I was on my way to visit some friends in a nearby parallel universe the other day and dropped in to Copp’s to pick up some taco chips. Copp’s is unionized over there, but that’s a story for another time.
As I walked in the door, there, between the Isthmus and Simpson Street News, was a bin loaded with the latest copy of the Union Labor News. Curious, I went down to the Labor Temple Bar (which is smokeless, btw, and has a fair assortments of micro brews on tap) to see what gives.
The story I got is that, over there, the Union Labor News had fallen on hard times awhile back. Oh, it was well written and nicely laid out, and it even ran stuff by a local left-wing blogger from time to time, so there were no grounds to criticize. But costs were up and subscription revenues were way down.
One barfly speculated that the ULN had exercised a little too much independence in recent years and had pissed off some Democratic Party stalwarts, who saw to it that their locals cancelled their subs. But I wasn’t around long enough to check out that story.
Whatever the cause of the financial crisis, the cure was to convert the ULN form a subscription-based newspaper to a free monthly. This actually wasn’t a very radical idea. A number of mass circulation daily newspapers around the county, including the Boston Globe and The Capital Times, had switched to a free, mass distribution format.
The ULN had an advantage. As a union paper, it was able to garner grants from a couple of huge rich internationals. And, with a new free circulation of over 100,000 a month, ad revenues were up. Union members volunteered to do the distribution to their local supermarkets, libraries, government buildings and at public events where working people gathered. There was even talk of going weekly.
And, as part of the switch, ULN changed its approach. In its previous incarnation, it was primarily a union newspaper, speaking to unionized workers. The new idea was that it would become a voice for the working class and an organizing tool. Each issue had a general working class interest article on Page 1, above the fold. Inside it still covered the local labor movement. And, each issue included a pitch on how people could start organizing a union where they worked—in English, Spanish and a Rigel-5 dialect.
Folks down at the Labor Temple Bar credited the change with a modest upsurge in union organizing in the area.
Well, the dilithium crystals were getting low so I had to make it for home. But, while there are always risks to employing ideas that worked in a parallel universe, it does kinda make you think.
Ok, a lot of people read this thing. I know because you're coming up to me all the time to tell me what you think about the latest posting. But not many of you are leaving a comment. I know you folks and you aren't short of opinions. And, it isn't hard to do.
1) Click on "Comments" at the bottom of the message.
2) Type your comment in the box.
3) Then hit "Anonymous" button. Don't ask why. It just works better that way. If you want to include your name, type it in the comment box.
4) Finally, hit the "Publish your Comment" button.
Got something to say? Sure you do.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Not a bad idea, I think that ULN is beginning to do some "free" distribution. Some really good Local union (big locals) newspapers have gone to publishing bi-monthly for financial reasons and due to other forms of communication/mobilization technology (something they'd have on Rigel-5). We do need a broader discussion of the future of ULN and I thnak you for kicking this off.
DAVE
PS I've tried the comment section before but failed - maybe that's why I'm partial to newsprint!
Brilliant!
Hmmm...but would this make them beholden to advertisers? Sounds like it could be a slippery slope...I think a beefed up ULN website (and a blog such as yours or a ULN blog?) would be better way to at least cut production costs. That still doesn't solve the issue of distribution to those who wouldn't even know to look for a ULN website, or who don't have access at all...so maybe some sort of hybrid (publishing the print version less often?)...
I think I am in favor of wider distribution of the WI SCFL Labor Union News. I volunteer to pick up copies and distribute them in Stoughton and we can probably get volunteers from other communities to do the same.
We need to enable non-union people to read about what unions do and what they could do for them. We need people who are in unions to read about what unions do and how they help employees and corporations work better together.
Because of print costs we cannot just keep getting smaller and smaller, fewer and fewer issues - that is the path to death.
Web sites just do not work for most people. If working people they have time to read their emails they are lucky, to expect them to read wonderful web sites on their own, I believe, does not work.
Those who are interested in a specific topic, like unions, may go to a well done web site. But those who never think much about unions (union or non-union persons)will probably not go to a web site no matter how well it is done.
We need to catch people's attention and get them to read just a bit, next issue maybe a bit more, next issue maybe all of it if they have time, etc. etc.
Buzz Davis, AFT-WI and WPEC
Rlgee makes a good point. We don't want "labor's voice" to be dependent on the good graces of capitalist advertisers. Altho, I suspect a few will be willing to sell us the rope with which to hang them.
Better might be to get some large, rich unions to make a monthy pledge to keep the paper running. Of course, when push comes to shove, we don't want to be dependent on pro-capitalist union bureaucrats either. When we have to strike against a Democratic Party Governor, for example.
And, the points about a web-based newspaper are well taken. Maybe a mix of all three approaches.
And, lets not forget the independent left press. While they have their own axes to grind, they are independent from advertisers and bourgeoisie politicians.
~~RB
Since you brought it up, do they
still accept subscription fees? Just wondering. One problem for locals,
and yes this is definitely NOT something unions want to hear, was the ever increasing percap fees to
the internationals and state organizations. While wages to the union members were not going up and in fact possibly going down, especially due to furloughs and insurance costs. I would suggest that some locals dropped subscriptions because of the financial squeeze. If they didn't they couldn't pay percaps. Unions that don't pay percaps get seized (trusteed) by the international. There's no bankruptcy capability for unions.
This is a huge problem I think because most unions are headquartered in the far more wealthy and higher wage east states like New York. They set percaps according to typical wages in states that are orders of magnitude higher wages than disastrously failing states like Wisconsin. Also cutting back/offshoring on
workforces in general has gotten rid of union members and whole locals.
I think this was just the tip of the iceberg that locals had to stop
funding things like this and we will see far greater problems in the future because internationals do not have the mindset to cut back on any 6 figure salaries and other costs.
oh I get it it's another one of those thought experiments. I thought you were serious because a story about a print newspaper going out of business is very very common, and subscriptions are indeed not required for unions to be members of scfl. Also unions don't have to be members of SCFL either.
I think it's a good idea but not the right venue. AFLCIO already long ago dropped its print publications to the membership. It's the union with the least communication with rank and filers so why expect it would value communicating with them and the public too?
In my experience I think SCFL closely follows the board and aflcio's direction. Things that are official missions of SCFL like the labor rights center, Acorn issues (historically; maybe Acorn stock is down now), and initiatives that SCFL have endorsed get press. Other things do not get press. SCFL is very focused on building trades; they must be well represented on the board. There's a lot of tradition: bean feed, labor day, holiday light show,( ring in new year and repeat... ).
I don't know what editorial policies ULN has if any but I suspect effectively it is material the board and aflcio approve of. Which makes a lot of sense if your salary depends on that, as Cavanaugh's does. In particular I haven't seen and don't expect to ever see SCFL promoting any new unionization drives. They were extremely resistant to encouraging collective bargaining legislation for UW Faculty and Academic staff, for all the years that campaign was waged. I think the range of material that ULN could and would handle, due to its bureaucratic constraints, is limited.
What you have seen in the past is what you are always going to get in the future. Not that it's bad but its what the board approves basically. So I think trying to shoehorn ULN into a real stir things up, pro new organizing publication is just not feasible.
It's just not their thing. This is a publication that follows the issues that the SCFL power structure wants publicized. Which makes sense but it's not want it sounds like you want.
Promoting new union creation is a very specialty topic. I think we need a totally new publication and a totally new mindset. Fists in the air and pictures of people holding signs and endless repeats of the word solidarity are not going to convince people of the value of unions. Basic principles need to be explained. Existing unions and labor education figures are not resources for new organizing. They are beholden to their client base. That there is no money there for financing new union organizing, is a major hurdle.
Post a Comment