I’m intrigued enough by the Solidarity Charters question to give it one more ride here, though I might also come back with some reactions from the CLC folks themselves. After reading the guidelines in John Sweeney’s letter to the Executive Council, I wonder (along with some intelligent commenters yesterday) how doable these charters really are. Certainly, the Change To Win coalition is less than thrilled with the proposal.
A point to make clear: I’ve said from the outset that I’m all for everyone figuring out how to work together and I think it’s a very bad idea to waste money, on either side, raiding each other. Generally speaking, I don’t think much good comes from raiding–and, as my colleague Kate Bronfenbrenner points out, sometimes the employer wins the “no union” option when two rival unions split votes in a representation election. Bad.
Maybe it’s my tunnel vision but I always start with “follow the money” questions. You can solve all the other issues (political coordination, organizing projects) without all this drama and rhetoric about “free-riders.” What’s driving this formula is dollars and cents, my friends.
The national AFL-CIO is in dire straights; its financial situation is pretty grim because it has to plug a hole of $25-$27 million created by the Big Three disaffliations (SEIU, UFCW and Teamsters). And that’s just the start–when the Laborers and UNITE HERE leave prior to the September 27th Change To Win coalition convention, that will be another $5 million hole to fill. Good staff people at the Federation (and there are many) are looking to jump ship. And I hear there are other unions beginning to murmur about leaving the Federation, maybe not right away, maybe they wait to see if the new Federation has wings but it’s fairly likely if the newbies show some results quickly.
The CLCs and State Feds also have money problems. The Washington State State Fed laid off 6 of its 14 people, for example. These folks were screaming: either figure out a way to help us financially or else there were going to be a bunch of us willfully ignoring the edict to kick out locals from the disaffiliated locals, requiring the national AFL-CIO to spend a whole lot of energy acting as cops. “We are all going to be in violation and at some point that won’t fly,” says one CLC leader.
So, now comes the Solidarity Charter idea which says, sure, you’all can stay–just pay your dues plus a 10 percent “solidarity bonus” (I would have just avoided the use of “solidarity” and just called it what it is: a service fee) to “help offset the cost of services and mobilization systems provided by the national AFL-CIO…”
By the way, it’s kind of interesting where that 10 percent is headed–into the fund that was established by the extra 4 cents hike in the per capita. The way this fund was played at the convention was that it was all about the CLCs and State Feds. But, really, when you look more closely at the wording, the fund (now being called a “Solidarity Fund”) was also set up to “combat raids by disaffiliating unions, and to assist trade and industrial departments.” So, the convention created a huge funding apparatus that could finance a bunch of different line items in the national AFL-CIO budget. Maybe that’s a fine thing to do. I have no opinion there…but it seems to me an important factor behind the “solidarity charters.”
Aside from money, there really is no barrier to the disaffiliated unions and the AFL-CIO working together on political operations and organizing campaigns. You just, well, have to want to do it. Put together some coordinating meetings, draw up the division of labor and figure out who funds what…and it’s done.
The thrust of the “solidarity charters” is to, in fact, not accept the disaffiliations. When I mean accept, I mean respect that it’s done and move on. Hence the passages that seem, in contract terms, dead on arrival: requiring the disaffiliated locals who stay in the local bodies to abide by decisions of the AFL-CIO on raiding and jurisdiction–yet denying them any say in how those decisions are made (the charter says members of disaffiliated locals cannot run for office or participate in the Federation’s national conventions).
And requiring any current officers of local bodies, who belong to disaffiliated unions and want to continue to serve as officers of CLCs or state Feds, to publicly argue inside his or her union in favor of reaffiliating to the AFL-CIO. Is this a new loyalty oath? It seems odd, unncessary and certain to be rejected.
The problem, it seems to me, is that the Federation is still reeling from the disaffiliations, financially and emotionally, while the disaffiliated unions and the Change To Win coalition are over it. The coalition is deep into its planning for its convention and large-scale organizing campaigns, while the Federation is trying to control the terrain as if it is the only “House of Labor.” For everyone’s sake, it’s important to just adjust to the reality and accept that the AFL-CIO is **A** player within the labor movement but it is not **THE** labor movement. I think we’re not there yet.
If I might throw in here a comment posted by Tom Lewandoski, my friend from the great city of Fort Wayne (where I spent many a day sometime back) who I disappointed by not dragging my tired ass from the AFL-CIO convention to his inspiring Cultures of Solidarity gathering: “Our labor day picnic is an annual ecumenical event in which unions not affiliated regionally such as UAW or those nationally excommunicated such as the UTU join with affiliated locals to throw money and volunteers into the kitty for a chili, hot dog, beer, kid rides kind of picnic. Before the AFL-CIO convention donations and interest for the picnic were at an all time low. We considered canceling it for lack of funds and interest. Before we could issue the great panic call but after the ship wreck at Navy Pier, money started coming in and now we have more donations than we have ever had.”
One thing I’ve learned from this whole thing is this: if you’re looking for union comrades to underwrite your vacation, maybe some new threads or set of wheels, you’re guaranteed to get a large windfall if you just appeal to them to give to a “Solidarity Fund.” I want a ten percent cut for the tip.
