::::::::
Taking on Wal-Mart, demanding universal health care, expanding the Working Families Party, developing labor media ... These are just some of the indicators that the labor movement in the United States --as defined by those actively and conscientiously pursuing policies on behalf of
working families --is considering a range of bold moves to stake a greater claim for the movement in a rapidly changing world.
While all labor activists certainly agree on this goal of having a greater voice for working families, at the same time there are
disagreements among union members and leadership over how to go forward.
The first cluster of questions is, broadly, Does the Democratic Party adequately promote working families ' issues at present? If not, how can labor organizers exert greater influence on the party 's agenda? If this is not possible, should labor continue developing Plan B 's like the Working Families Party or even collaborating with the Greens?
I bring up the Working Families Party because the organizers of this up-and-coming third, perhaps fourth or fifth party, because they made several gains in local and statewide elections this November 2004.
The second cluster of questions, is: Should existing unions work together and integrate their efforts and create a massive undertaking together like organizing Wal-Mart and demanding universal health care? Would all
unions unite for those causes? Is the problem, rather, then, that the leaders of some of the central unions are too conservative, either
ideologically or in terms of boldness of action? If so, is it better for the more activist unions to lead new paths on their own?
The SEIU is proposing a broad new 10 point plan, calling it the "Unite to Win " Campaign (http://www.unitetowin.org).
According to Unite to Win, "Only 8 percent of private sector workers and only 12.9 percent of all workers are united in unions. In many cases, union members in the same industry, employer, or craft are divided into different unions with different agendas. We need a united strategy to unite those workers' strength. "
The first principle of the Unite to Win campaign asserts that, "A key function of the AFL-CIO should be to support a strategy to win good jobs in America that is larger than the members of any one union could accomplish on their own. The AFL-CIO should establish a center to support
such projects, and should allocate to the center all of its $25 million annual royalties from Union Plus credit card purchases. Challenging
Wal-Mart should be its first project. "
The second principle is: "The AFL-CIO and its affiliated unions and allies should unite behind an all-out national strategy to win access to quality health care for all. The AFL-CIO should lead a grassroots campaign for this purpose with dedicated funding, campaign staff, and other necessary resources. "
Principle 3 is demanding the right to demand the right to unionize of any employer.
Some of the other items among 4 through 10 are more controversial. These elements of the plan entail a massive restructuring of the labor movement where existing efforts would integrate and centralize, so to team up efforts where possible, prevent duplication efforts in other areas, and build new union strengths in areas needing additional development, such as
mobilization and recruitment.
Andy Stern 's plan was critically discussed in a popular regular mass email circulated by Harry Kelber of the Rank and File AFL-CIO Union Reform Movement.
Kelber writes, "The SEIU program emphasizes the importance of union density and market share for strengthening labor's bargaining power. Of course, union density matters, but you can only get it by recruiting a huge number of new members. What new organizing strategies does Stern propose that are different from those that have resulted in failure? "
"Even if, " Kelber continues, "for argument's sake, we assume the validity of Stern's restructuring plan, who would decide which unions are to be selected for the favored 20 and which are the ones to be left out?
What happens to unions that don't accept the plan? How long will it take for the restructuring to be completed, and what happens in the meantime? Will members have any say about what course their union chooses? "
The email also states that "Stern has declared that if the executive council won't go along with his restructuring plan, he'll pull out of the AFL-CIO and start his own labor federation. Meanwhile, the International
Association says it will quit the AFL-CIO if Stern has his way. Other unions may also adopt the Machinists' stance. Unions may end up fighting each other to the advantage of giant corporations. "
Another indicator of tensions within the labor movement was the 2004 primary season 's division over whether to support former governor
Howard Dean (VT) or Senator John Kerry (MA) for the Democratic nomination.
Initially, Howard Dean had received endorsements by the SEIU, IUPAT, and AFSCME in addition to several smaller unions, multiple celebrities, 36 U.S. House Representatives, 2 Senators, 25 mayors, and one New Jersey governor James McGreevey.
But after the allegedly controversial "Dean Scream, " many unions began withdrawing support. AFSCME was the first big union to withdraw support in February 2004, causing many Democrats to ask, "Et tu, AFSCME? "
With all the negative publicity Wal-Mart 's been getting lately, I think taking on Wal-Mart is a really good idea and should be something existing unions should be able to support together.
It would be great to see unity among the unions, but not for the sake of unity itself. The point is sticking to principles and, preferably, asserting bold demands. The corporations are certainly doing it. So, with all the questions remaining unanswered, we don 't have to ask whether unions need to as bold and vigilant as today 's corporate actors, in demanding an alternative to the model of mega-exploitation. This is already apparent.
