It’s not an easy time working for the AFL-CIO. You have to feel a lot of compassion for people who want to fight for working people–yet find themselves in an extremely tough situation, not made easier by some of the ways they are being treated.

In these very days, the Federation’s staff is now seeing the reality of how the previously-announced layoffs will be implemented, as they go through the process of applying and interviewing for the “newly-created” positions at the Federation.

To recap, the layoffs were coupled with the creation of entire new job categories for the remaining jobs, requiring virtually all field and program staff to reapply for jobs as if they were new recruits.

When this whole thing went down, I thought it smelled rotten: this is what corporate management does when it wants to get rid of people and grab control; it calls for a “reorganization” that forces people to scramble to keep their jobs no matter how loyal, how long or even how well they’ve done their jobs. As a recent Newspaper Guild bulletin proclaimed, we “are very concerned that management has used the interview process as a fishing expedition to deny jobs to the most senior qualified job applicants.”

The level of trust between the staff and management is at rock-bottom. As the bulletin says, “we do not believe that management has met the basic threshold of treating job applicants with dignity and respect.” The Guild is taking a series of actions to protect staff from this arbitrary weeding-out. In addition to on-the-ground actions showing solidarity among staff, the Guild has just issued to the Federation’s management a Bill of Rights (see below) that calls for basic fairness as this process moves forward. I think a lot of this is aimed at getting the attention of John Sweeney, with whom the Guild is seeking a meeting.

I know, plenty of people out there think that the bureaucracy is bloated with people who can’t do their jobs. I ask: would that be your position if you were watching workers at some other place struggling to keep their jobs? Regardless of where you stand on the necessity or purpose of the
past layoffs or anything coming down the road, it’s clear that this is not the way to handle people.

It can’t be done bluntly or lacking in compassion, which will just offend and alienate dedicated staffers. I get the sense that people feel jerked around and not told the truth by upper management, particularly Bob Welsh, the Federation’s chief of staff. It’s safe to say, though, that there
will be more blood on the floor if the Federation’s management doesn’t adjust its path.

It strikes me as quite sad that this Bill of Rights would have to be issued in the House of Labor. I wonder if all those delegates, who stood on the convention floor less than two weeks ago proclaiming their pride in the principles and the mission of the House of Labor, would feel comfortable knowing how their own workers are faring?

========================================

Interview
Bill of Rights

We, as CWA-TNG union members and as current employees of the house of labor hereby demand the following rights for the interview process:

1. RESPECT AND DIGNITY: that all interviewees be treated with respect and dignity;

2. SENIORITY: that in accordance with the contract, the most senior employee who meets the minimum job qualifications will be awarded the position. The interview process should not be used to circumvent this obligation;

3. CONSISTENT STANDARDS: that all interviewees for a specific position be held to the same standards and be subject to the same requirements for proving their qualifications;

4. RELEVANT QUESTIONING: that all interviewees be asked only questions that are relevant to the job for which they have applied and the job’s qualifications;

5. UNION REPRESENTATION: that all interviewees have the right to union representation during their interviews;

6. REASONABLE REQUESTS: that additional requests for evidence proving an interviewee’s qualification be reasonable both in terms of the time frame given for responding to the request and for the actual content of the request;

7. PAST PRACTICE FOR INTERVIEWING: that the interview process and requirements for interviewees be no more burdensome than the process and requirements for interviewing internal applicants for open positions.