FOKUS AMERIKA

B ü r o W a s h i n g t o n

Dr. Almut Wieland-Karimi 1023 15th S treet NW, # 801 Washingto n, DC 20005 USA Tel.: +1 202 408 5444 Fax: +1 20 2 408 5537 fesdc@fes dc.org www.fesdc .org

Nr. 6 / 2006

Dueling Federations: U.S. Labor in 2006 Richard W. Hurd1

. Seven unions with six million members formed the Change to Win federation in 2005, leaving the AFL-CIO with nine million members.

. Neither dire predictions of open warfare nor optimistic scenarios of immediate growth have proved accurate; union density is relatively stable, and the two federations are learning how to coexist peacefully.

. There has been a marked increase in strategic cooperation among national unions, most notably within the CTW, but also through AFL-CIO Industrial Coordinating Committees.

. The CTW is sponsoring a number of large-scale organizing campaigns, and several AFL-CIO unions have increased organizing expenditures substantially; to date the results have been modest.

. The two federations are cooperating for the 2006 Congressional elections with the AFL-CIO taking the lead.

. The best hope for the future is that the labor movement will ultimately benefit from competing models for growth.

Background

Labor unity in the U.S. lasted exactly half a celebration. On the eve of the August 2005 century. At the convention to celebrate the event in Chicago, seven major unions fiftieth anniversary of the 1955 merger of the announced that they would break away from American Federation of Labor with the the AFL-CIO. Six weeks later they formally Congress of Industrial Organizations, bitter- established the Change to Win federation, ness and rebellion swept away plans of spawning both proclamations of labor’s

FOKUS AMERIKA 6 / 2006 rebirth and simultaneous warnings of the industrial jurisdiction. The proposal also set movement’s destruction. mandatory targets for the organizing expenditures of the AFL-CIO affiliates. At Ten years before the rupture John Sweeney this juncture the NUP unions were joined by had headed a challenge to the entrenched three others, most notably the Teamsters; leadership of the AFL-CIO. He was elected shortly thereafter they adopted a new name, President of the federation in 1995 on a the Change to Win coalition (CTW). platform that emphasized structural change Throughout the first half of 2005 the CTW and identified organizing as the top priority. unions not only pushed their restructuring His victory generated an extraordinary level agenda, but also called for ousting of John of enthusiasm among progressive unionists Sweeney as AFL-CIO President. and their allies in academic and political circles. With Sweeney at the helm and his The reform proposals were dismissed as union the SEIU (service employees) leading insulting by labor leaders who embraced the the way, it seemed that organized labor was tradition of national union autonomy on poised for a remarkable reversal of fortunes. strategic issues related to bargaining, orga- nizing, and internal governance. It was not But Sweeney’s efforts to reorient the AFL- just traditionalists who were angry; several CIO’s seventy national unions were national leaders widely respected for their unsuccessful, and the election of the arch progressive views and support for innovation conservative George W. Bush as President also attacked the plan. These union officials of the U.S. in 2000 deepened labor’s woes. endorsed the importance of allocating sub- With union density continuing to decline at stantial resources to organizing but rejected the same rate as before 1995, opposition to the overall reform agenda, arguing for the Sweeney emerged, ironically led by Andy necessity to devote equal attention to poli- Stern who succeeded him as President of tical initiatives. They also attacked the re- SEIU. In the summer of 2003 Stern joined structuring idea as top-down engineering that with four other union presidents to form the would undermine union democracy. It be- New Unity Partnership (NUP), which origi- came clear weeks in advance of the 2005 nally pushed for change within the AFL-CIO. AFL-CIO convention that John Sweeney This loose-knit group embraced a framework retained enough support to win on any key for reform that echoed Sweeney’s earlier cry votes and to be reelected. When the CTW for increased resources devoted to orga- realized that its reform proposals would be nizing. The NUP also proposed restruc- defeated, its key members announced that turing through mergers designed to promote they would withdraw from the AFL-CIO. On consolidation based on industry in order to September 27, 2005, the new Change to Win enhance bargaining power. federation held its founding convention in St. Louis. The proposals stimulated debate, but serious consideration of reform was postponed so Contrasting Expectations that all of labor could join forces in an effort to replace George Bush as President. When In the aftermath of the formal split, there was the political effort fell short and Bush was great distress among the unions that reelected in November, 2004, the NUP retained allegiance to the AFL-CIO. The lea- unions immediately went on the offensive. ders of the CTW unions were described as Most notably, the SEIU released a refined arrogant and self-serving and were denoun- restructuring plan that would give the AFL- ced for undermining union solidarity. There CIO authority to force mergers, reducing the were dire warnings of raids by CTW unions number of unions from seventy to no more to steal members from AFL-CIO affiliates, than twenty, each with a clearly defined and deep concern that the movement would

2

FOKUS AMERIKA 6 / 2006 be divided at the state and local level under- organizing arena. Organizing is still a priori- mining mutual support and cooperation on ty, but national unions control all funding and political campaigns. More practically, the de- strategic decisions. In his Labor Day press parture of unions accounting for approxi- conference John Sweeney announced that mately one-third of the AFL-CIO’s member- four key affiliates have increased their ship forced budget cuts that affected all organizing budget by a total of $100 million. aspects of the federation’s operation. Meanwhile, the AFL-CIO itself has reasona- bly decided to concentrate primarily on politi- While the AFL-CIO scrambled to reorganize cal action. A centerpiece of the political ef- and refocus, the CTW unions began to fort is its Voice@Work campaign for labor develop a coordinated strategy to pursue a law reform, which promotes the long-term growth agenda. At its founding convention, objectives embodied in proposed federal the new federation selected of legislation. The Employee Free Choice Act SEIU as Chair and Edgar Romney of UNITE- would establish union certification based on HERE (needletrades and hotels) as Vice signed authorization cards, provide for arbi- Chair. Burger became the first woman to tration in bargaining for first contracts, and lead a U.S. labor federation, and Romney increase penalties for employer unfair labor became the first African American to serve at practices violations. As of October 1, 2006, such a high level of federation leadership. the bill has been endorsed by 260 members of Congress — a majority of those in the The CTW unions projected a determined House of Representatives and close to half optimism. They argued that by shifting sub- of those in the Senate. stantial resources to organizing, conducting joint campaigns where appropriate, and The federation also has initiated an asso- promoting strategic support among members ciate membership program, Working Ameri- of the coalition, CTW would pave the way for ca, to establish a communication link to wor- growth. The CTW unions pronounced their kers who support labor’s political philosophy intent to target for organizing only those but who are not currently union members. industries that cannot export jobs, primarily Working America was created in the leadup in the service sector, transportation, and to the 2004 election and currently claims construction. They declared that they had no nearly 1.5 million subscribers. Like desire to fight with the AFL-CIO and would Voice@Work, this project is directly integral be content to build power in those industries to the federation’s political program. The already within their core jurisdictions. Also, most impressive aspect of the AFL-CIO’s the key leaders of CTW publicly voiced leadership role in the political arena is its opposition to raiding. remarkable effort to influence the 2006 election. In spite of the defection of the CTW After a relatively brief period of acrimony, the unions, the AFL-CIO has managed to two federations negotiated an agreement allocate $40 million to mobilization for the that allows locals of CTW unions to apply for 2006 campaign, up approximately one-third “solidarity charters.” The charters assure from its expenditures in the most recent mid- that the locals will have full rights of term election four years ago. By all indi- participation in municipal labor councils and cations, the effort in the field has not been state labor federations affiliated with the adversely affected. In fact, the CTW has AFL-CIO. agreed to cooperate with the AFL-CIO, and the more established federation retains its AFL-CIO Strategy 2006 role as leader of labor’s political action program. A year after the split, it is clear that the AFL- CIO has deemphasized its role in the

3

FOKUS AMERIKA 6 / 2006

In addition to politics, another key initiative of commercial) and UNITE-HERE will jointly co- the AFL-CIO is the formation of Industry ordinate certain retail organizing campaigns, Coordinating Committees (ICC). The ICCs and LIUNA (laborers) and UBC (carpenters) are designed to coordinate bargaining and will work together on major construction organizing activities among unions with sub- industry organizing. The best example of a stantial membership in a particular industry. campaign that is too large for any one union The idea originally was suggested during the is Wake Up WalMart, a public awareness fight with CTW as an alternative to manda- campaign to highlight the leading retailer’s tory mergers. There are currently three ICCs excesses. in operation, with more on the drawing board. The first ICC was formed in October The overriding strategy is to target for orga- 2005, bringing together unions in the arts, nizing activity only those industries that will entertainment, media, and information indus- remain in the U.S., primarily in health care, tries. The other ICCs are for unions repre- hospitality, retail, building services, trans- senting nurses (RNs Working Together), and portation, and construction. In order to pro- for unions of state and local government mote full cooperation, the presidents of the employees. Although it is too early to assess unions hold bi-weekly conference calls and the impact of ICCs, they have provided a monthly meetings. In addition, the unions’ venue for strategic coordination and cross- organizing directors, campaign directors, and fertilization thereby strengthening ties among political directors meet regularly to share AFL-CIO affiliates. The most important as- strategic plans and seek input on campaign pects of the state and local government planning. There is a high degree of energy, ICC’s agenda is a targeted campaign to commitment, and excitement about working expand bargaining rights for public em- together to build market power through ag- ployees in states that do not have com- gressive organizing. Although organizing is prehensive labor laws. This effort dovetails the top priority, the unions also support each with the AFL-CIO’s political program. other on major bargaining campaigns.

CTW Strategy 2006 The CTW is also looking to build global partnerships with unions in other countries in CTW unions subscribe to a growth agenda support of organizing where a key employer based on organizing. They embrace an is a multinational corporation. approach that includes reallocation of re- has established an informal global organizing sources on a grand scale away from other alliance that includes key union leaders from union activities and to recruitment. The parti- at least a dozen countries. Several CTW cipating unions have agreed that 75 percent campaigns have global connections, inclu- of the CTW budget should be devoted to ding the school bus drivers’ campaign which organizing, and that each affiliate will maxi- is targeting a British company and a mize resources for organizing. Each union UFCW/UNITE-HERE retail, apparel, and dis- accepts responsibility for organizing in its tribution initiative. own industry. The primary role of CTW is to sponsor joint campaigns by pairs of affiliated There is consensus among CTW leaders unions, and to initiate new campaigns that that political action will pay dividends in the are too big for a single union. short term only if tied directly to strategic Current joint campaigns include SEIU and leverage to support specific campaigns or the Teamsters who are partnering to recruit pave the way for organizing. Although parti- school bus drivers, SEIU with UNITE-HERE cipating alongside the AFL-CIO nationally for in general service contracting, and the the 2006 elections, the CTW is running its Teamsters with UNITE-HERE in industrial own field operations in Michigan, Ohio, and laundries. In addition, UFCW (food and

4

FOKUS AMERIKA 6 / 2006

Pennsylvania in the hopes of electing labor- natural fit with occupational unionism. Re- friendly governors. cognizing the potential, the AFL-CIO De- partment for Professional Employees has For now the CTW denies any interest in initiated strategic dialogue among its affi- adding new unions to the federation. Any liates and through this process is exploring prospective member will have to embrace alternatives to traditional collective bargain- the CTW organizing commitment, accepts its ing, as well as political options for addressing strategic campaign focus, and limit its activi- the workplace concerns of the growing con- ties to assigned jurisdictions. The depth of tingent white collar workforce. Ultimately, the strategic coordination that appears to be future of the U.S. labor movement will de- emerging from the CTW is atypical and has pend not only on the CTW’s fortunes but also not been seen in the U.S. since the early on the ability of other unions to adapt to the years of the CIO in the late 1930s. 21st century with their own growth agenda. Ironically, it may be competition between the The Potential for Revitalization with a two federations that creates the dynamic Divided Labor Movement energy required to spur union revitalization.

Strategically the CTW framework for growth Unfortunately, the future path is not clear and appears to hold promise, and the AFL-CIO is there are numerous obstacles to resurgence. making progress in creating a new identity Globalization, the hostile political environ- and sense of purpose among its affiliates. ment that will surely continue well beyond The best hope for immediate success lies the Bush presidency, and the broad neo- with CTW-coordinated organizing cam- liberal policies embraced by both U.S. poli- paigns. Hotel Workers Rising, an effort tical parties will combine to thwart many sponsored by CTW and coordinated by union initiatives. The AFL-CIO has taken UNITE-HERE, has secured neutrality agree- some initial steps to openly challenge the ments from Hilton Hotels and other major neoliberal agenda, and this needs to con- corporations in the industry, and the union tinue if labor hopes to push the Democratic appears poised for substantial growth. If Party to the left. Inside of the labor move- other CTW campaigns achieve similar re- ment there is still some danger that com- sults, the new federation will begin to gain petition between the federations will dege- momentum. Ideally this would stimulate nerate into open warfare with raiding and, unions in the AFL-CIO to rally behind alter- even more likely, an inability to coordinate native models for growth that are compelling strategy across the chasm. Finally, there is and are pursued with clarity and unity of no evidence that the CTW growth agenda purpose. Perhaps consensus could be can succeed, since even those unions within reached to embrace a competing model the new federation that have been devoting based on a re-energized application of poli- substantive resources to organizing for over tical unionism, or one that constructs a a decade (SEIU and UNITE-HERE) have modern-day interpretation of occupational had only modest success at increasing den- unionism. sity in core jurisdictions. The newcomers to the strategic organizing framework, espe- The AFL-CIO unions have moved beyond cially the Teamsters and the UFCW, need to their initial distress with the split, and now go through a difficult period of radical orga- need to build positive momentum that nizational change in order to build the foun- speaks to workers not attracted to the CTW dation for long-term growth. industrial/sectoral framework. Public sector workers would likely prefer some form of In spite of the pitfalls, the current controversy political unionism, while the expanding pro- has at least stirred unions into action. The fessional and technical workforce would be a U.S. labor movement continues to face the

5

FOKUS AMERIKA 6 / 2006 real possibility of irrelevancy and even ex- tinction. Given their former strength, it may be surprising that the American unions have to fear for their futures. However, the globa- lized economy and anti-union policies have significantly contributed to the crisis of the unions in the U.S.2 The share of the private sector work force that is unionized fell from more than 20 percent in 1980 to less than 8 percent in 2005. Additionally, the unions that continue to exist have far less power due to changed tactics by employers, who can fire the leaders of organizing drives more easily. Radical transformation is crucial for labor movement revival and, with the CTW serving as catalyst (or antagonist depending on your perspective), there is finally the possibility that unions will find a way to adapt and ultimately will create strategic approaches that deliver voice, power, and leverage in the context of the evolving global economy.

Washington, DC December 4, 2006

1 Richard W. Hurd is Professor of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell University. 2 See also Baker, Dean, “Increasing Inequality in the ”, Fokus Amerika 5, 2006: Friedrich Ebert Foundation

6