Great comments, and I couldn't agree more. Friends like this, and companies won't need to hire Union-busters anymore. I was personally offended when I read those same comments made by Kaine. I AM SICK OF "FRIENDLY" POLITICIANS GIVING US WINKS AND NODS EXPECTING US TO THEN PASSIVELY FALL IN LINE. WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?

I have an idea. Let's stop giving the Dems any money. Let's get back to organizing workers and fighting the good fight. Politicians (with the exception of a slim few) can care less about workers. They care about getting re-elected and THAT'S ALL. We should use our money to organize. Screw the Dems and the Repubs. It's time for some good old Direct Action.

" So, where are the letters from Change To Win and the AFL-CIO publicly challenging Kaine? Where are the letters from the Federations that say neither federation will contribute another dollar to his future election campaigns until he disavows that position" JT

Jon, as I have stated a number of times, I am whole-heartedly with you on Democrats who do not support working people. As the chief executive of Virginia, Kaine has no real choice but to enforce the law, including the RTW law; but his added comments are a slap in the face to organized labor. However, Kaine cannot run for Governor of VA but once - VA is, I think, the only state that limits the Governor to one term. True, he could want to make a US Senate or Congressional run - he's young, but this is it for him as Governor. What his comment looks like to me is "Now that I have what I want, drop dead!"

Issues; issues; issues. Get organized (institutionalized) labor out of politics and focus on the issues important to working women and men; period.

The rebirth of a true movement will happen when the lords of labor quit looking at politicians as their salvation and come to grips with the fact the only reason unions exist is to serve people. Of course, they also need get their own faces out of the trough, but that's another story for another time.

Honest to God, this isn't that difficult. Workers are getting screwed at every turn. Health care; pension; wages; workers rights...they are all in a shambles and being dismantled, gutted or are stagnating.

The solution is to build a worker-driven agenda that talks to and for working men and women (and not just the dues paying ones). Duh! The politicians from both parties will have to decide which side they are on.

Come on guys, wake up. It is truly amazing; as solidarity is ripped to shreds, the only remnant they have is their collective heads up their collective asses.

Wondering if the vexing " face in the trough" addiction could be approached w/ a variation on the old " twelve step program "... something like " Labor Leaders Anonymous "..... "Hello , my name is ________ , and I've nearly destroyed my own union, failed my membership, slowly abandoned my principles, & effectively ruined organized Labor's reputation ... and I'm finally willing to say that ,..uh,... the _______ ( insert: " CTW "or "AFL" here ) has a problem... "

Love your comments Josh, and as usual they are right on target. Funny thing is before i retired i used that same metaphor all too often. Unless and until the powers that be look in the mirror and take a fearless and searching moral inventory, we will continue to slip further into the abyss of failures and self-destruction. Then you've got the other problem of having some kind of a spiritual awakening, but we'd do well to digest one piece at a time.

My friends at the UFCW hated this kind of talk. All too often it was a celebration of yet another job well done...spin doctoring at its finest. Some nut case in the crowd pointing out our flaws and suggesting we were failing miserably was never well received.

Oh well, life goes on: The bigger question is whether institutionalized labor can survive... and even bigger yet is; if they do, will they be relevant to anyone but themselves?

These calls for change-for working on issues and for organizing-are embodied in the politics of The Working Families Party. Check it out!
(www.workingfamiliesparty.org)

quick, small thought. the very phrase "right-to-work" sounds bad, hits just a little every time it's uttered. there some other more pejorative term we can use? since the term itself is propoganda, maybe something a little clearer, like "anti-union state", something to put the onus back on the politicians themselves?

These comments are ridiculous. Kaine NOMINATED LeBlanc-- the head of the state fed! to his cabinet! He is going to put him in there anyway, over the objections of the solidly republican state legislature. The head of the state fed is a close advisor to the Governor of VA-- why don't you trust LeBlanc's judgement on this? He has been laboring in the vineyard for many years. Kaine's rhetorical comments on a matter that is not in debate in the "Old Dominion" are of zero importance to working people in any respect whatsoever. This is a showdown over whether the legislature can break past precedent and deny a Governor his choice for a cabinet seat, and solely because of that nominee's labor background-- and Kaine is saying "NO Way!" He, and LeBlanc, deserve your unqualified support in this matter, and your support in getting rid of the republican majority in the VA legislature.

Thank you, Ragnar. Finally some sanity to these posts. Kaine's comment is rhetorical. Right to work is not a burning question in Virginia. The GOP (Grease Our Palms, Grab Our Profits and Give Others Poverty) majority in the House had no better way to prove they are Republicans that to reject a representative of working people. Kaine still has to work with these clowns for a while, so what would it profit him and workers in the state for him to say right to work (which he's sworn to uphold) "is a law I detest." It's the equivalent of making sure your enemy has enough ammo.

As for getting labor out of politics, that's insane. Most of the problems workers face come from bad laws and bad enforcement. Allowing the bosses to be in charge of governance at all levels, pitting their vast resources and power against the limited power of individual citizens will not advance any laws benefiting workers.

As for electing Democrats of any stripe: In 1995, the U.S. House of Representatives was in the hands of Newt Gingrich and he garnered many near unanimous bloc votes against working family issues. An assessment at the time of the voting record of Democrats vs. Republicans showed that on the dozen or so worker issues cited by the AFL-CIO's congressional voting record, the Republican congressional members supported labor issues only 5 percent of the time, while Democrats supported those issues 91 percent. That was an extreme year, of course, but I don't think it's all that much different today. Most interestingly, the worst Democrat (in terms of supporting worker issues) was still better than the best Republican.

The key perhaps is to require a few more strings to the money and volunteer manpower that is donated by unions to candidates, and perhaps stronger, more visible public pronouncements by candidates of exactly what they will do (as opposed to would like to do) to help workers.

While unionized workers are only 10 percent of the workforce and voters from union families only provide 25 percent of the votes in elections, it will be hard to get candidates to say that they are behind us 100 percent, even on our core issues, as Jon suggests. Perhaps a blood oath would be more satisfactory.

Thanks for the great suggestion to save labor Robin, more money and more manpower; it's served us so well over the past forty years. You are kidding right?

At some point gang you've got to look in the mirror and see the reflection. We are losing on every count. After 25 years on the inside, watching us shovel money and manpower at elections and politicians, i have seen almost nowhere there has been a return on investment.

Just imagine if over that same 40 year span we had invested the same dollars and people power in actual marketing plans aimed at educating and outreach. What if we had made a commitment to promoting an agenda of economic and social justice, rather than a bunch of overly expensive photo-ops for union leaders?

The point i was making was simple; help shape, define and promote the wants, needs and expectations of the working class and then let politicians come to us. We've been throwing money at politics for years in hopes it would provide us with solutions; and all we have to show or it is an institution that is on the verge of collapse.

You've gotta love it...more of the same only better...the mantra of organized labor for the past forty years.

While we can probably agree that there is no one answer, here is mine. Organize key sectors. When the UMWA was powerful, coal was king, and was used not only to heat all the big northern cities, but to fire the steel furnaces and make the steel used to make cars, and organizing the USWA and the UAW follwed a natural progression. The same chain today does not start with janitors and housekeepers, as much as they may need a union, or with public employees, although they need unions too. Labor can parlay our present base, especially in transportation and shipping, and in telecom, into a movement in IT, new economy-type companies, just as John L. Lewis parlayed the UMWA base into an industrial union movement. Both CWA and IAM, as well as IFPTE and some others, are at least looking at going in this direction.

Well Jonathon I don't know what you'd have us unions here in Virginia do. Support Kilgore? NOT. As the president AND organizer of a public sector union (UVA) Tim Kaine is all we have. Jim Leaman, the new AFL-CIO prez here has helped us out with both Warner-who was more anti union than Kaine could ever be-and Kaine. I have met with Warner's cabinet and Warner AND Kaine. No, I'm not thrilled about his stance on right to work for less law and I have written a scathing letter to a lefty blog here that everyone reads about the LeBlanc situation. We have a repiglican far right wing nutjob of a legislature and a repiglican AG and Lt. Governor. I agree Dems should be pro labor but us stuck in a red state work with what we have. Tim is a good man and has done alot as far as support of us and of CWA. We'll probably get a meet and confer out of this adminstration-something Mark Warner would not give us. So while I agree with some of what you say I think that us down here in the trenches are the ones who know whats what. I fight a huge institution every day and I sure need the Governor's office to help me-and he has so far and he will continue to. And don't think that Danny LeBlanc is down and out. He WILL have a place in Kaine's administration. Mark my words. I am disappointed that we didn't have a huge statewide rally in front of the General Assembly building after LeBlanc's appointment went down. I'm not sure why we didn't. Every union member in this state should be up in arms.

Climbing off my soapbox now thank you very much.

"Republicans showed that on the dozen or so worker issues cited by the AFL-CIO's congressional voting record, the Republican congressional members supported labor issues only 5 percent of the time, while Democrats supported those issues 91 percent. That was an extreme year, of course, but I don't think it's all that much different today. Most interestingly, the worst Democrat (in terms of supporting worker issues) was still better than the best Republican."

The important point here is 1) what these issues are and 2) how close the vote was. It really doesn't separate supporters from fair-weather friends if a bill will pass - or not pass - 265 to 170 or somewhat closer. With that kind of margin, Democrats can vote with labor and still get a wave by from business: the bill was a winner (or loser) and so they need to check in on the left side of the ledger. Business interests understand that - it is simply business. It's when it's close - like CAFTA - that it matters.

As I think I mentioned before, I once was in a meeting when the COPE director from a few years back was asked if labor could rely upon a certain politician. He responded, "We can rely upon him completely unless we really need him, and then we can't rely upon him at all." These are the kind of politicians we need to stop supporting altogether.

As for Tim Kaine, as far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out. But his "a law I strongly support" comment was a gratuitous slap in the face.

As for getting out of politics altogether, if it hadn't been for the efforts of the AFL-CIO, GWB would have slaughtered his opponents in 2000 & 2004, probably bringing along other offices below. It may well be that labor should spend more on organizing and less on politics - I can agree with that; but I fail to see how the situation I described above HELPS working people. The quality of the people we support is key here, I'd think.

The U.S. has effectively outlawed national political parties.

Most people are probably aware that the majority of U.S.states nominate by primary election. This was done, starting in the 1880's to stop people from using the right of assembly to create private member organizations that would field politicians that reflected the organizations interests, and would carry the organizations name on the ballot. By requiring political parties to nominate by publicly funded primaries, the state could specify the requirements for ballot access for the primary elections. The organizations have no control over their own political parties name!

Bill, I can tell you were already formulating your response to what you thought you read before you finished my post. I did not say "more money and more manpower." I said more strings (more conditions) to getting the money and manpower that is available from the labor movement. You said, "The point i was making was simple; help shape, define and promote the wants, needs and expectations of the working class and then let politicians come to us." I think that the labor movement has been helping to "shape, define and promote the wants, needs and expectations of the working class" for more than 125 years, sometimes with more success than at other times.

We can sit back and wait for the politicians to come to us--and they will. But we have to put more stings on money and services we are providing them. There has not been a fair exchange between labor and politicians because we have not required much of the folks that we support. We reward them for being better than the opposition and often they are only marginally better. Only we can change that. If we make the conditions widely known, perhaps we can sit back and wait. We may only get half the candidates behind us that we usually support, but at least they would be with us in spirit and action.

I'm sorry Robin, but i personally delivered over $100,000 to Paul Wellstone's campaign the year he died in the plane crash. He was one of labor's best friends, and yet while in office he was able to do nothing but get in the way of the republicans efforts to hurt us.

At the same time i was hand delivering checks to Paul, i couldn't get the UFCW to give us but token financial support to a program called Youareworthmore. The website and corresponding effort was unique, aggressive and in the space of the first year we anwsered over 5000 questions from retail workers around the country. It had the potential to be a whole new paradigm in the future of how organized labor reached out and represented workers.

Here's the hard reality: A medium sized local (7500 members) hardly has the resources to run that kind of program. Especially after the International, the AFL-CIO, the state fed and the ufcw regional office all suck off their percap.

The dilemma for labor (and even more so locals) is how it spends its limited resources. Our local was involved politically, and more than i wanted to be. With 2000 long-term care workers, we knew we had to play legislatively, or get left behind at budget time. Virtually any union representing public sector workers is in that boat; they have no choice.

The bigger problem is you/we can't rebuild organized labor on the backs of public sector workers. The private sector has to be the target, and the politicians will never, NEVER work with us to help make that happen. Both the dems and the rebublicans take too much money from the private sector. We'll always just miss by one or two votes when it comes to meaningful labor law reform.

As someone pointed out, voting records posted at the AFL-CIO are a sham of the first order. Long before the final tally is counted the boys know who will vote how and the outcome is preordained. The boys who need to give us their vote are able to do so, but nothing changes for workers and labor is left holding one hell of an expensive bag.

JT has been saying if we are going to play, we should hold them accountable, as have you. That's all well and good, but if we give them our money and people power, and they give us their vote, but the status quo remains in tact...then what? It's just more of the same.

Nope, put the money in people and an agenda that is about workers...all workers. We've built fences around our members trying to protect them and the net has been zip. We are free falling into oblivion and there isn't a politician alive who can or will save us. The answers lie within...who we are; what we do; what we stand for. Until we come to grips with that, we'll continue to melt like the snow in Minnesota on a hot April day.

...The envelope please ( not the P.A.C. envelope , ya' mugs ) .... & the Award for clearest-eyed assessment 1984-2008 goes to William Pearson for his outstanding performance in " Labor's Big Picture " where he appears in a supportive role as an extraordinary
Labor leader with an unflinching gaze & an uncanny intelligence.

FYI: A Letter to the editor in the "Washington Post"

Wednesday, March 15, 2006; Page A18

While I agree with Gordon C. Morse on many issues, I disagree with his suggestion that Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine will "never lack enthusiastic labor support" since the House of Delegates failed to confirm Daniel G. LeBlanc as commonwealth secretary ["Delegates Defer Deference," Close to Home, March 12].
As a union lawyer, I am appalled that even after Mr. Kaine's choice was rejected, he felt the need to placate House Republicans by gratuitously stating that he continues to "strongly support" Virginia's "right to work" law.
Those of us in the labor movement from Virginia have given Tim Kaine a lot of financial support over the years and have generally asked for little in return. For him to publicly proclaim that he strongly supports a law designed to keep unions weak is unsettling.
MATT HARRIS
Alexandria

Jan, I've been following your work at UVA for a while now and can't say enough about your efforts. About a year ago I was at a fundraiser that Gov. Warner attended. Knowing that the state has and continues to violate the ILO by not permitting its employees to engage in collective bargaining a friend (who is a mutual friend of yours and mine) asked Warner why he wouldn't issue an executive order allowing public employees the right to collective bargaing - by Warner's response you would have thought we'd disparaged his mother. Sadly, Kaine may be even worse for working people because he is so two-faced.
With this said, you shouldn't need Kaine as much as Kaine needs you. He will never understand the dynamics of this relationship until we (labor) show him that we are serious in our demands. The other day someone asked me why the National Right to Work jerks only give to VA Republicans and not Democrats and I responded that who'd ever pay for what you can get for free?
There are numerous things we can do in Virginia. We can tell our labor leaders to lead more and spend less time at political dinners down in Richmond. However, until we rise up and are not afraid to challenge both our labor leaders and Dem. politicians, nothing will ever change. Be strong!