A lot of people do retrospectives this time of the year, taking a look back at the high and low points of 2009. Here at LaborLeft do it the hard way. As is our tradition, here is our retrospective on the local labor movement for NEXT year.
And, you gotta admit, 2010 was a hell of a year!
No doubt, the most significant happening was the founding of the Madison Organizing Committee in January. The MOC was singularly responsible for the new unions at the Marriott, Crowne Plaza, Cintas and Hy-Vee and the half dozen or so organizing drives currently underway around town.
It was a good idea to establish the MOC as an ad hoc committee, independent from the Fed and existing internationals. Once we were out from under all the bureaucracy, jurisdictions, legal, financial and political constraints and dues requirements, we just went out and organized.
The setback at Woodman’s turned into a plus. When word got out that Phil and his “employee owners” had successfully busted the union, the customers who had been shopping there just because it was a union shop went elsewhere. The “For Sale—Will Build to Suit” sign in the empty parking lot at Woodman’s East sent a message to the managers at Hy-Vee: This is what happens when you mess with the union. A first contract was remarkably easy.
The transformation of the Union Labor News into an organizing tool obviously helped a lot. I think we distributed over 10,000 copies of the debut bilingual issue at the May Day rally. We saw a lot of people reading (in Spanish) the lead story about labor’s fight for principled immigration reform.
And, although it may have seemed a bit patronizing, we did enjoy the salsa band at Labor Day.
The shift in how we did politics might have the most significant lasting impact, however. The decision to launch independent campaigns around progressive issues really mixed things up. We hit the streets with an army of union members and, in short order, got the signatures necessary to get referenda on the statewide ballot that would require specific progressive tax reforms and paid sick leave.
We have to admit that it was fun watching the politicians scramble. Their first response was to stonewall and just ignore our issues. But that turned out to be difficult, since taxing wealth and requiring paid sick leave were about all voters wanted to talk about. Then they developed a two-line position, strongly for and against the propositions, depending on who they were talking to. Voters (and even some of the media) were smart enough to figure that one out.
In the end, the ballot initiatives forced the politicians to take a side: Will you stand with the working class or the employing class? By early fall it was clear that organized labor would be supporting a lot fewer candidates come November. The political action money we would have poured down the “lesser evil” rat hole was spent in last minute campaign to push the ballot initiatives well over the top.
So, that’s where we are, at the end of 2010. In good position to make 2011 one a hell of a year!
Some folks tell me they're still having trouble leaving a comment. Here's how you do it:
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)
6 comments:
2010 I am in front of you all the way. Follow me!
Happy New Year,
Nelson Eisman, Chief Steward Emitus
I wholeheartedly agree that organizing hotels and grocers (among other retail firms) is a must not only for the local labor movement but also the national labor and union movements. Organizing rooted in low-wage, service-sector work is one of the keys to revitalizing a new dynamic labor movement -- and in building a different kind of social movement unionism. That it also, in Madison and most other metropolitan areas, intersects with organizing immigrant and non-white workers is almost as key as taking on organizing in non-mobile, "New Economy" (term used derisively) jobs; the reasons for organizing low-wage, service-sector, and immigrant/non-white work could, and have, filled essays, dissertations, and books. Consider this a full-throated endorsement of the concept. None of us here can claim credit for the idea, but we can definitely rally around it.
However, I think that the cursory treatment of the complexities of doing so as you describe here leave something, or some things, to be desired.
Organizing new unions is incredibly difficult. At the risk of glossing over the mid-level concerns (which is to say that the high-level issues, organizing these types of jobs to build a new labor movement, are implicitly addressed), the intransigence and class militance of organized, anti-union business in fighting against unions, the detail-level issues are perhaps most pertinent in this regard.
At its purest, organizing unions is simply organizing workers, building power by connecting people, resources, and ideas. Are the people there to serve as organizer-activists? Probably. In sufficient numbers to be successful in the Madison area or otherwise? That remains to be seen -- and I think that it must be tried.
One determinant is the second aspect, that of resources. Organizing is expensive, especially when done right -- empowering workers through training, education, and other support both material and in the way of expertise and other matters (yes, the dreaded lawyers will need to be involved in new organizing like this). Could a dozen organizer-activists successfully put together drives at hotels and grocers in our area? Maybe. Could a hundred? Probably. Either way, strong planning, coordination, and leadership would be needed.
The determinants are on a sliding scale though -- and resources can amplify exponentially the actions of people; the idea(s) is/are there.
I am not yet convinced that organizing today, without the involvement of internationals (in this case, likely UNITE-HERE and UFCW for hotels and grocers, respectively), can be successful. Certainly not on the scale imagined in this diary -- or needed.
The labor markets for both hotels and grocers are regional. That works in favor of regional organizing as suggested here. However, it works against it as well. Success in organizing at one workplace with one firm without success at other workplaces and other firms undermines the ability of the first to do things like win a first contract, the real test of organizing (at least in the private sector). What would be needed is a comprehensive, coordinated, community-based campaign - with plenty of the hallmarks of a corporate campaign as well - that can win success at all workplaces and with all firms (or at least the critical mass in the regional market) at roughly the same time.
Such a campaign likely would need significant resources. And in reality, those resources are going to come from something like an international. Of course, the question remains to be answered as to whether or not UNITE-HERE or UFCW wants to organize. By all account, all things being equal, and judging by current status and past history as I understand it, probably not.
Probably. Who's to say that with the growth of an organizing body building the campaign initially an international wouldn't think to itself "Gee, we should work on that." Like most industrial unions in the private sector, UFCW and UNITE-HERE are hemorrhaging members (and in the case of the latter, not entirely of their own doing). A hot prospect of organizing, as opposed to something completely 'cold' might very well be attractive.
It is a hard reality to face, unfortunate as it may be, that some of these concerns above -- and others -- cannot be ameliorated simply by good ideas, passion and dedication, and skilled organizing. It is also a tough nut to crack to find it within ourselves, as partisans of building a real labor movement, that we have to work with those with whom we disagree at times in our House of Labor. Sometimes we need to drag them kicking and screaming to the right strategies and tactics. Not to lionize John L. Lewis in any way, but one can point to the formation of the original CIO as an (imperfect) analogy here.
An organizing campaign, locally rooted and initially begun, to unionize hotel and grocery workers, might need to give way to the greater good of actually building the union movement in service of the ideal of building a stronger, larger, more vibrant labor movement. As hopefully is clear from what I write here, I think that the idea of organizing hotel and grocery workers in the Madison region is a fantastic idea, should be pursued, and should be based in the work of local labor activists; it should be comprehensive, strategic, well-designed, well-led, and well-executed. It can be successful. It just might not be able to be a completely organic labor uprising among the locals, requiring some involvement of internationals who have to be shown the way on the importance of - and desire to - organize here.
Foraging through some older articles I keep, I found this one that is particularly instructive as per the notion of organizing hotels.
I am still back on the last blog. There is every reason to put together a print,blog, broadcast and podcast labor news organization here in Madison. We have the talent, each of the pieces is in place and i think there are both the technical and financial resources to do it.
Then it will be easier to organize the hotel and grocery industries.
Frank
Oh Great Swami Ron, The future certainly looks bright for Madison labor. I can't wait for 2011. Maybe that will be the year that the unions can negotiate some nice wage cuts for their members.
I think that it is more likely that working class resistance to the growing attacks on wages and benefits will come from outside of, and in many cases in opposition to the official labor movement. Independent ad hoc workplace organizations are likely to be a prototype for new fighting workers organizations. As the atmosphere in the US becomes inevitably more repressive and hostile towards the proletariat and the left the official unions will side the capitalists and the government against the "people".
The labor movement has been going through a state of evolution since it appeared on the scene many,many years ago. I can't help thinking that trying to bring the 2000 year old Christian church back to its original roots would be a similar example of the futility involved in trying to reform the capitalist labor movement.
The old capitalist unions have become transformed into their opposites as Marx might have said. The UAW is a great example. They now are owners of GM. They have a vested interest in the preservation of capitalism, and in the exploitation of the people that they supposedly represent.Much the same can be said for the other unions. Their organizational purpose has become chiefly the preservation and enhancement of the organization itself. This is a natural evolutionary process at work. It doesn't make it an acceptable thing, but, it has to be understood that this is a naturally occurring phenomena. Paul Mattick is a good one to read if you want gain some insight into the labor movements evolutionary transformation. Mattick was a shop steward, and a participant in the post World War One rebellions that shook Germany. Check out his online archives. I can't wait for the year 2525 if man is still alive.
Brother Rat
Post a Comment