|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Think againNo unions — no middle class. It’s that simpleBy
TIM NESBITT We came to Chicago for the 50th anniversary convention of the AFL-CIO
as one federation of unions; but we left as two. How did this happen,
and what does it mean for our union movement?
All of the unions that gathered in Chicago last week agreed on ultimate
goals — to rebuild our union movement and restore the American dream
for America’s workers. But they disagreed on how to organize themselves
to achieve those goals. Three unions, the Service Employees, the Teamsters
and United Food and Commercial Workers, broke away from the AFL-CIO and
raised the banner of a new coalition, called “Change to Win,”
promising to lead a new effort for mass organizing in America’s
workplaces. The other 52 unions of the AFL-CIO chose to stay together
and used the convention to renegotiate the compact of our federation.
These AFL-CIO unions are marching in tighter formation now, determined
to prove that their unity will take them farther than the breakaway unions.
So now we’re entering a period that has been compared to that of
the great rivalry of the American Federation of Labor (AFL) and the Congress
of Industrial Organizations (CIO), dated 1935-1955, when unions aligned
in two federations competed to organize workers victimized by the Great
Depression and, following World War II, created the largest and most prosperous
middle class in our nation’s history. There are profound differences
between then and now, as daunting as the differences between FDR and GWB.
But we have to hope that this realignment of our unions will succeed,
because the future of our union movement is at stake.
In that hope, I offer three suggestions to help ensure that this separation
leads to the regeneration of our movement that we tried to launch in Chicago.
First, we must continue our great debate in a way that speaks to working
people who know little about unions. This is about them, the workers of
America who are working harder and longer and getting less and less for
their efforts. The sooner more workers recognize that they deserve better
for their efforts and that our union movement is the vehicle to help them
get it, the sooner the demand side of unionization (workers who look to
unions to make their jobs better and their lives more decent) will match
the supply side of union organizing efforts (unions putting more organizers
in the field to help workers become part of our movement).
Our disagreements in Chicago produced a high-profile debate in which union
leaders in both coalitions spoke directly to America’s working families
about reclaiming the respect and rewards they deserve in a prosperous
economy. More workers are listening to us now; we need to keep their attention.
Second, we need to stick together in the political arena. We may have
two federations of labor, but we are still one union movement when it
comes to defending our rights as free unions and advancing the interests
of working families. When we were still one, the AFL-CIO pioneered a powerful
political program that overcame many of the attacks of the anti-worker
forces and delivered real gains for working people at the state level.
I’m encouraged that the “Change to Win” unions say they
want to continue to support our state federations and central labor councils,
which have become the centers of our political campaign capacity. We may
need different vehicles for our joint efforts in the future, but we still
have the same number of union members, the same unions and an impressive
track record of working together to engage the political process for working
people. We can’t let up now; those efforts have to continue.
Third, when it comes to organizing, we need healthy competition and smarter
strategies. Our unions should compete by outdoing each other, not by undoing
each other. I’d like to see some of the “no-raid” pacts
offered by the “Change to Win” unions come to fruition. Walking
this talk is critical. But we need more than that. We need sharper eyes
for new opportunities, as our cities go through rebuilding booms, our
energy infrastructure awaits its ticket to the 21st century, and new medical
technologies transform the physical plants and workforces of our health
care system.
And, we need smarter strategies for engaging a changing workforce. Organizing
and leveraging large employers within key industries is one such approach,
as UNITE HERE is doing with hotels in major metropolitan areas.
The back-story to the debate in Chicago was the sense of “controlled
panic” that I mentioned in my last column, the feeling that we’re
running out of time, members and resources to stem the decline of the
middle class in America. As AFL-CIO President John Sweeney stated at the
convention, quoting a comment from a member who weighed in during the
debate: “No unions, no middle class; it’s that simple.”
That’s a good reminder for all of us. Whether we’re changing
to win or uniting to win, we know what we have to do now. Tim Nesbitt is president of the Oregon AFL-CIO. For more information, check out the Oregon AFL-CIO online at oraflcio.unions-america.com
|