All Sections ------------------------------- News & Events Pay & Benefits Departments & Divisions Members Only

Advanced Search

Printer-Friendly Page

---

---

President's Viewpoint

What Will It Take to Get YOU Involved?

(This article first appeared in the March/April 2007 issue of The American Postal Worker magazine.)

My biggest challenge as an APWU activist and leader has been involving the membership in decisions that affect their employment.

Belonging to and participating in the labor struggle was once a ‘calling’ that ranked just behind family and religion.

The union has always had its ups and downs in the arena of representation, yet over the years the number of employees contributing to these wins and losses has shown a steady decline. Too often, good representation or even mere attendance at a union event has depended on payment for services; union involvement has become subservient to more trivial pastimes. And it is not just the APWU: The democratic institution of organized labor has come to resemble just another advocacy group performing a service for a fee.

Back In the Day

It hasn’t always been like this. There was a time when belonging to and participating in the labor struggle was a “calling” that ranked just behind family and religion. As we have achieved success in the struggle against corporate greed, expectations have grown while our ranks have thinned and participation has dwindled.

No matter the issue or the challenge, the overall response of workers has shifted from “What can we do?” to “What are you going to do about it?” These vastly different reactions represent the gulf that distinguishes collective effort from individual expectation.

Perhaps we are victims of our own success. We feel confident enough about the fundamental conditions of employment — decent wages, job security, benefits, and a process to contest arbitrary management decisions – that they no longer motivate widespread involvement.

Over the course of the past 20 years, APWU members have received – in addition to step increases, promotions and upgrades — wage increases of approximately $1,200 each year for every year of employment: An employee with 20 years of service has received more than $24,000 in increased wages. Regular wage increases are taken for granted; they are expected.

What We Have Done

Today’s postal worker enjoys unparalleled job security. Since the conception of APWU in 1971, not a single union-represented employee has suffered the loss of one day of work because of a layoff. During this turbulent period of globalization, employees in other industries routinely face the uncertainty of plant closings and workforce reductions, while APWU-represented employees have been contractually protected. The psychological effect of this guarantee is immeasurable, yet it does not serve as a galvanizing force.

Fifty million Americans go to bed each night without the benefit of health insurance; but none of them are APWU-represented employees or their dependents. And despite the tremendous increases in healthcare costs, we have been able to restrain the adverse impact on our members, restricting their cost to less than 10 percent of gross salary.

The right to contest management decisions is a fundamental objective of workers intent on balancing the absolute authority of the employer with the rights of employees. These rights are achieved only through contractual provisions negotiated by a union. The APWU process is not perfect, but there is no acceptable alternative, and I challenge any postal employee to find higher-quality representation in any industry, union or non-union.

Unacceptable Numbers

Despite the achievements made possible by tens of thousands of APWU stewards, and local, state, and national officers, the level of employee participation in union activities is unacceptably low. Relatively few APWU members attend union meetings, vote in local or national elections, or participate in the ratification of contract agreements. An unacceptably high number of employees even refuse to belong to the union that is responsible for all of their benefits of employment, benefits so good that very few leave for other jobs.

The recent contract referendum offers a case in point. Our constitution (and U.S. labor law) requires that the membership must ratify the terms of employment, yet only 40 percent elected to mark an “X” on a piece of paper and return it in a pre-paid envelope. The same tepid response rate is the rule in the election of local or national union officers. Approximately six in 10 APWU-represented employees do not care enough to voice their approval or disapproval.

This general refusal by workers to involve themselves in fundamental decisions affecting their lives is perplexing, but the decision of tens of thousands of non-members to disassociate themselves from their co-workers is beyond comprehension. How can so many individuals withhold their participation and allow themselves to be governed by the actions of others? The APWU is the union for 280,000 postal employees; and whether they participate or not, we will determine their wages, benefits, and conditions of employment. How can non-members surrender the opportunity to have a voice in those decisions?

Who Cares About Upgrades?

In the recent contract negotiations, the APWU bargaining team succeeded in negotiating upgrades for every APWU-represented employee. Is there a single employee who will not welcome an upgrade? Over the past several years — particularly following the successes in upgrading mail processors, Motor Vehicle Craft employees, and several other positions in 2005 — those who were in positions that had not been upgraded severely criticized the union’s failed efforts to increase their pay grades. Now that the upgrades have been achieved, only 40 percent of the affected employees care enough to endorse the effort.

In an effort to turn the tide of non-participation, I initially focused on the union’s outreach — I believed that if we communicated better, member involvement would increase. We updated the union’s national magazine and News Bulletins and revamped the APWU Web site, to share breaking news and information. We also established Ask the President, which enables members to raise issues of importance directly with the president. I challenge any APWU-represented employee to identify another membership organization that provides more timely information.

Yet I find myself unable to convince the majority of members that this is their union and that their participation is absolutely essential to our success.

A Special Challenge

Non-members present a special challenge. I have tried to communicate with each non-member at least twice a year in recent years, and have received responses from many who have tried to explain their non-participation.

When the listed reasons are under our control, the union has responded. Wages have increased at a rate of 4 percent per year over the past 20 years; benefits have continued unabated; there have been no layoffs; every employee is being upgraded; bereavement leave and leave sharing have been instituted; there are transfer rights, sick leave for dependent care, part-time flexible conversions, and more. Yet despite our successes, nothing that we have done has significantly reduced the unacceptably high percentage of workers who continue to receive the benefits of union efforts but refuse to join the organization.

One obvious solution supported by many members — who pay a small portion of their negotiated salary to support their union — is to require membership in the union or at the very least make non-members pay their fair share. This is the same principle that applies to every other aspect of democratic governance. An individual who does not approve of the policies of President Bush cannot refuse to pay taxes. You cannot declare that because you do not use the educational system or the public highways that you will decline to pay for their upkeep. Dissatisfaction with an elected official does not allow you to withdraw from the responsibilities of citizenship.

The apportioned share of a citizen’s income supporting collective operations of a government is no different than the collective contribution of workers to the union that represents them. The American Postal Workers Union is the union of postal employees in the clerk, maintenance, motor vehicle and support services crafts, regardless of whether they are members or not.

Paying Their Fair Share

If a permissible legal way can be found, it is my intent to require that every postal employee represented by the APWU and governed by the contract pay his or her fair share. No employee who receives the benefits of representation has the moral right to declare independence.

In a perfect world, there would be no labor unions: Workers would be treated with dignity and respect and would receive a fair share of revenues derived from their efforts. But we live in a capitalistic world, and the benefits afforded workers are derived at the expense of increased profits, so the right to collective effort through unions has resulted in a continuing struggle against corporations and their allies. Over the past 20 years, these corporations have been very successful in limiting the rights and scope of organized labor, including the prohibition of union-imposed fees on represented non-members.

Unions have responded by exploring alternative ways to extract payment for services rendered. Among the most creative was an initiative by the Independent Metal Workers Union. The union gave non-members the right to retain private counsel or represent themselves in grievance handling. If the union was required to provide non-members with representation, however, a fee schedule was established that provided reimbursement for incurred costs. Non-members unwilling to secure independent counsel would be required to pay the union $15 for the processing of a grievance and $400 for a case that went to arbitration.

The policy of charging non-members was challenged before the National labor Relations Board. In the case of Hughes Tool Company vs. the Independent Metal Workers Union [PDF], the NLRB ruled in 1953 that requiring non-members to pay these fees represented an unfair labor practice and ordered the abandonment of the policy.

The Columbus (OH) APWU Local initiated a similar policy (charging non-members 25 cents for grievances forms and $10 per hour to process grievances), which in 1985 the NLRB concluded was a violation of the law. These and other NLRB and Supreme Court decisions have established that unions may not charge non-members for services even though these employees clearly are beneficiaries of union efforts. Other rulings spell out that collective bargaining activities such as contract negotiations, interpretation, and administration must be extended to members and non-members alike by the exclusive representative without the imposition of special fees.

These rulings represent the interpretation of the “laws of the land,” and unless changed through legislation that is signed by the president, it will remain illegal for a union to charge fees to non-members. The only exception is found in instances where an employer and a union negotiate an “agency shop” that makes union membership a condition of employment.

But because 21 states have laws banning agency shops, postal unions and the U.S. Postal Service — which employs workers in every state — are prohibited from negotiating such an agreement.

These prohibitions against charging fees to non–members or denying them our services require that we try to find other ways to get them to pay their fair share. It is morally wrong for postal employees or workers in any industry to receive all of the benefits of union activity without contributing to the cost of representation.

I have not surrendered to the view that “free-riders” have an inalienable right to receive union services, and I intend to continue our efforts at outreach, to continue to try to convince non-members to voluntarily make a fair contribution.

Failing success in that effort, it is my solemn pledge that if there is a way to require that non-members share in the financial burden of improving conditions for postal employees, I will find it. I intend to correct this injustice.

[back to top]