Seachange Bulletin #133July 21, 2004Seachange Bulletin ArchivesEmail the editorSeachange Bulletin #133: Labor Action & Debate I On July 23-25, 2004 at the University of Massachusetts at Boston - just before the Democratic National Convention - a coalition of Boston-area progressive community organizations, non-profits and unions will be hosting what promises to be an exciting event - the Boston Social Forum (BSF). A regional forum within the World Social Forum process, the BSF has been called to help progressive activists to begin to answer some very basic questions: What kind of future do we want for Boston? For our region? For our nation? For the world? What is our vision of a better society? Through a series of workshops, cultural events, plenary sessions, and giant convocations of the entire forum, we are encouraging progressive organizations of all kinds to showcase their best analysis of the present, and their best ideas for the future, across the breadth of human knowledge - politics, economics, science and technology, culture and faith - in the context of corporate globalization. The goals of the event are simple: encourage various social movements to exchange information, network with one another, form new alliances, and push our movements forward a bit more towards the next stage of our development. We'd like to do our part to help progressives seize the high ground of ideas in this society, and then, having captured people's imaginations, move forward to become a more significant political force. We invite all progressive activists, interested community members, and delegates to the Democratic National Convention, to come to the BSF and become part of the global process to build a better, more human-centered society. Boston Social Forum, 33 Harrison Avenue, Boston, MA 02111, USA - 617-338-9966 Boston Social Forum Program <http://www.fairjobs.org/docs/bsf04-program.pdf> Health Track Schedule: <http://www.massjwj.net/040716health.html> Activists plan pre-DNC forum Kevin Joy, Boston Globe, March 10, 2004 <http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/03/10/activists_ plan_pre_dnc_forum> Hoping to borrow some limelight from the Democratic National Convention and draw attention to liberal issues, two city councilors, community groups, and a local activist are planning a three-day forum for protesters, academics, and religious organizations the weekend before the convention. The Boston Social Forum, a three-day series of workshops, cultural events, and meetings is expected to attract some 3,000 people, said City Councilor Chuck Turner and Councilor at Large Felix D. Arroyo, who plan to ask the city to sanction the event with a measure at today's council meeting. Set to be staged at the University of Massachusetts at Boston from July 23 to 25, the nonpartisan forum is meant to give activists a voice as Democrats converge on Boston, organizers said. It's also an alternative to protesting downtown or near the Fleet Center, said Jason Pramas, the forum's coordinator. ... Forget the DNC. Here's the BSF! Joshua Glenn, Boston Globe, July 18, 2004 <http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2004/07/18/forget_the_dnc_her es_the_bsf> On Friday, community and social-justice activists from around the country - not to mention progressive celebrities and celebrity progressives like Harry Belafonte, Angela Davis, and Billy Bragg - will converge on the UMass-Boston campus for the Boston Social Forum, three days of workshops, happenings, and free association. The BSF, an offshoot of the World Social Forum, a decentralized network of activists whose annual gathering is a pointed alternative to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, was organized by over 70 local church, labor, and peace groups and community organizations. Local pols Felix Arroyo, Byron Rushing, and Chuck Turner, along with lefty gadflies Noam Chomsky, Lydia Sargent, and Howard Zinn, have signed onto the BSF's advisory board. Interested members of the public are invited to the 600 or so events and exhibitions listed on the website <http://www.BostonSocialForum.org>. But why Boston? "Boston is the nation's premier political city," insisted Jim Green, a professor of history at UMass-Boston's College of Public and Community Service, in a recent telephone interview. (Green, who proudly notes that several of his former students are on the Boston Social Forum's planning committee, was commissioned to pen a chronology of local progressive history for the BSF's website.) "Not only in the obvious institutional ways that have produced generations of ward bosses, national campaign managers, and cabinet secretaries - not to mention three, and possibly four, presidents," he continued. "But also when it comes to insurgent and movement politics." ... Domestic Costs of Corporate Globalization Boston Social Forum Friday, July 23rd, 4:30 - 6:30 PM McCormack Cafeteria, UMass Boston Jobs with Justice: Health Care Action Day A Huge Success! Jobs with Justice, March 4, 2004 <http://www.jwj.org/updates/2004/03-04.htm#hcad> Union members and community activists mobilized in 125 communities on March 4 to send a message to politicians and employers that it’s time to provide a health insurance plan that can control costs and ensure access for everyone to high quality care. Eight international unions and six national reform organizations sponsored "Health Care Action Day," an unprecedented on-the-job and community mobilization linking the outrage workers feel about paying more their health benefits with the larger movement for reform. Activists in 23 local Jobs with Justice coalitions (and over 260 local unions) mobilized hundreds of thousands of people to put on stickers calling for "health care for all." ... Protesters take stand for access to health care Claudia Torrens, MetroWest Daily News, March 5, 2004 <http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=62161> Workers and union members took to the streets yesterday around the state and MetroWest to protest cuts in health care and demanding coverage for all. In MetroWest, the protest had a special meaning because of the planned sale of MetroWest Medical Center in Framingham and Natick and Saint Vincent Hospital in Worcester. Some protesters held signs outside the region's hospitals while others handed out fliers. Others wore stickers while on the job. "Health care is not an individual issue. It has a big impact, it affects everybody," said Grace Ross, coordinator of the nonprofit Sisters Together Ending Poverty. "An insurance program that covers everyone would save money by eliminating bureaucratic inefficiency and would improve quality of care." ... Rally for coverage Kristen Lombardi, Boston Phoenix, June 18, 2004 <http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/this_just_in/documents/0391 7082.asp> When it comes to health care, Nancy Bullet, a self-employed physical therapist from North Adams, has two choices: pay for exorbitantly priced insurance on her own, or go without. A single mother of two, Bullet, 49, had long settled for the first option. She paid up to $1300 per month for what she calls a "lousy" health plan covering catastrophic medical care and featuring a $2500 deductible. This year, when Bullet found a lump on her breast, she discovered just how inadequate her plan really was. It cost her $100 above the $1300 monthly tab to visit a doctor and undergo a mammogram and ultrasound - tests that she needed to ensure the lump was benign. "It was ridiculous," Bullet says, referring to her former health plan. "For each procedure I had to pay high co-payments. It was too expensive." Now, as of May 1, she has chosen to go with the second option - and live with the fear of sudden illness or injury. "The dread is the phone call saying my kids have gotten hurt," she says. "I live with this anxiety every day." ... Rallying For Health Care In Massachusetts: Video Massachusetts Jobs with Justice, June 19, 2004 <http://boston.mirror-image.com/newsvideo/soft/template.html?OAS_pos=SPONSOR3& pre=snicker_ad_052604.rm&middle=061904_walk_12p.rm> Bridging the Gap, Cambridge to Boston: Photos Marilyn Humphries, Massachusetts Jobs with Justice, June 19, 2004 <http://www.massjwj.net/hcad040625.html> Trying To "Bridge the Gap": Fighting For Health Care For All Richard Gilluly, Pioneer Valley Union News, June 23, 2004 <http://www.pvaflcio.org/main/node/view/345> Many hundreds of people representing groups as diverse as the Massachusetts Nurses Association, the Harvard Medical School, labor unions, members of the Boston City Council and the Massachusetts Senior Action Council rallied in Boston Saturday to protest the fact 82 million Americans lacked health insurance at some point during the past two years - and that some 43 million permanently lack it. "The figure includes about 600,000 uninsured people in Massachusetts, and millions more of us are struggling to keep the coverage we have," said Jon Weissman of Springfield, who coordinated Western Massachusetts participation in the rally on behalf of a group called Jobs with Justice. The purpose of the rally was not just to protest the present system but also to advocate elimination of the vast and costly array of 1,100 health insurance companies, health maintenance organizations and other private groups involved in the health care payment system and replace them with a single-payer system operated by state or federal governments, speakers said. ... Unions, Community Activists Rally for Health Care for All SEIU Local 509, June 27, 2004 <http://www.seiu509.org/action/20040619__bridge_the_gap__rally.cfm> On Saturday, June 19th, tens of thousands of Americans joined together at over 165 local events in ALL FIFTY STATES to Bridge the Gap for health care. This national day of action was a powerful display of our collective strength and our indignation about the 44 million Americans without health care. Read about the national day of action. SEIU Local 509's Tom Barbera led the Boston rally with Kathy Casavant of the Mass AFL-CIO, John McDonough of Health Care for All, and other community and labor leaders. Massachusetts Jobs with Justice coordinated the Boston event. ... "Bridge the Gap" actions on June 19 spur movement for health care for all Rand Wilson, Boston Independent Media Center, June 29, 2004 <http://boston.indymedia.org/feature/display/22964/index.php> Over a thousand people from 85 labor and community organizations marched across the Longfellow Bridge from Cambridge to the Boston Common on Saturday, June 19 calling for a political solution to the mounting crisis of health care cost, quality and access. As costs continue to skyrocket, employers are shifting more of the burden to workers or abandoning health care coverage entirely. The trend is leaving record numbers of Americans uninsured – and many more underinsured. The Boston 'Bridge Walk' was one of 165 actions that occurred in every state calling for quality, affordable health care for all. The Boston 'Bridge Walk' was one of 165 actions that occurred in every state calling for quality, affordable health care for all. ... Boston Social Forum Health Track Highlights Title: Health Care Workers’ Struggles: Voices from the front lines Health care workers are themselves increasingly victims of our profit driven health care system. Nurses are struggling for safe staffing ratios, doctors are fighting to preserve their independence from HMOs, and other health care providers are facing budget cuts in a system that puts patient care and dignity for workers last. The workshop will discuss these ongoing struggles of health care providers and the need to reorder our health care priorities. Saturday 1-3 Wheatley 62 Title: Building Labor-Community Coalitions in the health reform movement The June 19 "Bridge the Gap" events in over 150 cities showed the potential for a broad mobilization around fundamental health care reform. What can we learn from recent experiences and how can we build a stronger movement? What are the tensions between labor and community agendas around health care? What would a real social movement look like that would make health care a right not a privilege in the US? Saturday 6-7:30 Wheatley 57 Title: A People's Tribunal: The US health care system on trial Join community members, including persons who are homeless, disabled, veterans, women, immigrants, working poor, seniors, and health care providers, who will testify at this historic People's Tribunal as to how they are personally affected by the criminal negligence and failings of our current health care system. Not only are 44 million people completely uninsured in the richest nation in the world, but millions more are facing increasingly unaffordable co-pays and premiums, cannot buy the prescription drugs they need, and daily suffer the consequences of government cutbacks in basic programs and public health services. It is time to demand change. The tribunal will prosecute the corporate powers and government for their greed and irresponsibility which are the major causes of our health system failures. Come to witness a panel of community leaders render a verdict and present alternatives for change. Add your voice to the jury's. Congressman John Conyers will be the people's prosecutor. Saturday 3:30-5:30 Lipke Auditorium New Unity Partnership: An Immodest Proposal: Remodeling the House of Labor Stephen Lerner, New Labor Forum, Summer 2003 <http://qcpages.qc.edu/newlaborforum/html/12_2article9.html> Unions and the labor movement in the United States have continued their historic decline in terms of membership and density, under a Democratic president and in a booming economy. Unions have emerged from a period of economic growth and prosperity not larger and stronger but weaker and smaller. Having missed an incredible opportunity to grow in a time of prosperity, labor must now figure out how to build numbers and strength in the face of economic uncertainty, a Republican President, the war on terrorism, budget deficits, public service cuts and the continued exporting of union manufacturing jobs. ... ‘The Gang of Five’ Union Leaders Plot Radical Takeover of AFL-CIO Harry Kelber, LaborTalk, September 17, 2003 <http://www.laboreducator.org/radplot.htm> A group of five international union presidents, who call themselves the New Unity Partnership, are going ahead with their plan for drastic changes in the organizing methods, structure and functions of the AFL-CIO, without any discussion of their initiative within the labor movement, or even with their own members. The five union leaders, who have banded together to promote their image of what the union movement should be, are: Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union; John Wilhelm, president of the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees (HERE); Bruce Raynor, president of UNITE; Terence O’Sullivan, president of the Laborers, and Douglas McCarron, president of the Brotherhood of Carpenters, whose union withdrew from the AFL-CIO in March 2001. The "unity" group excludes the AFL-CIO’s other 59 international unions, takes away the authority of state federations and central labor councils and shows no regard for women, black and Hispanic labor leaders and their members. In an unpublicized, internal memo, the Partnership commits itself to a seven-point program that, it says, will restore labor’s strength at the bargaining table and in the political arena. ... The New Unity Partnership: A Manifest Destiny for Labor Joann Wypijewski, CounterPunch, October 6, 2003 <http://counterpunch.org/jw10062003.html> Since unions are supposed to be organizations of workers, we at CounterPunch thought the members might like the opportunity to review a document cobbled up by five union presidents outlining big plans to spend the workers' money, consolidate their unions and revamp institutional labor - whether by breaking with the AFL-CIO or destroying it and remaking it in the image of this particular gang of five is not entirely clear. Members aren't likely to get this opportunity through any formal union channels. Published here with an assist from Carpenters for a Democratic Union, the draft program of the New Unity Partnership, or, less alluringly, NUP, is long on the language of management theory ("growth", "density", "market share") and short on such fuddy-duddy concepts as "class", "worker participation", "social movements" or "democracy". That is hardly unusual for union bureaucrats. The twist here is that the NUP project is trading on the progressive credentials of SEIU's Andy Stern, HERE's John Wilhelm, UNITE's Bruce Raynor and, to a lesser extent, the Laborers' Terry O'Sullivan to present itself as the vanguard of militant unionism, holding aloft the banner "Organize or Die!", a rather ugly slogan formulated by their rather ugly partner, the right-wing president of the Carpenters union, Doug McCarron. ... Response to "The New Unity Partnership: A Manifest Destiny for Labor" Lorna Salzman, Portside, October 21, 2004 <http://lists.portside.org/mailman/htdig/portside/2003-October/004891.html> There is one subject that your piece on unions did not raise: the environment, energy and economic growth. Aside from the growth of services, the loss and export of production, and other factors that have depressed worker wages and hampered union organizing and worker rights, no one in the unions seems to have acknowledged the imminent crisis of global warming and its underlying cause, the burning of cheap fossil fuels. Traditional economic growth as well as increased consumption continue to rely on underpriced fossil fuel energy. Keeping costs down not only maximizes investor profits but assures unlimited consumption of goods. This has been the fundamental maxim of capitalism. Under the circumstances, it is understandable that corporations would take flight to countries with lower wages and a minimum of environmental laws and constraints. But wherever they are, they need cheap oil, coal and natural gas. ... Response to "The New Unity Partnership: A Manifest Destiny for Labor" Greg King, Portside, October 21, 2004 <http://lists.portside.org/mailman/htdig/portside/2003-October/004891.html> Joann Wypijewski's article, "The New Unity Partnership: A Manifest Destiny for Labor," raises some disturbing questions and prospects. Are the NUP unions out to destroy the AFL-CIO? Do they really intend to do away with democracy? Will a bureaucrat-run and -driven labor movement be able to grow? Do these questions lay before us the prospect of the death of a unified progressive movement? Does the prospect loom of most of us having no say in the running of our unions? Will they really be "our" unions? As a labor activist in Local 888, SEIU, I find all this quite disturbing. I had read or heard somewhere before this that democratic control was to be taken out of the picture in SEIU and other unions. We have recently had a reorganization by sector in SEIU, so that, from a local which was a collection of a lot of differently employed workers, I and my coworkers now find ourselves in a new local made up entirely of public sector workers. Now, this, I think, is a good thing. Everybody in the new local has similar interests. However, this new local has an appointed leadership that has made only the faintest steps toward involving the rank-and-file in the day-to-day running of the local. No mechanisms exist whereby the members can empower themselves. ... Response to "The New Unity Partnership: A Manifest Destiny for Labor" John Lacny, Portside, October 21, 2004 <http://lists.portside.org/mailman/htdig/portside/2003-October/004891.html> If I had the time, the base of knowledge, and the analytical sharpness to do so, I would write a full-scale critique of the all-too-common "left" response to the "New Unity Partnership" of five large AFL-CIO unions. JoAnn Wypijewski's recent piece in the online CounterPunch - <http://www.counterpunch.org/jw10062003.html> - is an example of this, and like much "left" writing on the topic, it comes through with some important insights that are worth considering, all the while getting most things spectacularly wrong. Wypijewski is skeptical of the NUP challenge to the federation on the grounds that mass organizing is bound to occur in the context of mass movements where old institutional forms will necessarily be tossed aside, and where even the most far-sighted of current union leaders will be unable to predict and shape the forms that the movement will take institutionally. This is an important point, one that is worth keeping in mind when union leaders of any stripe talk of the need for bold and sweeping change. There are limits to what can be achieved even by a cadre of talented organizers working in tandem with strategically sophisticated leadership; ultimately, the people are decisive, and much of what has to happen is beyond our control. Nevertheless, Wypijewski's solution to this dilemma amounts to a fatalism that, in effect, gives aid and comfort to the do-nothing habits of the labor old guard. ... Wypijewski Replies CounterPunch, November 4, 2003 <http://lists.portside.org/mailman/htdig/portside/2003-November/005032.html> I am happy to have a hand in the debate, but I do think it is one that would most profitably be had within organized labor, and still think it curious that it didn't occur before five union presidents freelanced their New Unity Partnership, without any discussion among everyone in labor, as a plan for everyone in labor. Now the boys are ruffled. So ruffled that Tom Woodruff mostly ignores the NUP, the subject of my piece, and Gabe Kramer, in a posting on the portside list where Woodruff's also appeared, takes a with-us-or-against-us posture, equating suspicions about the NUP with a To the barricades! defense of the status quo. Is this what we've come to - the range of imagination enclosed within the fenceposts of two bureaucratic options? Kramer distorts most of what I wrote, so I'll address his points here and there but mostly refer readers to my original article <http://www.counterpunch.org/jw10062003.html>. Woodruff is a serious guy who says he wants a serious debate, so let's first clarify a few things. ... The New Unity Partnership Sweeney critics would bureaucratize to organize Herman Benson, Union Democracy Review #149, December 2003 <http://www.uniondemocracy.org/UDR/articles52.htm> What John Sweeney did unto Lane Kirkland in 1995, may now be done unto him. On September 18, this year, Sweeney announced he would run for reelection as AFL-CIO president, along with Rich Trumka, secretary-treasurer, and Linda Chavez-Thompson, executive vice-president. But his term of office doesn't expire until mid 2005, almost two years to go. Ordinarily such a premature declaration would seem strange. Not this time, however, because Sweeney needs to forestall a not-so-subtle drive by five international union leaders to push him out. They had planted stories in Business Week and in the American Prospect about his probable 'retirement' in 2005 (news to him!); they were already mulling over the choice of his successor. ... The Labor Movement State of Emergency, Signs of Renewal Lee Sustar, International Socialist Review Issue 34, March–April 2004 <http://www.isreview.org/issues/34/stateofemergency.shtml> A sense of emergency pervades the US labor movement. Scattered organizing successes haven't compensated for job losses due to plant closures and restructuring. Labor-management "partnership" arrangements involving traditionally powerful unions have resulted in tens of billions in concessions in the steel, auto and airline industries. Originally proposed as temporary solutions for hard-hit industries, these givebacks are fast becoming the standard. The three biggest supermarket chains made similar demands to force 59,000 grocery workers onto the picket lines for several months beginning in October 2003 - a battle which has gained widespread solidarity and support despite repeated strategic blunders by the union. ... A Rank and File Perspective on the New Unity Partnership John H. Hovis, General President, United Electrical Workers (UE), Portside, April 2004 <http://lists.portside.org/mailman/htdig/portside/Week-of-Mon-20040419/005786. html> The political, economic and social pressures exerted on organized labor and working people are massive. The growing union vs. non-union gap serves to increase pressures on our respective unions by both employers and government. Given the circumstances it would be difficult for anyone in the labor movement to find fault with the premise that the answer to the myriad of problems lies in building stronger unions by pursuing a more aggressive organizing effort. There is reason to believe that such an effort could be successful with recent surveys showing that given the opportunity, a majority of unorganized workers would vote to join a union. However, count me among the skeptical that the plan put forward by the New Unity Partnership (NUP), at least as presently advertised, provides the organizational features to attract the new members the NUP is counting on. ... Rank and File Perspective on the NUP - Responses Portside, April 24, 2004 <http://lists.portside.org/mailman/htdig/portside/Week-of-Mon-20040419/005818. html> Thank you for the interesting article on the rank and file perspective of the NUP. As a president of a small CIO local union in Detroit, I have to say that there is to me nothing encouraging about the agenda of the NUP. I have far less credentials to speak than the writer of the article. It looks like a corporate merger, complete with downsizing without taking into account the membership of any of the affiliates in the house of labor. As a complete outsider, I have a few questions, perhaps they may be trivial, but they matter to me, and to our membership, I believe. Would the AFL-CIO still have money and resources to undermine other countries' indigenous labor movements, such as is the case currently in Venezuela? Would there still be the CIA connection? Or are the customers on that end unchanged? ... Union Leader Urges AFL-CIO Reform Federation Is Outdated, SEIU Head Says Thomas B. Edsall, Washington Post, June 22, 2004 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58969-2004Jun21.html> The AFL-CIO has failed to keep up with the changing workplace and must be radically reinvigorated - or replaced - if the labor movement is to survive, the president of the nation's largest union said yesterday. A loose federation of 13 million union workers, the AFL-CIO wields little control over the 65 individual unions that are its members and has not been effective at creating a single, powerful voice for American organized labor, Andrew L. Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), told a national convention of his union in San Francisco. ... Socialist Organizations and Social Movements: friends or enemies? Boston Social Forum Saturday, July 24th, 1:00 – 3:00 PM Wheatley 9, UMass Boston Next Upsurge: The Next Upsurge: Labor and the New Social Movements by Dan Clawson, Cornell University Press, 2003. ISBN: 0801488702 <http://www.labornotes.org/bookshelf/nu.html> The US labor movement may be on the verge of massive growth, according to Dan Clawson. He argues that unions don’t grow slowly and incrementally, but rather in bursts. For there to be a new upsurge, Clawson asserts in The Next Upsurge, labor must fuse with social movements concerned with race, gender and global justice. In The Next Upsurge Dan Clawson points out that even if the AFL-CIO could organize twice as many members per year as it now does, it would take thirty years to return to the levels of union membership that existed when Ronald Reagan was elected president. In contrast, labor membership more than quadrupled in the years from 1934 to 1945. ... Labor retools Union membership may be down, but new tactics and new targets are revitalizing the workers' movement Dan Clawson, Boston Globe, August 31, 2003 <http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2003/08/31/labor_retools> In 1994, Time Magazine called labor unions "toothless dinosaurs on the way to becoming fossils." And many would argue that it has only been downhill since then. Today, only 13.2 percent of the American work force belongs to a union. In the private sector, the figure is below 9 percent, the lowest since the 1920s. Strikes have almost disappeared: Every year in the 1970s saw more strikes than any year since. All too often, unions lack the clout to win basic gains for their members. ... Is Labor on the Edge of a New Upsurge? Dan Clawson, Labor Notes, September 2003 <http://www.labornotes.org/archives/2003/09/d.html> Imagine our goal is to revive the power of the labor movement, not just to hold on for another year, not just to do a little better. What might make that possible? Most of the labor movement’s focus has been on the need to put more resources into organizing, but if the labor movement doubled the number of people it organized each year, and kept that up till 2036, it wouldn’t bring back the power. It would leave labor’s numbers (in percentage terms) right where they were in 1983, after Reagan wiped out PATCO, at a shade over 20% of the labor force. If you look at labor history, the US labor movement hasn’t grown slowly, bit by bit, year after year. Most of the time the movement is losing ground. But once in a while there is a sudden burst of growth. The number of members shoots up, and labor’s power increases even faster. ... Trade Union Education League: A Proposal for a 21st Century Trade Union Education League An attempt to solve the current crisis of organizing the unorganized Judy Atkins & David Cohen, WorkingUSA, Winter 2003-4 <http://www.kclabor.org/tuel.htm> How do we increase the ranks of the labor movement? Countless articles by activists in the labor movement have been posing this question for at least the last decade. The total number of union members is rapidly shrinking, now down to 13.6% of the total workforce and the political establishment of Republicans is hell bent on destroying organized labor while the Democrats sit silently by, doing absolutely nothing. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) under the ideological leadership of the Republicans for the last 20 years has transformed the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) into an impediment to organizing, allowing an estimated 4% of all workers who attempt to organize into unions to be fired by their employers. Employer terror and harassment effectively end 50% of all union organization attempts before they ever get to an election. Employer tactics which are common now, but were illegal when the NLRA was passed, cause unions to lose 49% of union elections that do go to an NLRB supervised election. ... Unions, Movement Building and Organizing the Unorganized - A New Approach Boston Social Forum Saturday, July 24th, 3:30 to 5:30 PM McCormick 209, UMass Boston US Labor Against the War: Defend Iraqi Workers' Rights A joint campaign of US Labor Against the War, Progressive Portal, Progressive Secretary, EPIC, and others. <http://www.progressiveportal.org/iraq-labor.html> Since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, workers there have faced intolerable conditions: massive unemployment, grossly inadequate compensation in the few jobs that can be found, and harassment of organized labor by the occupying forces. The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) has arrested labor leaders repeatedly and ransacked union offices - and, unbelievably, is enforcing Saddam Hussein's anti-union laws. Members of Congress, led by Rep. Sam Farr along with Reps. Barbara Lee and Dennis Kucinich, are preparing a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and CPA Administrator Paul Bremer calling on the CPA to provide jobs or income to Iraqi workers, pay a living wage, and allow Iraqi workers to exercise internationally recognized labor rights. Urge your Representative to sign onto the letter ... Union leaders look at Iraqi labor conditions David J. Ortiz, New Bedford Standard-Times, February 8, 2004 <http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/02-04/02-08-04/a04lo983.htm> Dartmouth - Iraqi citizens are either unemployed or they are overworked and grossly underpaid, and the US-led coalition force running the country is preventing Iraqis from organizing labor unions. That was the message of two American labor union leaders opposed to the war in Iraq who spoke at UMass Dartmouth Friday. Clarence Thomas, a board member of the International Longshore & Warehouse Workers Local 10 in California, and David Bacon, an independent labor journalist, both represent a coalition of labor workers called US Labor Against the War. ... International Appeal Withdraw All Foreign Occupation Troops From Iraq! Peace & Sovereignty for Iraq! USLAW et al, Portside, May 18, 2004 <http://lists.portside.org/mailman/htdig/portside/Week-of-Mon-20040517/005939. html> We, the undersigned trade unionists and labor activists from around the world, applaud the decision by the new Spanish government to withdraw its troops from Iraq. We call on all governments with occupation forces in Iraq - especially the US government - to take similar action. Indeed, the situation facing the Iraqi people is alarming: The number of Iraqi deaths - particularly civilians, women and children - increases by the day, with untold human suffering. The torture of prisoners by the US occupation forces is heinous and has stirred public outrage the world over. Hunger is widespread, resulting from the destruction of the country's infrastructure under the occupation. Iraq's sovereignty has been trampled upon. There is a complete absence of democratic rights, including the right of workers to form trade unions of their choice, as stipulated by the Conventions of the International Labor Organization (ILO). ... Agitating for Workers' Rights in Iraq Where the Livable World Order Begins Greg Moses, CounterPunch, June 4, 2004 <http://www.counterpunch.org/moses06042004.html> Wouldn't it be a profound retort to empire if Iraqis led a global movement for worker's rights? Next Friday in fact, June 11, a coalition of labor groups will stand behind an Iraqi appeal for the right to self-organize. "Workers are in urgent need to build strong and broad-based organizations which are not based on language or religion," says Aso Jabbar, international spokesperson for the Union of Unemployed Iraqis, one of several worker-based groups organized in the aftermath of the recent US invasion. This June marks the second year in a row that international labor groups are gathering in support of Jabbar and other Iraqi labor organizers as the United Nations convenes its annual meeting of the International Labor Organization (ILO). ... SEIU Convention Calls for End to US Occupation of Iraq and Return of US Troops Nation's largest union adopts tough antiwar stand without dissent. Service Employees International Union, June 22, 2004 <http://uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=5382> Our nation faces growing domestic challenges - unemployment, declining wages and benefits, deunionization of the workforce, reduced public services, crumbling health care and educational systems, cuts in veterans benefits, escalating public debt, and decreased economic, social and personal security. Massive military spending, combined with tax cuts for the rich, is creating massive federal deficits and huge cuts in state public services. This crisis is a product of the Bush Administration's policies (backed by a majority in Congress) of military intervention abroad and attacks on working peoples' rights at home. Only corporations and the wealthy have benefited. We cannot solve these economic and social problems without addressing US foreign policy and its consequences. ... AFSCME Convention Says ‘Oppose Pre-Emptive War’ AFSCME International Convention, June 25, 2004 <http://uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=5590> Whereas the George W. Bush doctrine redirects America’s foreign policy to allow for unprovoked pre-emptive war against any nation which the president defines as a danger to America. This perceived danger may include the potential for military power that could, sometime in the future, compete against American power. It also allows for US military action irrespective of the United Nations or the opinions of other world leaders or the citizens of other nations; and whereas this doctrine is seen by most of the people of the world as highly arrogant and dangerous. It is contrary to the ideals of international cooperation and mutual defense under universal rules among nations. Already, the United States under President Bush has alienated much of the world by abrogating treaties involving global warming, the International Court of Justice, and banning land mines and chemical/biological weapons ... Solidarity in Wartime David Bacon, The Nation, June 28, 2004 <http://thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040628&s=bacon> In a Service Employees union hall in Boston, a hospital worker raises her hand. "If Saddam Hussein was such a bad guy," she asks, "why is the US enforcing his law banning unions in Iraq?" Since January, workers like this orderly have been listening to the answers to their questions given by Iraqi workers themselves, courtesy of US Labor Against the War, a network that now includes dozens of union locals and labor councils nationally. USLAW's campaign for labor rights in Iraq is also bringing reports, videos and testimony of American unionists who have traveled to Iraq into union halls in California, Washington, Michigan, Ohio, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Washington, DC, and beyond. As a result, hundreds of union members have suddenly been able to see Iraq not just as a scene of violent conflict but as a complex nation of 24 million people, with trade unions, political parties and civil organizations trying desperately to win back control of their country. ... Big Labor Speaks Out Against the War Steve Edwards, President, AFSCME Local 2858, June 30, 2004 <http://uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=5492> In June, the AFL-CIO's two biggest unions, the Service Employees International Union and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees met at their respective conventions. Both passed resolutions clearly condemning the war in Iraq. SEIU, which with 1.7 million members claims to be America’s fastest growing union, took up the platform passed in October 2003 by the multi-union group US Labor Against the War. This platform calls for "A Just Foreign Policy based on International law and global justice ... An end to the US Occupation of Iraq; The Redirecting of the Nation's Resources from inflated military spending to meeting the needs of working families ... Supporting Our Troops and their families by bringing our troops home safely ... Protecting Workers Rights, Civil Rights, Civil Liberties and the Rights of Immigrants ... and "Solidarity with workers around the world ... Vets call for pulling US troops out of Iraq Santa Cruz Sentinel, July 3, 2004 <http://uslaboragainstwar.org/downloads/VFW_Ad.pdf> Members of the Veterans of Foreign Wars 5888, the "Post for Peace," are very proud of America but very concerned for our great country. We sincerely hope you will take some time to read and think about our humble, heartfelt ideas concerning our position on the conflict in Iraq, our assessment of the costs of war in Iraq, and our vision for America. It is past time that the members of the Bill Motto Post 5888 VFW USA adamantly voice our opposition to the war in Iraq. The prevailing opinion of our elected leaders (and of Americans in general) is that we may have made a terrible mistake, but we are there, and we can't quit now, that we will look weak if we pull out, and that Iraq will fall into chaos. This opinion serves the politicians who are yet to find the courage to oppose an unjust, ill-conceived, costly, immoral war. ... VFW Post Runs Full Page Antiwar Ad in Santa Cruz Paper <http://uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=5576> Army's agenda on mental health Nancy Lessin & Charley Richardson, Jamaica Plain, Boston Globe, July 5, 2004 <http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2004/07/0 5/armys_agenda_on_mental_health> The Army's study of mental health of combat troops ("Mental toll on troops detailed," Page A1, July 1) ignores the fact that the goal of mental health treatment in the military system, rather than taking care of the soldier, is to serve the needs of the military and get the soldiers back to the front. Good mental health care for the troops is sacrificed. Experiences documented by Military Families Speak Out, a nationwide organization of more than 1,500 military families, detail cases where troops have been deployed to Iraq within weeks of hospitalization following a suicide attempt or diagnosis of being suicidal and cases where troops diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder have been placed on medication and redeployed to the front. ... Bring the Troops Home California State Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO, July 13, 2004 <http://uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=5656> Whereas there is general agreement in the United States and throughout the world that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction that posed an imminent threat to this country or to Iraq's neighbors, and that the government of Iraq had few if any discernable ties to those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon; and whereas the federal government has approved $150 billion in public funds for the US war in Iraq, draining those funds away from domestic priorities including transportation, health care, and national security; and whereas working families in the United States have paid a heavy price for the US involvement in Iraq with the deaths of 836 US military personnel - with many more seriously injured - between the start of war on March 19, 2003 and June 16, 2004 ... Antiwar Delegates to AFT's National Convention Give John Kerry a Message - 'Say No to War' Delegates unfurl banners when John Kerry addresses the AFT Convention on July 16, 2004 <http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/img/original/KerryNoWarAFTConvention1.jpg> Impeach Bush Ad in New York Times, July 16, 2004 <http://www.votetoimpeach.org/pdf/advti04.pdf> Union Members who are Veterans and Military Families say: Support Our Troops, Bring Them Home Now! Despite the so-called "transfer of power" on June 28th, the occupation of Iraq by 140,000 US troops continues, the violence shows no sign of diminishing and the quagmire deepens. A Senate Intelligence report confirms that the war in Iraq was justified using flawed and false information. Many people are now asking: What is the best way to support our troops who were sent off to fight in a war based on lies? Veterans and military family members who belong to unions are a powerful resource to help people understand that the best way to support the troops is to bring them home, out of harm's way, out of a war based on lies. Union members who are veterans and military families can articulate from their own experience the folly of the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq and its consequences for the troops, for their families, for the people of Iraq and for working people overall. Those who said "We gotta go to war!" weren't going anywhere, nor were their loved ones. It is working people who have sacrificed so much. The administration has tried hard to silence the voices of those who question the war by calling them unpatriotic and unsupportive of the troops. They have tried to prevent discussion and debate. And they have tried to hide the toll of this war. Military families and veterans can help break through the silence. ... Labor for Justice with Peace Boston Social Forum Saturday, July 24th, 3:30 - 5:30 PM McCormack 608, UMass Boston Web Sites of Interest: Bring Them Home Now <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org> Military Families Speak Out <http://www.mfso.org> US Labor Against the War <http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org> Michael Moore Home Page <http://www.michaelmoore.com/index_main.php> FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 US Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: <http://www.law.cornell.edu/asked/17/107.shtml>. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. |
