Andy Stern On Solidarity Charters

    Andy Stern has sent a letter to SEIU locals reacting to the recent Solidarity Charters proposal from the AFL-CIO. Here it 'tis:

August 17, 2005
TO: All Local Unions
FR: Andy Stern
RE: Labor Unity at Local and State Level and in Constituency Groups

The seven major unions with 6 million members that formed the Change to Win Coalition have begun discussions about the exciting opportunities that our new unity makes possible.  We are preparing for our founding convention on September 27, 2005 and working together on strategies to unite millions more workers with us so we all have the strength to change workers’ lives.  

At the same time, we continue to encourage our locals to maintain past affiliations with central labor councils, state labor federations, and constituency groups and to continue to pay per capita as in the past to the labor councils and state feds unless those payments are rejected.  

The national AFL-CIO leadership recently told the news media that they may be prepared to accept continuing local and state unity.  At this point, however, that unity would be conditioned on proposed rules that are unworkable and divisive.  

For example, Change to Win local unions would be subject to:

•        A ban on participation in local and state leadership.
•        A requirement to be “bound by whatever actions or decisions of the [national] Federation that are binding on all affiliated local unions.”
•        A requirement that even to fill out a current term in elected office in a council, an individual from a Change to Win union must publicly oppose their own union’s democratically determined decision regarding national affiliation.
•        Discriminatory fees, including a 10 percent surcharge.
•        A provision that Change to Win locals’ participation in local or state councils expires at the end of next year, and that in the meantime they could not withdraw from the local council or state federation for any reason.  

Conditions like these are obviously unacceptable, but we remain open to discussions with the AFL-CIO regarding unity and partnership at the local and state level. We have reached out to meet with AFL-CIO President John Sweeney to discuss how the Change to Win Coalition and the AFL-CIO can work together.  

We hope this situation can be resolved to maintain the unity that is the goal of the Change to Win Coalition and all concerned at the local and state level. One way or the other, we will find a way to coordinate our work as real partners at the local and state levels, both among our unions and with our sisters and brothers in AFL-CIO affiliates.  

Now that the debate about national direction is over and behind us, it is time to pursue the strategy that we believe will unite millions more workers in each industry and rebuild the strength of working people in America. In doing so, we will work with all allies, both in and out of the AFL-CIO, who share our goals and principles.  

Comments

[TruthSquad]

Andy Stern is a big threat to workers. He wouldn't know solidarity if it hit him in the face.
Right Now SEIU is spending millions of dollars in hard earned dues money raiding AFSCME members in California.

Although many folks may know that SEIU is raiding existing AFSCME members in California- The news is that they are very un succesful convincing workers to join with them.

A recent contract vote -that would give workers a raise and protect health benenfits was passed by over 90%.
SEIU workerd hard to defeat this- but they were defeated badly. Even after sending organizers and flyers to thousands of doors and promising 2$ an hour raises- they could barely get 100 votes of the 9,000 person unit. Those doors were slammed shut. Workers are not stupid. Stop wasting our money.

Somebody please call Andy and tell him to focus on the un organized- so the unions he is raiding can do the same.

[AFSCME? Truth?]

AFSCME members and workers in California are much more than "not stupid". They are very smart. They certainly know when they are being let down by AFSCME in many of their bargaining units.

In Stanislaus County AFSCME represents close to 3,000 county employees while SEIU represents about 800 county employees. AFSCME's approach to contract bargaining in the last several months was to extend their contract with no wage increase and a "a me too" clause in the event that the smaller SEIU bargining unit got a raise

On July 19, in the face of a bogus contract offer 200 SEIU members, marched through downtown Modesto in triple digit heat where they rallied outside the Board of Supervisors meeting and sent a delegation from the bargaining team to address the board.

Unbeknownst to SEIU members a delegation of AFSCME members were at the same board meeting where they expressed outrage to Stanislaus County Supervisors at having been sold out by their AFSCME representative who acted unilaterly and without any consultation with the rank and file when she agreed to no money on a contract extension.

The AFSCME members were told by the board that the situation they described was an internal union manner and they were in no position to intervene.

This is just one of many example of AFSCME's organizational failings in California that put all public sector employees within AFSCME's blast zone at risk.

If AFSCME had its act togther there wouldn't be members looking for effective representation else where.

An injury to one is an injury to all and when AFSCME injures its own membership it injures us all.

[Not an AFSCME Staffer]

Can we just focus on what Stern said in his letter, and what kind of impact it will have on how non-affiliated unions will or can continue to work together with AFL unions?

Personally, I think that if Sweeney were to level an extra tax on disaffiliated CtW unions who wanted to continue to remain members of CLCs, State Feds or constituency groups, he should leave the money at the local level, instead of filtering it back to the internationals. If CtW locals are committed to building stronger alliances at the local levels, it seems to me that they shouldn't have a problem paying slightly more to build local movements. And I think that it's not totally fair, but once you formally leave the umbrella body, you don't get much of a say in setting the rules of the game. It particularly stings because in some areas, CLC political machines are built on the backs of SEIU locals. But them's the breaks.

Then again, I doubt that either the disaffiliated CtW internationals or the AFL is seriously interested in figuring out a way to work together cohesively at the local level, in most places. All of these actions and reactions seem designed to provoke anger from their "opponents" or to draw more unions to their side. The whole sorry mess reminds me of poker players who keep upping the ante in an attempt to win, and no one knows who is calling who's bluff. Or worse, it reminds me of a giant game of chicken.

To steal from a very famous poor man, "Why can't we all just get along?"

[generalstrike]

Spoken like a real labor leader.....who has increasingly less control over the people he is suppose to represent.
Andy, anybody who has had any dealings with SEIU over the last nine years knows that despite the rhetoric, postering and hyperbole, your leadership is a mile wide and an inch deep.
Here is Stern, issueing a dictum on the immediate and future relations between SEIU and the AFL and what does he do? Talk out of both sides of his mouth.
The only reason the local leadership puts up with him is because they want a piece of the organizing money-those that don't know they are outnumbered.
Real leadership is about giving direction and meaning to the mission. However, for an increasingly marginilized Stern, his existance is wrapped around egomania and a series of personal traumatic events.
Now, STERNTOWN residents justify raiding as one part of a grand mission and they can safely legitimize any of their actions with these vague and useless "statements' issued by the false prophet hiimself.

Solidarity

[krista]

Andy Stern and others in CtW have at least taken SOME action. To those of you that can only find room to criticize, come up with another plan. And, channel your energy toward implementating what your version of a good idea is to: restore faith in the labor movement, stop raids, focus on rank and file member needs, etc.

Otherwise, give us a break with the name calling.

[look who's talking]

You ctw people are such hypocrites. Let me rephrase that so that i don't get accused of name-calling. Your views are full of inconsistencies and have no basis in reality. Forget about raids for a minute. (Just go back to the So Cal situation where SEIU just got a good ass whippin' when it tried to raid AFSCME, right after Andy issued his "no raid" pledge.) Look at the diversity issue. At the IBT, there is one African American, one woman, and no Latinos among the 24 voting members of the General Executive Board. Wow. How about UFCW? Not much better. The Laborers. Please. And SEIU can parade Anna Burger all it wants, but, I'm sorry, having a nasty woman as your spokesperson doesn't give strengthen your diversity credentials. The point is that instead of getting their own houses in order, the ctw unions are just pointing fingers. And that's what's so rotten about this whole thing.

[AFSCME? Truth?]

More AFSCME truths from California.

In late spring of 2002 an independent public sector employee association, Local 1, launched a raid on an AFSCME Local in Contra Costa County.

Contra Costa County like many counties in California have more than one union representing county workers. Contra Costa's different unions had formed a coalition to better represent workers in a united front with the boss.

In 2002 Local 1 broke the coalition and began a raid on the AFSCME Local. SEIU responded without hesitation to defend its sister AFL union and protect the interests of all county workers by reamining united in the midst of bargaining.

The SEIU Local mobilized half a dozen organizers, communications staff and administrators (pulling them off other assignments or in most cases asking them to do double duty) to fight back Local 1's efforts to raid the AFSCME Local.

The AFSCME Local's response was to proceed in a "business as usual" mode bringing no new resources to bear.

In the month that SEIU staff were on the ground the most difficult interaction with workers was trying to respond to AFSCME members who kept encountering the SEIU presence and seeing no presence of their own AFSCME union frequently asked how they could become an SEIU Local.

Local 1's raid on AFSCME was successfully defended against thanks to the work of SEIU and despite AFSCME ineffectiveness.

AFSCME's problems in California are of their own making. All the misdirection in the world won't change facts on the ground for AFSCME's members.

AFSCME's failures in California have harmful consequences for all of us.

[Krista]

Look who's talking - it goes without saying that you have every right to your view of things. But, none of it seems the least bit constructive. You're the same one that gives out your name as doubt it, oh please, etc. Do you ever focus or give thought to what good may come of the CtW folks?

As for Anna Burger, I've never met her, but she sure gets my vote for having some "moxie". Want to focus on a nasty spokesperson? Let's match her up with Denise Mitchell at 16th Street and see who wins that one.

[Roscoe Rich]

Looks like the Unite to Win refugees are here. And we'd been having such a civil discussion. Ho-hum.

The truth is neither SEIU nor AFSCME is perfect and each has flaws in leadership. You think Andy has an ego? Try Mcentee. Every union has those units that everyone wishes they could hide in the attic under a stack of old magazines. SEIU has L. 79 and AFSCME has their correctional unit in Pennsylvania. On the other hand both uniosn have amazing and effective locals. My point is we should quit the "my dad can beat up your dad" stuff and get on with real debate.

What is your specific plan? And your answer cannot include soemthing about Andy Stern being an undead vampire.

For my money the CTW stuff is far from perfect. I have trouble stomaching being anywhere near agreement with Hoffa. However, having read their materials, I think they've got a positive direction for the labor movement.

[Peter]

This response should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with this debate. What inquiring minds really want to know is what's coming out of this CtW founding convention nest month? A bold roll-out of an exciting new multi-union campaign or more scripted theatrics? CtW is capable of both - though I imagine we're all hoping for the former.

[LaborVet]

I wish SEIU and AFSCME would go start a joint website where their staff could have their own private mud fight without ruining Brother Tasini's substantive discussion board. Hey y'all, your headquarters buildings are only a few blocks from each other. Why don't you meet in an alley somewhere in downtown DC and have it out privately, without the rest of us having to witness?

Now about Stern's letter, which, as you recall, was the thread that Tasini started, one point that I must assume is not lost on the Change to Win group but does appear to be lost on the AFL-CIO is that there is no particular reason that the Change group has to keep trying to maintain membership in the AFL-CIO's CLCs.

Nationally the Change group is already 2/3 the size of the AFL-CIO group, and in many major Central Labor Councils the Change unions are a majority. And those proportions will shift even more if more Change unions disaffiliate.

So instead of trying to accomodate to the AFL-CIO's new rules that were designed to be rejected, wouldn't it seem logical that at some point the Change unions would say they are starting new local and state coalitions and the AFL-CIO local unions are welcome to participate without the vindictive zingers that the AFL-CIO put in its new rules?

The AFL-CIO continues to act as though it can dictate and not negotiate. But by the time all the disaffiliations are finished, the two federations are going to be roughly the same size, and in many areas the AFL-CIO will actually be the smaller one.

So there will be nothing stopping the Change group from setting up truly collaborative local and state councils without punitive extra fees, loyalty tests, requirements to follow rules that have nothing to do with local and state collaboration, and all the other b.s. the AFL-CIO loaded up their edict with.

[More Truth From CA]

How is it more relevant to discuss a postion paper from Andy Stern then discussing what is actually occuring in the labor movement. The rhetoric of CTW is nice, but lets discuss what is actually happening.
Not only is SEIU wasting its members money, it is forcing AFSCME to spend millions of dollars as well.

This is outrageous and relevant.

[NathanHJ]

Well, Truth, the actual vagaries of day-to-day organizing and/or raiding are relevant to the future of labor. I am totally in agreement. But I would also say that back and forth between AFL and CTW is also relevant especially as it concerns the evolving relationship with the CLC's.

This topic is ostensibly about that.

If you and others want to blast each other for the specific tactical steps that various unions in the labor "movement" are taking, then why don't you lobby JT for some space to do that, or start your own "I Hate SEIU - I Hate AFSCME" site where you guys can hash it all out, internet-ninja-style.

I stopped posting on the Unite To Win blog because it was just flame wars regarding union dirty laundry. I love this site because it offers an opportunity to intelligently discuss issues and strategies for all of organized labor, not just people with an ax to grind over how much Andy Stern in the devil and SEIU is the death of labor.

I'd like to keep it as such, rather than a collection of flame wars following each of JT's postings.

[Jimmy King]

The future of labor is competition. Competitive unions will weed out those that do not perform and reward those that can make it happen. For too long union members have had to suffer because they were held hostage by some ineffective local supportedy by an affiliation with an AFL-CIO international's "No Raid" clause. Let's stop all of this sorry discussion about raiding and finally realize that competition is good in the labor movement, just as it is EVERYWHERE else. Union members pay the dues and generally speaking (over the last half decade) leadership has not done the job. Stern is trying to put an end to all of that misery and yes FAILURE.

Stern's Memo says: Hang in there on the local front. We are going to have a convention on Septemer 27, and maybe then we will have a better way to deal with local affiliation issues and more specific direction for the CTW unions. Can anybody read between the lines.

Rebuild and renergize this "movement" by providing choices and introducing immutable human laws that empower workers who, despite what many staffers, bureaucrats and entrenched "elected" leaders think, really know what is right for themselves.

[coet]

Workers "really know what is right for them"... no offense but you are from another planet, delusional or live in Kansas.

George W. Bush, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan ... P9, PATCO, Steelworkers, UAW, Machinists, the paper workers strike in Jay Maine, the sun setting on this nation's manufacturing industries and the slaughter of the mother of all Golden Gooses.

We get the government we deserve and more and more workers get the labor movement they deserve...

[NathanHJ]

Wow, coet, cynical much?

[coet]

NathanHJ

cynical not, realist much, living in the trenchs for 28 years cursed with a long memory...

forget history, doomed to repeat it...

optimist always, defeated never and always wary of those who believe there are any "immutable human laws" or that empowered workers are going to safe our bacon