Friday!!

 
If you are in DC and are able to attend, please do so in solidarity with those who are furloughed.  This rally is an excellent start, and I would like to see a more proactive push from the AFGE national leadership.  Let's set up some picket lines and burn barrels near the Capitol and House office buildings.  It's time to take the fight to them and put some real pressure on them to stop this insanity.

In Solidarity,

Joseph

 

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

The Great Disappearing Act

No, I'm not referring to Candidate Obama, or Medicare under Paul Ryan's budget.

I'm referring to the phenomenon that occurs with the staff of labor organizations every time there is an election.  If you are a union member, have you ever noticed that your union representation becomes as hard to find as a unicorn during election season?  The local office is as empty as a church on Sunday morning - unless it is being used as a campaign office.

 

The reason for this is one of the worst kept secrets in the world of organized labor.  Every election cycle, in direct conflict with FEC law, union staff are forced to "volunteer" for whoever the Democratic candidate happens to be.  In presidential election cycles, this can start as early as September, and in mid-term or special elections, it can start in October.

I experienced this firsthand during my time with a certain purple entity during the Senate Bill 5/Issue 2 election.  Instead of representing our members as we should have, we were required to work exclusively out of a campaign office.  Everything else became secondary, unless you had an actual arbitration hearing.  In full disclosure, the S.B. 5 recall was somewhat justified, as it directly affected almost a third of the members of our local who were state employees.  However this is commonplace in presidential and statewide races where this is not the case. So, if you happen to have a contract that might be coming up for negotiation, it might be a little concerning if all of the sudden, everyone is off doing political work instead of representing members. 

This is not limited to SEIU.  This is standard procedure with virtually every major labor union, with the exception of the United Electrical Workers(UE) and the National Union of HealthCare Workers(NUHW),  who prefer direct action to wasting its time with PACs.

I'm not saying the unions should not be involved in the political realm.  It is necessary and important, as elected officials have direct influence on the livelihood of union members.  What I am saying is that a union's involvement in politics should not come at the expense of member representation, which is almost always the case.

In Solidarity,

Joseph

What Closed Door Bargaining Actually Looks Like

The National Union of HealthCare Workers released a copy of the tentative agreements(TA's) reached by Kaiser Permanente and the Coalition of KP Unions - an organization almost completely controlled by SEIU.

This document shows exactly what happens when your union turns away from militant action and operates on a business model: They essentially become part of the company itself.

I recommend checking this out:

http://www.nuhw.org/storage/doc/documents/Annotated_TAs.pdf

In Solidarity,

Joseph

The Dirty Truth Behind Closed Contract Negotiations

If you ask your average rank-and-file UFCW or Teamsters member when they last attended a contract bargaining session, they'll likely tell you that they've never been to one.  What's the reason for this?  One of the unfortunate truths of the labor movement is that many unions do not permit their own members to attend the negotiation sessions of their own contract.

I asked several Kroger members for an update during their contract campaign last year.  The answer was identical from everyone I talked to.   They could attend a regional meeting to receive an update, but they were never informed of negotiating session locations, or invited to attend.  When I asked several Teamsters from the facility in which I work, they responded that only the Shop Steward was permitted to attend negotiations.

So why is this a big deal?

For starters, and probably most importantly, it's your contract.  I don't know about you, but there is no way in hell that I'm going to let someone negotiate the terms of my employment without me being present so I can witness and approve of what they agree to.  I have always believed that someone who has the opportunity to attend negotiations, and refuses to do so has no right to complain about the shortcomings of their collective bargaining agreement.

If your union doesn't encourage you to attend negotiations, or tries to discourage you from attending, this should be a major red flag.  Ask yourself this question - Why don't they want me to attend?

So why don't unions want their members at negotiations? 

There are two very big secrets that many unions do not want their members to know that contribute to this strategy:

1. Having open negotiations has the potential to show the weakness of the bargaining unit if nobody shows up.  Of course, if a union is doing its job, then it will have the bargaining unit mobilized for negotiations.  Most unions do not spend enough time or resources on this sort of action.  Therefore, it is in their interest to have closed negotiations to keep the employer in the dark.

2. Having closed negotiations allows the union to make whatever deals it wants to make without the members knowledge.  I call this the SEIU strategy.  SEIU has become famous for its backroom deals with employers.  While I mentioned earlier that my local had open negotiations, I was trained to figure out what the members would swallow without going on strike, then to make a deal with management without the members knowing to settle the contract.  Sadly, many unions follow this playbook and negotiate weak contracts instead of organizing their bargaining units into a militant force that can fight concessions.

The bottom line is: It's your contract, your job - Fight for it!

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)

Indian Workers Pull Off Massive General Strike

 Now this is how it's done!

http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/12813/in_general_strike_indias_workers_challenge_the_grip_of_neoliberalism/

Virtual Picket Line Clip of the Week

This is a clip of my good friend and National Political Director for the United Electrical Workers(UE), Chris Townsend, laying the smackdown on an anti-union Republican strategist:

I wish we could get Chris on cable news a lot more often.

In Solidarity,

Joseph

Creating A National Organizing Drive

Something I've often thought about is how to develop a strategy to organize workers across various industries in a national blitz to jump start a renewed sense of union membership in the United States.

I've mentioned before that Labor Day would be an ideal opportunity to run commercials nationwide showing what unions have done historically for working people, and displaying a number on the screen that people can call to get information about organizing.  People who call the number would be directed to the appropriate union for more information.

Sounds simple enough, right?  Well...

The reasons why this has not happened are many, but here are a couple of the big issues that I believe would hamstring this sort of effort:

1.  There is far too much overlapping of various unions in similar industries.  For instance, you have hospitals that are represented by Teamsters, United Steelworkers, in addition to SEIU.  Hell, SEIU and the Teamsters don't seem to have any boundaries as to what they'll go after.  The old adage Jimmy Hoffa used was "If there's a wheel anywhere in the facility, including inside someone's watch, they should be Teamsters." There would have to be some serious ego swallowing and negotiating take place in order for this to work.

2.  It would require unions to spend significant money up front.  This has been something unions have been reluctant to do in the past - unless it's blowing half a billion dollars watching spineless Democrats lose control of the House of Representatives.  Unions would have to hire more organizers and internal member representatives.  Given the fact that a lot of unions are already stretched thin on staff, this would be a sizable commitment.

If unions could ever just take a page out of the old IWW playbook and just stop jumping into ever industry imaginable, this would be a vision that could come true.  The Wobblies had this basic principle right - you don't need more than one union per industry.  When there is more than one union vying for the same workers, we raid each other instead of going after the 93% of private sector workers who need a union.

In Solidarity,

Joseph