Reply With Quote
The labor movement has been stalled for decades. It's hard to find fault with any major shakeup when the status quo is useless.
Teamsters, SEIU quit AFL-CIO
Two major unions become first of disenchanted groups to abandon labor federation.
July 25, 2005: 6:16 PM EDT
CHICAGO (CNN) - The Teamsters and the Service Employees International Union voted Monday to withdraw from the AFL-CIO.
The announcement came on the first day of the 50-year-old labor federation's annual meeting.
James Hoffa of the Teamsters and Andy Stern of SEIU told reporters they each notified AFL-CIO President John Sweeney on Monday morning in a letter after their executive boards unanimously agreed to disaffiliate.
"What John Sweeney has been doing has not been working and it's time to try something new," said Hoffa, general president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
He predicted to CNN that seven other international unions would soon bolt from the AFL-CIO and join the Teamsters.
"It is not done lightly. We have extended a number of propositions and ideas to the AFL-CIO to make sure that we could change the tide of the AFL-CIO.
"We have been disappointed over the last 10 years that we have seen a decline in membership," he said, referring to Sweeney's decade-long tenure as president.
Though the union suggested "a number of changes," including a $5 million rebate to help the Teamsters reorganize in their core industries, "they said no," Hoffa said. "Their idea is to keep throwing money at politicians."
He added, "What was being done at the AFL-CIO is not working; we are going to do something new. That is our message."
Among the new things the Teamsters will try, Hoffa said, will be becoming "more bipartisan. ... We're not going to be afraid to back a Republican."
Two other unions were also considering splitting from the AFL-CIO.
A spokeswoman for UNITE/HERE, which represents textile and hotel workers, said she would not announce Monday whether it is quitting the umbrella organization.
A spokeswoman for the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union said she did not know what was being planned.
"All the signs are that they are going to split off," former Labor Secretary Robert Reich told CNN.
The dissident unions have a combined membership of nearly 5 million workers -- about a third of the AFL-CIO's total membership. Their leaders have accused Sweeney of putting more money into political campaigns at the expense of union organizing.
"We are not trying to divide the labor movement, we are trying to rebuild it," SEIU President Andy Stern said Sunday.
When the AFL-CIO formed in 1955, about 35 percent of American workers belonged to unions. Today, unions represent about 8 percent of the private-sector workforce.
The AFL-CIO has weighed in heavily behind Democrats in national politics, with member unions contributing tens of millions to party candidates in 2004, according to federal campaign finance records.
"In unity, there is strength," Reich said. "And if the AFL-CIO splits, the fear is at least that the entire labor union movement will be less powerful than it is today -- and that's not very powerful."
Reich, who led the Labor Department during the Clinton administration, said American workers are likely to be worse off "if the labor unions just find themselves fractured and angry." But if the dissidents can get more workers to sign union cards, he said, "it's possible that the labor union movement, when the dust clears, is actually stronger."
In some ways the split of major unions from the AFL-CIO may have more symbolic impact than operational impact for unions and their members, said Gary Chaison, professor of industrial relations at Clark University in Massachusetts.
"Quite bluntly, to an auto worker at General Motors or an airline worker facing demands for concessions, this doesn't mean a of a lot," said Chaison. "Their concern is 'can my union deliver at the bargaining table?' I can't think of any union that would really be hurt at the bargaining table."
But Chaison said the split is important as a sign of the troubles that have been plaguing organized labor for decades: waning numerical strength and lost leverage in dealings with employers.
"I do think employers will be emboldened by this move. It's a signal that labor is on the ropes," he said. "The decline of organized labor over the last 20 years now is really shown by the events of the last day or two."
Chaison said that the loss of dues paid by members of the four major unions which may leave the AFL-CIO could cut its operating budget by up to a third.
"I think it (the AFL-CIO) will survive as long as it has key unions still in it like Steelworkers and Auto Workers and especially the Communication Workers," said Chaison. "But it's going to be a loss for the AFL-CIO in terms of income. It's not going to be effective in terms of political activity for quite a while."
Sweeney, who was president of the SEIU before becoming the federation's leader in 1995, said the federation's remaining 50-plus unions "will make major decisions about changing workers' lives this week, no matter what happens."
"It's a shame for working people that, before the first vote has been cast, four unions have decided that if they can't win, they won't show up for the game," Sweeney said in a written statement.
He said the boycotting unions "should come argue for their ideas and listen to others. That's how democracies work." He called it "fundamentally wrong to use working people's issues as a fig leaf for a power struggle."
But SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger said the AFL-CIO "has listened ... but, in the end, has not heard us." She called the differences "unresolvable."
The coalition includes three other unions -- the Laborers International Union, the Carpenters Union and the United Farm Workers. The UFW and the Laborers are not planning to boycott the convention, and the Carpenters Union is not an AFL-CIO member.
-- CNN Producer Grace Ramirez contributed to this report.
http://money.cnn.com/2005/07/25/news...ex.htm?cnn=yes
The labor movement has been stalled for decades. It's hard to find fault with any major shakeup when the status quo is useless.
So what do you think of unions?
My dad owns his own company (which I work for) and we have 3 different unions. As an employer, we pay a load of money each month to them for health and welfare, etc. Sometimes being an union company has hurt us in bids because our prices are higher.
Are unions the powerhouse they used to be?
Discuss.
They are definetly not the powerhouse they used to be because of many things. I have no problems with unions. I think if people can organize themselves in order to gain bargaining power that is simply capitalism at work.
I have a problem with Unions. They don't do what they were designed to do.
They were great for America at one time. Nodays nothing but a PAC.
I have seen Union Leadership indorse a Political canidate, the Members were simply not asked, polled, etc, but a Union Officer stated to the paper that the Union supported ...... I've seen this a lot in San Antonio and recently.
Unions were outstanding in the 40 -60's. I benifitted from them and so did a
lot of the folks in the coal fields of WVa.
a company needs to figure out how to be like wal-mart and say unions.. if they can't , then too bad, there will be a union...
Unions are important, but I agree that many of them have lost their way.
An anachronism.
Unions came about from trade guilds. If the union performs training and technical/skill development, they it will stick around because people will know that hiring a union electrician or pipefitter will mean quality work that is done to specifications and code. If they stop performing these functions and become solely a collective-bargaining body, they will die out as well.
We don't, however, need a united bottle washers union and the like. And yes, I know several union shops that have/may go out of business because they cannot bid competively with non-union shops. Stupid rules such as non-union workers not being allowed to use tools and the like will be the death knell for some unions. When I worked designing conveying equipment, some of the designs used hand knobs and manually-adjustable takeups and adjustments so that you wouldn't have to call in a union maintenance worker to tighten a bolt.
We make overhead cranes, so we have electricians, ironworkers, shop ironworkers. The electricians and field ironworkers get paid pretty well. Salary for them is in the $32-$35/hour range (these are CA unions). Our shopmen's union pays under $20/hour.
We don't lose too many bids because of our reputation and quality of materials, but a lot of times we end up being the high bidder.
My ho's tried to start a union, but I was like, " es, shut the up and gimme my money."
I had to smack some es down for that.
Nice. There are always a lot of critical components when doing overhead lifting, so I would imagine that some customers would be willing to pay a little extra, but do you face a lot of compe ion from overseas? (By that I mean Korea & Far East).We make overhead cranes
There are several mechanical contractors here in the South Austin area that were booming during the heyday of the semiconductor manufacturing in Austin, but now are scrounging for work. Being a union shop is murder when trying to lowball a bid.
For you ladies, that was a joke.
No, no compe ion from them at all. We do a lot of defense work. We have an ongoing service contract with Lockheed in Palmdale, and just got one with Boeing in Long Beach. We did a huge job (as a sub) for Boeing in Decatur, AL back in the late 90s. 95% of our jobs are in southern CA. A lot of our compe ors have been bought out by other companies or are just no longer around.
It has slowed down a lot and we're not as busy as we once were. I think part of that has to do with defense spending being down and the fact that my dad has pretty much retired.
Well, here's hoping the Port of Long Beach builds a new shipping dock or something of the like for you.
You mean like hiring illegal workers and keeping them "part-time" so they don't have to pay benefits and make them work off the clock?
You just ruined a perfectly good union-bashing thread. Thanks a lot, organized labor supporter.
The primary benefit of unions in my industry is that they are so damaging to productivity that companies will overcompensate their non-union workers to dissuade them from organizing. It's better to pay 5-10% more than the union workers get than to see your output drop by 20%.
If unions go away entirely, then companies could revert to the Wal-Mart model and screw their people over.
Extra, what industry are you in?
I work for a non-union construction company and when an independent productivity survey was done at a facility we work at a few years ago, the Steelworkers were productive only 2-3 hours in an 8 hour day and our hands were productive 6-7 hours.
I've worked both sides of the coin, and while I think that the apprentice and training programs unions have/had are wonderful (It's nice to call the hall for a welder or a millwright and actually have someone show up who knows what he is doing), the incessant breaks/mandates/job claims/etc. turn me off.
Our permanent union employees have been with us for over 20 years, so we do have a good core of guys. We hire mostly field ironworkers out the hall on an as need per job basis. Lemme tell you, you get some real pieces of work. Most of them owe child support and or back taxes. Unfortunately, but the time I get the withholding order, we've laid them off.
As my field superintendent likes to say, most of them are one step ahead of the law.
The Union was great for my dad when he got hired at GM back in the early 60's. If it wasn't for the Union he may not have but lucky enough to earn what he did with only a 6th grade education. But I also think they caused prices to sky rocket for some manufactured goods.
Don't think they are as powerful as they once were.
Look around, most well-paying blue-collar jobs and even many high-paying white collar jobs in the U.S. are protected by Unions. If your job is secure, it's probably because your protected by a Union. The real problem is that the U.S. has dropped trade barriers, first with NAFTA and now possibly with CAFTA, too fast, and it is hard for American companies to compete against what would amount to slave wages here and the lack of benefits in India, Indonesia, Mexico and soon Central America.
The funny thing about unions are this:
Our unions are based out of Los Angles county. If we go into another union's jurisdiction, we have to hire ironworkers out of that local. It doesn't happen often because I think we get around it somehow
So do you do installs/startups, and if so, do you have to scrounge around for union labor at each location? That sucks if you do.
BTW, I can personally verify the union ironworker productivities quoted by 1369. They are some goofing off sons of es. Luckily, we had some ironworkers from Canada helping install our conveyor on our part of the ride and they worked nonstop and were happy to be paid in the US in US dollars (kept the sociallist gov. from taxing them to death).
As much as conservatives would love to see the demise of Unions, I don't see that happening anytime soon. Unions aren’t as visual as they used to be, some Unions are strictly PAC's that look after the best 'political' interest of its members. Others provide its members with Insurance, disability, law-referral and assistance, banking and many other benefits on top of negotiating new contracts with employers.
This move by the Teamsters and SEIU seems more like a power-move at the top of the Union ladder than any else that might be read by this.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
