Printer-Friendly Page
 |
AFL-CIO News |
 |
Listen to Labor News |
Reflections on the AFL-CIO Convention
Burrus Update #10-05, August 2, 2005
This year’s AFL-CIO convention, which was held in Chicago, July 25-28, has generated unprecedented interest.
I led the APWU delegation, and was accompanied by Executive Vice President Cliff Guffey, Secretary-Treasurer Terry Stapleton, Clerk Craft Director Jim McCarthy, Maintenance Craft Director Steve Raymer, MVS Director Bob Pritchard, Research & Education Director Joyce Robinson, Organization Director Frank Romero, Human Relations Director Sue Carney, Regional Coordinators Liz Powell, Omar Gonzalez, and Sharyn Stone; Illinois State President Linda Turney, North Carolina State President Larry Sorrells, Baltimore Francis 'Stu' Filbey Area Local President Thomasine Derricks, Fayetteville (NC) Area Local President Tony D. McKinnon Sr., and Philadelphia BMC Treasurer Bill LaSalle.
All of the APWU delegates participated fully in the convention and represented our union well. I was appointed Secretary of the Credentials Committee and reported to the convention daily on the number of delegates in attendance.
I was also honored to second the nomination of John Sweeney for re-election as president.
You undoubtedly have heard the media reports regarding the disaffiliation of several large international unions from the AFL-CIO. To maximize media exposure, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the Teamsters withheld the announcement of their decision until the eve of the convention, but they had discontinued payment of dues in March and April 2005, respectively. This means that the decision to disaffiliate had been made prior to the convention. Although they were present, representatives of the disaffiliated unions — and their supporters in other unions — did not register as delegates to the convention and presented no resolutions for consideration.
Since the close of the convention, as expected, the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) officially withdrew its membership in the AFL-CIO. The UFCW had discontinued paying per capita tax in May 2005, and was delinquent for the months of December 2003 and January and February 2004.
The Laborers International Union, UNITE/HERE, and the United Farm Workers Union are also expected to announce their disaffiliation from the AFL-CIO in the near future.
The combined loss of these unions (in addition to the Carpenters Union, which withdrew earlier) represents a significant loss to the membership of the AFL-CIO. Collectively, they represent one third of the former membership. In addition to the significant reduction in total membership and dues money, this decision will fracture the unity of the organized labor movement at a critical time — when the world’s economies are adjusting to the affects of globalization and changes in technology.
The initial reaction of the AFL-CIO leadership was anger — and even, among some, a desire for revenge — but the emotional outbursts already have been replaced with the recognition that these unions have made a decision and organized labor must be positioned to respond, no matter its divisions: Working people have no voice in the conditions of employment except through the efforts of unions, and our struggle must continue.
I wish the disaffiliated unions well in their endeavor to fulfill their vision of enhanced organizing. However, I do not believe that their publicly-stated reason of wanting to commit larger sums of money to organizing was the motivation for their decision.
There have never been limits on the funds that international unions could devote to organizing, so disaffiliation will not change their ability to organize. The major obstacle removed by their withdrawal from the AFL-CIO is the constitutional limitation on where they would be permitted to organize. The AFL-CIO constitution limits the right of affiliated unions to organize workers in industries or companies where a competing international union has initiated efforts to organize or where the workers are already formed into a bargaining unit.
The decision to disaffiliate relieves the departing unions of the AFL-CIO’s constitutional limits where there are competing unions, so they will be free to organize any and all workers wherever they have an interest. This will undoubtedly lead to “raids” among competing unions. Every dollar expended in this intra-labor struggle will be a dollar not spent on organizing new workers. This cannot result in a positive outcome for all workers.
The field operations of the AFL-CIO at the state and local level will be the most seriously affected by the disaffiliation. The state federations and central labor councils that have served as the “ground troops” of the labor movement will be forced to exclude those members and officers who belong to non-affiliated international unions. The unions that have withdrawn from the AFL-CIO have communicated their desire to continue involvement at the local and state level, but these overtures have been more cynical than based on reality. In the real world it would not be possible to permit affiliation at the state or local level while the international union chooses to disaffiliate.
The biggest disappointment for the American Postal Workers Union is the planned disaffiliation of UNITE/HERE (formerly the Needle Trades and Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees unions) and the United Farm Workers unions.
Delegates to APWU conventions may recall the numerous expressions of support that we have extended to these unions. At each national convention, APWU delegates have braved the elements and marched in support of local hotel workers who were involved in contract disputes.
And during the l980s, APWU delegates extended significant financial support to the United Farm Workers during the struggle to organize migrant workers in the grape industry. APWU and other unions were there during their time of struggle, and it was extremely disappointing that they could now turn their backs on the House of Labor.
The decisions have now been made and we must move on. In our form of government, only unions speak on behalf of workers. In our imperfect world, the interests of politicians are most often aligned with corporate interests, not workers’ interests. Without a strong and vibrant labor movement, there is no voice for workers. We must now move on and commit ourselves to continuing the struggle.
To compensate for the loss of membership, the delegates to the AFL-CIO convention approved a resolution to make permanent the temporary seven cents per member per capita tax that was due to expire with the convention. In addition, a per capita tax increase of four cents per month was approved to strengthen state federations and central labor bodies. The APWU national union will absorb the increase in per capita tax payments; members’ dues will not rise as a result.
The next APWU objective is ensuring the enrollment of all APWU locals in their respective state federations. This cannot be achieved without a change to the APWU Constitution, but it is my intent to devote a future scheduled APWU national per capita tax increase to enrolling all APWU locals in their state federations.
Workers need a strong voice in the continuing struggle for workplace democracy.
William Burrus
President
