A couple of days ago, this message arrived, commenting on my dispatches from Las Vegas. It’s from Greg Junemann, President of the International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers, which has 75,000 members. In his message, his reference to the “five unions” is to the rebel group that has united around a set of principles for change at the AFL-CIO:

If the leaders of the five unions were as openly communicative with the other unions as they are with the media, this whole affair might look less like a power play by the five. The members of my union don’t want to be absorbed into the mega-union scheme. Unlike the fashion by which some other unions operate, the members of IFPTE are in charge of their union, and the elected national leaders serve the members. The mega-union concept aims to direct all authority to the DC-based national union leaders, and this makes the concept quite unattractive to them. The press seems to want to run this story as reform vs. status quo, but this is incomplete. Many labor national leaders desperately want responsible, strategic and continuous reform, and so do our members. There is a great deal more to this story than Stern et al, vs. Sweeney et al. In fact, many of the people with whom I speak are tremendously frustrated with the two camps. For my part, I’m still seeking the champion of the third option.

I’m not sure what the third option is and I’m predisposed to be leery of “third way” pleas (witness the disaster we’ve lived thanks to Bill Clinton, and what the Brits have to tolerate with Tony Blair). But, certainly, we should welcome into the debate any ideas that will bring real change to the labor movement.