Numbers Don't Lie II

    I keep thinking, as I read the AFL-CIO confidential budget, that it may be the only reason a deal is still possible that avoids one or more unions leaving the Federation, but would include John Sweeney agreeing to step aside and not run for re-election and acceptance of some of the major structural changes being pushed by the Change To Win coalition. Follow my bizarre logic here and, admittedly, it's highly speculative...

    This proposed budget --which includes the already-announced 25 percent staff reduction and cuts in other parts of the Federation's operations--assumes a total income of about $126 million in 2005-2006. Now, $95 million of that comes from per capita dues (the other big chunk comes from the $26 million in credit card royalties from the Member Privilege program).

     But, that per capita tax income assumption means every Executive Council member has to ignore what's happening in the real world. SEIU is gone from the Federation--perhaps even if Sweeney steps down. That's $9-10 million less in per capita tax income (by the way, for real labor geeks, affiliates pay 61 cents per member to the Federation, which includes an 8 cent special assessment...at least, on the membership they report to the Federation...it's not uncommon for affiliates to, how shall I say it, be less than forthcoming about their total membership numbers when it comes to paying per caps).

    If you take the five unions that make up the Change To Win coalition (SEIU, Laborers, UNITE-HERE, Teamsters and UFCW), they pay about $31 million to the Fed--give or take, about one-third of the per cap income.

    If you're one of a group of unions that doesn't have a steadfast allegiance for either side and you think the debate has gone off the deep-end (take the American Federation of Teachers, for example) or you're a union that has sympathy for what the Coalition is trying to do but you have no stomach for tossing Sweeney over the side, it has to be a come-to-Jesus moment when you look at the budget and say, "shit, if these guys walk, forget the member mobilization political program (in for $27.7 million), forget the rebates some of us are counting on (a $15 million hunk), we might not be able to pay the electric bill."

    And I'm only dealing here with the permanent capita tax of 53 cents...wait until I examine the special assessment tax of 8 cents here today or tomorrow.

    Wouldn't it be interesting if one or more affiliates asked Bob Welsh (Sweeney's executive assistant and chief of staff) to prepare an alternative "what if" budget for the upcoming Executive Council meeting to show the Council how the Federation would function without the income from the Coalition unions--or, heck, just subtracting SEIU's contribution?

Comments

[Carl]

Come on Jonathan, you've never held out on us before. Post the budget. And on the case of political member mobilization, do you think that would fall under the CTW's offer to keep paying into the AFL's political program? Also, any word on compromise as far as letting the unions that withdraw maintain membership in state and county councils? Won't these bodies be severely underfunded as well if they are not allowed to maintain membership? And finally, please tell me that someone is working on Sweeney to have him fall on his sword to stop this whole thing from going down like this - crippling the union bodies that have a more broad focus - whatever one thinks of the success of the political program - seems counter-productive.

At least in Seattle we have a big stake in the King County Labor Council being effective - Taking SEIU and Unite's $$$ away would be horrible. Nationally we may be wasting money, but there are a lot of important local races that we need union sympathizers to win. For instance the Seattle Port Commission elections are coming up, and the choice is between developing waterfront property as condos for yuppies or keeping it as economic (and union labored) land. Making sure that the right people are elected to this rather obscure post is the focus of the KCLC, and it stands to reason that they are better equipped to make that happen than any one union.

Cheers,

Carl

[Tasini]

Hey, Carl: I would post it if i had an electronic copy but it's a 26 page document that I got in a non-electronic form. If I can get time to scan it, I will. In the meantime, I get to tease you'all with the suspense.

As for the other questions, remember, the Coalition To Win is not the same thing as disaffiliation--yet. But, we'll just have to see how the organizational relationships play out if, and when, one or more affiliates leave the AFL-CIO. SEIU has been pretty explicit that it wants to keep all lines of communications and activity open--which I assume would mean paying part of the freight--if it leaves.

On Sweeney, we'll see.