Working Life's ongoing special section devoted to holding the Cafta Fifteen accountable.
Buy the Wal-Mart documentary for $12.95
« On Welfare "Reform" | Main | Machinists Versus UAW? »
March 21, 2006
Make Work Pay
Okay, so I'm all for the idea of making work pay. That's the slogan of the Change To Win campaign unveiled in Las Vegas yesterday. Since I couldn't get there, I'm going to piece this together over the next few days.
The press statement of CTW says this:
The seven-union Change to Win federation today unveiled its new campaign to unite millions of workers across the country in an effort to raise living standards and improve the quality of life for American workers. With 2,000 organizers meeting in Las Vegas for the federation’s first organizing convention, Change to Win leaders announced that the Make Work Pay! campaign will launch on the week of April 24 with actions targeting major industries in more than 35 cities.
“The Make Work Pay! campaign is about ensuring that millions of taxpayers who are working harder and longer with less to show for it are able to be part of the American middle class,” said Anna Burger, Chair of Change to Win.” She added “We are fighting so that individuals who work hard can earn paychecks that actually support families; receive affordable health care, have the chance to give their children a better life and count on a secure retirement.
“We are going to reach out to those workers who are not yet organized and to the members of the public that understand and support the notion that this country can’t exist without a vibrant middle class,” Burger said. “This campaign will empower the millions of workers to help them effect real change to make work pay.”
Seems like this is kind of a living wage campaign under a union banner. No objection to the idea ,though, personally, I wonder why, if the goal is to try to reach out to millions of unorganized workers, the big campaign isn't simply Medicare For All? Wouldn't an audience of 45 million uninsured Americans be about as big as you'd hope to get? Wouldn't mass action in 35 cities, shutting down streets, over health insurance galvanize a ton of people?
The question is: how is this week of April 24th going to be done? Is it rallies, with follow through, or just rallies that make everyone feel good and just--but that don't lead anywhere? Obviously, I'm hopeful that, with the talent CTW has pulled together and the emphasis on a streamlined organization focused on organizing, we'll see something new and dymanic. But...the jury is still out.
But, it is clear that this is one measuring stick to begin evaluating what CTW will do that's different than the AFL-CIO--either in strategy and/or results.
March 21, 2006 in Inside Labor | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/4498994
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Make Work Pay:
» Best mp3 portals from MP3 Portals - Search for Music
Free MP3 music downloads from many music websites and portals... [Read More]
Tracked on Apr 27, 2006 2:27:58 PM
Comments
I agree that Medicare for All would be a great campaign. Incidentally, I also appreciate your using "Medicare for All" rather than "Single Payer" as the name/slogan. My guess is that they're worried about an anti campaign pitting those who already have health insurance against those who don't. That's pretty much what happened in California back in 1994. Now, I think it's just something you have to deal with, and you have to challenge people to think harder and more clearly about the issue of health care, and to focus on the real enemy, the folks who profit off of others' sickness and misfortune. But we really can't be shocked if CtW shrinks from confronting unions in their own ranks who might be more concerned about their own Taft-Hartley funds than about social justice, or confronting upper-middle-class folks who think they're doing okay with the health insurance status quo, or confronting seniors who think the plan would threaten Medicare (that's one reason to call it "Medicare for All" -- keeps seniors from misunderstanding and opposing). Minimum wage is easier to explain, harder to attack -- safer, all in all. I'm not shocked that CtW wants to play it that way.
Posted by: bigfall | Mar 21, 2006 10:19:44 AM
The president of my union, Seiu Local 5000 (also known as NAGE), Dave Holway, surely has a job that pays. The union pays him $240,000/year; and his horsebreeding job pays him another 100K. Some of us are trying to clean up our union. You can read about us at: www.nagemembers.blogspot.com
On 3/30/06 Holway stands trial in DC for retatiating against union members in DC. This comes on the heals of $2.3 million verdict against NAGE for retaliating against a nage member in lowell mass. What a mess. Why all this is happening our union president is trying to hoard even more money by pushing slot machines at the tracks which will helpf his horse breeding side business.
Posted by: Matt | Mar 21, 2006 12:15:45 PM
to be charitable, perhaps a more strategic consideration is that single payer will only come about in this country once the fact of its competitive benefits gets through business' ideological skull. an effective national living wage campaign may start to create enough of a wedge in the business world where our side can begin to assemble a coaltion powerful enough to tip the scales.
Posted by: alex | Mar 21, 2006 5:44:08 PM
If the Change to Win coalition cares so much about organizing all the Americans that do not have a union, then why did Teamsters local 714 just raid AFSCME's court clerks in chicago... Why are they going After other AFSCME locals. Why did SEIU try to raid 60,000 homecare providers from AFSCME a few months ago? THe CTW coalition is about politics and money....
Posted by: David | Mar 21, 2006 9:57:32 PM
Just to get it straight - you think that Medicare For All would be better than the living wage campaign? I'm not sure if I see one as better than the other.
I think, although I could be wrong, that there is more of a real network for the wage stuff already put together and moving. There are campaigns to raise the minimum wage going on in several states, and a whole living wage movement on the ground in cities across the country.
I just have not seen the same constituencies starting to come together and really mobilize on a local level in specific campaigns around universal health care. Not to say that C2W shouldn't start doing this, but maybe they wanted to start off with something where there was more of an infrastructure already in place.
Posted by: Brennan Griffin | Mar 21, 2006 10:24:16 PM
Re: the comment about Teamsters and AFSCME--One worker's "raid" is another's liberation--and opportunity to build and participate in an effective union that holds staff and officers accountable. AFSCME units often are "raided" because workers in these units, professional and non-professioonal, are poorly represented. Canadian unions accept the possibility of principled competition from other organizations and, frankly, they seem to be doing a better job of building density than we are here in the states. It's not simply about the difference in the law.
Posted by: Big Jim | Mar 22, 2006 7:27:34 AM
I do think the strategy to begin a national campaign aimed at workers is a good thing; irrespective of the agenda. The significance of creating a movement cannot be lost on arguing over which issue...it is far more important on what they accomplish.
Big Jim's point on health care and unions failing to get behind it is a concern, although every contract negotiations is bogged down with exploding costs and imploding trust funds. I think this time around union leaders will be far more pliable.
The ultimate end game would be for labor to develope a platform of workers rights, rather than a single issue. Seems to me a far better approach to create an agenda that has targeted several key items important to workers and then broadcast them as the beginnings of a movement or even a third political party...though i wouldn't sell it as a labor party as such.
The other thing regarding raids is this idea that unions own certain workers is tiring to me. While raiding has been considered a bad thing; crappy representation and overpaid union bureaucrats doing dickshit for their members hasn't worked very well either. Perhaps it is time to take the gloves off and let them have at it.
Any efforts to build a movement, create energy within workers cannot and will not happen as long as the leadership continue using their traditional spin doctored approach. Workers want to see honesty, openess and inclusion in the process rather than this tired old top down version that got us into the mess we are in today
The biggest thing that could come out of Las Vegas is if the boys finally admitted they need to change this lame excuse they call organized (ya gotta chuckle over that one) labor. More cosmetic surgery just won't cut it: If you want to change to win, then you'd better really change how you operate. Getting low wage workers to join just so guys with huge salaries and wonderful benefits can continue their lavish lifestyle hardly a movment makes.
Posted by: Bill Pearson | Mar 22, 2006 8:04:02 AM
My only point about Medicare For All is that you have, I think, a much broader network of allies and constituencies outside of labor that would jump on a nationwide campaign around health insurance--including some allies in business who are being killed by health care costs. If CTW can jump-start that and win it (entirely doable, I think) it sets a very strong foundation for the campaign on living standards. But, to me it's a slight difference of emphasis, not a huge departure, if the mobilization is sound.
Posted by: Tasini | Mar 22, 2006 8:30:27 AM
Regarding just the Canadian reference-- unfortunately, union density in Canda has been dropping like a stone. Of course, they are dropping from a much greater height than the U.S. labor movement...
Posted by: Ragnar Lodbrok | Mar 22, 2006 10:23:58 AM
Regarding just the Canadian reference-- unfortunately, union density in Canda has been dropping like a stone. Of course, they are dropping from a much greater height than the U.S. labor movement...
Posted by: Ragnar Lodbrok | Mar 22, 2006 10:25:08 AM
Re: the teamsters and AFSCME thing.... Saying that AFSCME represents workers poorly is just a sorry excuse for coroporate-unionism where unions go after the easiest targets. Comparing Canadian competition amongst unions to present day "RAIDS" (not liberation) is like comparing apples to oranges........
Its alot easier to organize workers who already have unions. These raids are hardly liberating since they are primarily the result of greed ( read about Hogan and 714)
Posted by: David | Mar 22, 2006 5:20:41 PM
As to why they went for "living wage" rather than "Medicare for all," they probably polled. Living wage and especially a higher minimum wage poll incredibly well among folks in the voting class -- they can't imagine living on what low wage workers are paid, yet they are not the employers either.
Health care reform in any form creates more friction between mixed interests.
Posted by: janinsanfran | Mar 22, 2006 9:54:22 PM
Jon, you should know this. CTW couldn't get the Laborers' and Carpenters' Unions on board for sensible health care reform if the CTW wanted to. The Building Trades lobbies like they're part of the insurance industry on health care. They're Taft-Hartley plans served them well in years past, and none of them seems to have come to grips with the fact that its time to change strategies and go with national health care. Maybe another decade of being under cut by non-union contractors that offer no insurance will convince them that their plans are a liability, not an asset.
Posted by: none | Mar 23, 2006 6:23:45 AM
National Health Care, Single Payer Health Care, Socialized Medicine, or Medicare for All, whatever you prefer to call it, the Physicians For A National Health Program, have a great web site and currently have their Spring 2006 Newsletter available for download. Anybody interested in the debate should visit this site and review the newsletter.
http://www.pnhp.org/
John Foster
GCC/IBT Local 4C
Posted by: John Foster | Mar 23, 2006 9:55:17 PM
It's not so much a campaign about living wage as it is an umbrella for all the Change to Win organizing campaigns. The ones that were hyped at the CtW conference this week were the UNITE HERE! Hotel Workers' Rising, the Teamsters' Port Drivers Campaign, the SEIU/IBT Driving Up Standards at First Group (private sector school bus company), UFCW's Justice on the Line at Smithfield Campaign, and various Wal-Mart-related organizing efforts.
Posted by: belleunion | Mar 23, 2006 11:39:28 PM
I disagree that healthcare reform should have been the main emphasis at the CTW convention, though I agree it is a big issue for millions of working Americans. By the way, as one who attended the convention, I can tell you that healthcare reform was talked about quite a bit. As an organizer, I work with a group of Personal Assistants (Homecare workers) who receive only $7.71 an hour, and nothing else--no insurance, no pension, no nothing. And it has been 8 years since their last pay raise. As the workers have organized their union and as they have talked about their priorities, the number one thing for them is wages. While many are without insurance (others get it through medicaid, second jobs, and spouses), without a pay raise, they simple can't make ends meet. I suspect for many low-wage service workers, whether they be in hotels, restaurants, retail, food processing, transportation, healthcare, building services (the jurisdictions covered by CTW unions)--raising wages is the top priority. You definitely need health insurance when you are sick, but you definitely need a living wage all of the time. Again, it is not that I disagree that healthcare reform is a huge need for many, raising pay is a fundamental issue for millions of service workers. And it needs to be a rallying cry for the labor movement, both in CTW and outside it.
Posted by: Will | Mar 24, 2006 4:31:37 PM
Wasn't April supposed to be the month that the CTW was going to have a bunch of actions in support of its "make work pay" campaign? I understand that the immigration rallies have kept everyone busy, but the CTW is quickly losing any momentum it might have had.
Posted by: None | Apr 10, 2006 6:41:28 PM
