Minneapolis, MN – After a 45-day strike, Twin Cities transit workers reached a tentative agreement on a new contract, April 13. Despite vocal opposition in the media by some members of Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1005, the contract was ratified with 72% voting in favor. The final scorecard was clear – retiree medical benefits were eliminated and wage increases were only 1.5% over three years. While there were some gains from the employer’s final pre-strike offer, the union was able to get back only a portion of the millions of dollars the employer saved by not operating buses during the strike.

But one cannot simply judge a strike by what is immediately won and lost. We have to ask: How did the workers fight the fight, how did they engage the enemy, and did it advance the struggle?

There should be no doubt that it was correct for bus drivers to stand up and fight for health care and against concessions. Union after union over the past couple of years has rolled over to employer demands for concessions. Those workers who chose to fight rather than concede, such as grocery workers in California, clerical workers at the University of Minnesota and striking members of ATU Local 1005 should be applauded.

However, while it is good transit workers chose to fight, it would have been better if they had been able to fight harder and smarter.

It was clear from the beginning of the strike that there were two conceptions of trade unionism at work in Local 1005. A bureaucratic approach, led by the Local 1005 president, represented a business unionism approach to striking. This approach placed emphasis on reaching a last-minute deal, did not attempt to mobilize the membership and ignored the key task of organizing the community. The approach was not to fight the enemy – Governor Pawlenty and Met Council head Peter Bell – in the press or through sharp political actions. With no roadmap to victory, the only strategy appeared to be to wear out the membership so a deal could be reached.

The other approach within Local 1005 was a class struggle approach. A group of the leadership actively pushed and organized a more militant agenda. This section of Local 1005 organized a series of rallies, involved the membership in a strike committee and reached out to the community. They began to put out a sharper analysis of the fight, emphasizing the roots of the problem in the health care crisis. It is clear that these are the types of tactics Local 1005 would have had to employ earlier and more consistently to win the strike.

The membership of Local 1005 favored a more aggressive approach and were willing to take action. Early in the strike, hundreds of members, with little prompting, pushed into the governor’s office demanding a just settlement of the contract. When the settlement was announced, many members made it clear that they wanted to continue to fight, but did not see a winning strategy from the leadership.

The will to sacrifice and the determination shown by the members of Local 1005 merits the respect of all working people. There is little doubt that in an era when attacks on public employees are the order of the day, transit workers will face the job of resisting new attacks and making up for lost ground. Hopefully, they will do so with a leadership that is capable of rising to the occasion and doing what needs to be done.

#TwinCitiesMN #MN #Commentary #BusStrike #AmalgamatedTransitUnionLocal1005