Tampa, FL – On Thursday, August 28, at the University of South Florida (USF) Tampa campus, the Tampa Graduate Assistants United (GAU) continued negotiations with representatives of the USF Board of Trustees to discuss the rights of international graduate assistants and update their collective bargaining agreement (CBA). Members of Tampa Bay Students for a Democratic Society were in the audience.

After a month of GAU introducing Article 26, an article aiming to protect international graduate assistant (GA) rights, the USF bargaining team gave a shameful response to GAU’s proposal. After disrespecting GAU’s time and coming into this bargaining session late, the USF bargaining team, without providing a counterproposal, the proper method during bargaining, declined to negotiate Article 26 at all. The USF bargaining team spoke in a low quiet voice, refusing to make eye contact with GAU and the audience.

With approximately 40% of graduate assistants being international students, GAU’s goal has always been to fight for protections for international graduate assistants.

“Considering the political climate and the attacks that have been levied against international students more broadly, we felt that it was really necessary to introduce protections for international students,” Tessa Barber, the USF GAU president and member of the GAU bargaining team, stated. “Even if it's just keeping Immigrations and Customs Enforcement out of classrooms and private spaces.”

GAU was rightfully infuriated upon hearing this response from the USF bargaining team. “They’re [USF bargaining team] not even being neutral about it.” Morgan Amick, the membership chair of GAU, noted. “They’re taking a stance against international GAs.”

USF has a track record of attacking international students. Most recently, the USF police department signed onto the 287(g) program from ICE, giving the campus police department the authority to perform detentions and attacks on local immigrant communities.

Despite this shameful reaction from USF’s bargaining team, GAU refused to let this response stop them. Tessa Barber asserted that Article 26 “is of grave importance to us at the bargaining table, it’s not something we’re willing to back down on.”

The next bargaining session is tentatively scheduled for September 10 at 1 p.m., with the location to be announced, where GAU will continue to fight to protect the rights of international GAs. “GAU is committed to standing with international graduate assistants and staying strong at the table to advocate for support and protections for them,” Tessa Barber insisted.

#TampaFL #FL #LaborMovement #StudentMovement #GAU #SDS

On Monday, October 30, the United Auto Workers at General Motors announced that they had reached a tentative agreement for their next union contract. This tentative agreement comes as the last of three, after they reached a similar deal in negotiations with Stellantis on Saturday, October 28, which in turn followed news of a deal at Ford on Wednesday, October 25.

The tentative agreements at all three companies still need to be voted on by the members of UAW, however, the workers won significant gains in the new contract offer. The driving force behind these tentative contract gains was a 44-day period of “stand up strikes” by the union members, where they chose select locations to take workers out on strike designed to impact the bosses’ ability to keep making money, but at the same time as allowing most of their members to remain working and preserving their strike funds.

The stand up strikes appear to have worked and allowed the UAW members at all three companies to win significant gains.

On October 25, UAW first announced a deal at Ford. That deal included raises of over 25% over the length of the contract, with workers at the top of the scale seeing 30% increases and workers at the bottom seeing a 68% increase. They also won language allowing them to strike even during a contract over plant closures, which is vital as the manufacturing of cars switches increasingly to electric.

Once Ford had fallen, then on Saturday, three days later, UAW announced that they had reached a similar deal at Stellantis. The Stellantis deal follows a similar pattern to the Ford one and has the lowest paid workers seeing 165% in raises. The deal also contains language to bring the Belvidere Assembly Plant back online with a new product.

Then only two days after that, a deal was reported with GM, which is said to again follow a similar pattern as the other two contracts did. Details of that tentative agreement have not yet been released.

The workers at all three companies still have to vote on the tentative agreements to make it final, but these contract deals amount to significant gains, after years of loss for the UAW members.

#UAW #LaborMovement #Strike

When legendary and prolific labor history researcher and author Phil Foner died in 1994, he left behind more than 100 meticulously researched and detailed histories of the U.S. labor movement. But Foner was not merely an historian in the usual university mold; he was a partisan, a lifetime communist, and he saw his work as not just chronicles of past events but serious guides to action for those still on the labor battlefront. His books in many ways became the untold stories of our class struggle.

Probably his most accomplished and massive work is the 11-volume History of the Labor Movement in the United States. Such an enormous work would be enough for any individual to research in a lifetime, but this series is only a small portion of his life’s work. Reaching from our colonial period all the way up through the early years of the Great Depression, Foner tracks the emergence of the early U.S. labor movement, its growth and evolution, and he details its many battles with employers and state forces alike.

At his death almost 30 years ago the series ended with Volume 10. Accidentally I learned about a lost draft manuscript that apparently existed for a Volume 11 several years ago. With persistence, the support of a small collective of fellow communists, and the cooperation of International Publishers, we were able to finally bring Volume 11 into print.

Setting apart Foner’s scholarship from most other labor historians is the fact that he includes the internal union political context of the era under study. Including the contributions made by the left, particularly communists and militants, is a constant theme that runs throughout the enormous history. Leadership roles played by communists were in many ways the key force both initiating and sustaining the dramatic labor struggles of the past 100 years. The author also takes great care to include details of the destructive roles frequently played by the business union leaderships, and where needed he exposes the negative roles too often played by social democratic forces. Few other labor histories will delve into these internal matters. Foner instead lays bare the actions of these forces, required for anyone to grasp the real context of the history. Most labor historians are allergic to dealing with these matters, but not Foner.

Newly published Volume 11 covers the early years of the Great Depression, from 1929 through 1932. Here Foner explains the political and organizational roots of what became the great class struggle upsurge that ultimately gave birth to the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). He reports on the desperate Depression-driven fights in multiple industries as workers were confronted with both employers bent on union liquidation, along with business union “leaders” determined to do whatever it took to water down or kill the growing spirit among the workers to aggressively fight back. Battle after battle is detailed as the working class resisted as best they could the mass joblessness, starvation, destitution and homelessness experienced by many millions.

Large sections of Volume 11 are dedicated to reports on the wind-down of the Trade Union Educational League (TUEL) and the birth of the Trade Union Unity League (TUUL), the federation of Communist Party-sponsored industrial unions in more than a dozen industries.

Foner offers intricate reports on the launch of new unions in steel and metal manufacturing, the needle trades, coal mining, food processing, tobacco, agriculture, auto, fur and other industries. With AFL unions then barely functioning, and with tens of thousands of communists and militants expelled from their unions by reactionaries in a “rule or ruin” maneuver, the Communist Party set in motion the TUUL experiment. Under Depression conditions the establishment of the TUUL was an against-all-odds proposition, but in just a few years most of the unions returned to the more established unions and bolstered the forces who soon comprised the Committee for Industrial Organization (CIO). Some academic critics have written off the TUUL legacy as some sort of Communist Party blunder, although given the circumstances nothing could be farther from the facts.

My favorite class-struggle skirmish documented in Volume 11 – one of many – is Foner’s report on the rank-and-file communist-led delegation of workers who appeared at the 1932 Cincinnati convention of the American Federation of Labor (AFL) to demand that the AFL support unemployment insurance for the many millions then out of jobs and literally starving.

The early years of the Depression found the conservative AFL leadership furiously opposed to unemployment relief, ridiculing it as “the dole” or “a Moscow plot.” Led by communist Louis Weinstock from the Painters Union, the ordinary union members were denied entrance to the seating in the main hall of the non-union hotel but were instead directed to the balcony seating. High above in the balcony the workers presented no threat and had no chance of being heard by the union big shots conducting their business-as-usual affair. But, seeing his chance – and being accustomed to working at great heights as a painter – Weinstock leapt from the balcony onto one of the gigantic chandeliers swinging above the seated labor chiefs. There, safely out of the reach of the police, he delivered his entire speech demanding AFL support for the urgently needed unemployment relief legislation. Unbelievably, and virtually unknown to labor leftists today, it required several more years before the AFL offered its support to such a basic reform as unemployment compensation. Many other such surprises are found here.

Much can be learned by studying the labor movement in the early years of the Great Depression. Argument could be made that the bulk of the business union leadership today is equally conservative, frightened, corrupted, directionless and as unimaginative as were their counterparts at the onset of that calamity. It quickly becomes obvious to the reader that the failed formulas of the business unions will not deliver any better results today than in the Depression decade. Today, as we are witness to the Amazon, Starbucks, and other new organizing upsurges, the imminent UPS contract showdown, and Biden’s destruction of the rail union strike, we see growing numbers of trade unionists demanding something better than the old losing approaches. In this moment Foner’s labor history series takes on added urgency.

Order Volume 11 and you will soon find yourself soon buying the others. William Z. Foster observed early in his career that, “The left wing must do the work.” He refers to the elements both within and around the labor movement who bear responsibility for altering the disastrous course set by the business union misleaders. Transforming the current unions from what they are into radically different and aggressive vehicles for working class progress is our mission. This series is a guide for action to that end.

History of the Labor Movement in the United States, Volume 11, The Great Depression 1929 – 1932, by Philip Foner. https://www.intpubnyc.com/browse/the-history-of-the-labor-movement-in-the-united-states-vol-11/ Chris Townsend was the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) International Union Organizing Director. Previously he was an International Representative and Political Action Director for the United Electrical Workers Union (UE).

#UnitedStates #BookReviews #LaborMovement

To mark May Day last month, the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) dropped a new pamphlet aimed at the hundreds of thousands of people embracing socialism across the country. Titled Class Struggle on the Shop Floor: A Strategy for a New Generation of Socialists, the 24-page paper outlines the FRSO’s approach to unions, the labor movement and the fight for socialism in the United States.

Just to say, this isn’t a rehash of tired political slogans. It’s a fresh, concrete look at the challenges facing both unions and socialists in 2019. It’s a call to revive the best elements of American unionism and socialist organizing. Frankly, there’s not much else like it in terms of depth, strategy and practical guidance for socialists, new and old, looking to dive into labor work.

It couldn’t come at a more important time either. “Socialism is back,” as the opening words read, and it’s growing fast. Just in March, roughly 50% of people between ages 18-35 said they would “prefer living in a socialist country” in a survey by Harris Poll. The explosive growth of groups like the Democratic Socialists of America and the continued popularity of self-described ‘democratic socialist’ senator Bernie Sanders attest to the growing disgust with capitalism.

But socialism’s popularity isn’t the only rising force in American politics. Last year, the U.S. saw 20 major strikes and work stoppages – more than any time since 1986 – along with dozens of militant contract battles at UPS and in the steel industry. This outbreak of strike fever began with teachers in West Virginia and quickly spread to teachers’ unions across the country. Now private sector unions are getting in on the action, like the victorious ten-day strike by Stop-N-Shop grocery workers in the Northeast.

Class Struggle on the Shop Floor identifies the U.S. socialist movement’s distance from labor as a key weakness – one that new socialists and radicals can help overcome. The fight for socialism is the fight for rule by the working class over the economy, government and society. But for several decades, much of the socialist movement has organized outside and away from its natural mass base.

This ‘hard divorce’ between socialism and labor, as the pamphlet calls it, hasn’t benefited either movement. Labor lost many of its militant, most dedicated fighters for worker power. In their absence, union bureaucrats increasingly discarded the strike weapon, preferring instead to strike deals with employers. Meanwhile, socialism got pushed to the margins of U.S. politics, distorted by the outsized influence of middle-class intellectuals, academia and more.

This pamphlet lays out a strategy for changing that. Even as membership hits historic lows in the U.S., unions remain the biggest and most important mass organizations of workers. Situated at the point of production, organized labor can do battle with their capitalist bosses in the arena where they are strongest. If we’re serious about fighting capitalism, that’s where we need to organize – not as staffers or allies, but as rank-and-file union workers on the shop floor, fighting side by side with our sisters and brothers.

One of the strongest sections of the pamphlet deals with the militant minority in the labor movement. It provides much-needed clarity at a time when more socialists and radicals than ever are talking about a rank-and-file approach to union organizing.

“The militant minority,” it says, “are those union workers who know the score. They clearly see management as the enemy and want to fight back. But they also understand that most of their union officials don’t share their view and collaborate with the boss. Whether organized or not, large or small, a militant minority exists in every union. They represent the natural trend towards class struggle in the working class, and that makes them key to transforming our unions.”

But the militant minority is more than just a grouping in the labor movement. It’s also a method that socialists and communists have used throughout U.S. history to transform unions into class struggle organizations – something the pamphlet explores in detail. The militant minority directs its main line of attack at the boss to draw as many workers as possible into the fight, including union officials. “If they join with us, good! Our struggle against the boss – and the class struggle in general – grows stronger. If the officials refuse, they are forced to step between the workers and the boss, exposing themselves as collaborators and opening themselves up to attack by the rank and file.”

The FRSO’s pamphlet concretely explores how rank-and-file socialists can help transform our unions. As part of the rank and file, we’re better positioned to lead fights against the boss – and sellout union officials – and raise the class consciousness of our coworkers. Sure, class consciousness alone won’t make workers socialists, “but we won’t have socialism without tens of millions of workers developing class consciousness.”

Class Struggle on the Shop Floor tackles other timely questions too. It looks at the material basis for the oppression faced by African Americans, Latinos, women and others – and why unions are one of the best vehicles for confronting systematic inequalities and discrimination. While its central argument centers on a revolutionary path to socialism, the pamphlet seriously grapples with the question of strategy, avoiding the eye-rolling clichés that mark so much writing on the U.S. Left.

The FRSO isn’t one of the flashiest socialist organizations in the country. But Class Struggle on the Shop Floor is written with an intensity and level of insight that only comes from hands-on experience in the labor movement. Their members spent the last decade in the rank and file of union workers, organizing on the shop floor, developing as workplace leaders, leading fights against the boss and pushing class struggle unionism. This isn’t to say this pamphlet is the final word on strategy or tactics – just that it’s backed up with practice.

Any socialist rank-and-filer will tell you it takes a certain patience and lunch-pail mentality to organize in the labor movement. But if we want to get rid of capitalism, it’s the only road forward.

The FRSO labor pamphlet can be viewed here.

#UnitedStates #PeoplesStruggles #FreedomRoadSocialistOrganization #LaborMovement #Socialism

Washington, D.C. – Labor officials in Washington D.C. are preparing for the worst and hoping for the best as Donald Trump assumes the office of president of the United States after losing the popular vote by 2.9 million votes but winning enough electoral votes from the states to assume the presidency. Trump secured his Electoral College win by squeaking ahead just slightly of corporate Democrat Hillary Clinton in states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

The election of Donald Trump has increased anxiety for a labor movement that has already been under sustained attack since 2011 when Tea Party governors began to roll out attacks on collective bargaining rights in states like Wisconsin and Michigan. The attack most recently culminated in Harris v. Quinn when a narrow right-wing majority on the Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that unions could no longer collect fair share fees to cover the cost of representation from certain groups of public employees who opted not to pay their membership fees to the union.

Labor officials fear an intensified assault on workers’ rights in three primary areas. Rank-and-file workers are right to be anxious too about the dangerous possibilities a Trump administration presents. Effectively resisting an anti-labor agenda will require both a sober analysis of the situation and rank-and-file militancy in fighting back in the workplace and in the streets.

Trump Supreme Court pick will likely renew Friedrichs attack

Workers dodged a bullet when Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died in February 2016, depriving the Court of its extreme anti-union majority. Prior to Scalia’s death it looked as if the Supreme Court would undo fair share fees for all public-sector employees in the case of Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, negatively impacting thousands of labor contracts covering millions of public workers in the process. The death of Scalia gave labor a temporary reprieve as a lower court ruling in favor of fair share fees has been upheld until the Court’s vacancy is filled.

The success of Senate Republicans in blocking Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, means that a President Trump will get to nominate Scalia’s replacement; a Republican Senate will be responsible for confirming the nominee.

In September 2016, Trump completed a list of 21 potential nominees to the Supreme Court. According to a USA Today analysis, Trump promised upon releasing his list to appoint justices like Justice Scalia. Ten of the potential nominees are federal judges put on the bench by President George W. Bush; one is a federal judge nominated by the first President Bush. Nine others were placed on state supreme courts by a Republican governor, and four of them clerked for Clarence Thomas, who is often viewed as the Supreme Court’s most conservative justice.

A Trump presidency very likely means a right-wing majority on the Court will take back up the Friedrichs case, or one similar to it, and rule against public sector workers by undermining fair share arrangements and thus starving their union of resources. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU); American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees; National Education Association; and American Federation of Teachers are just a handful of the public-sector unions that will be greatly impacted by a negative ruling on Friedrichs. Many of the labor officials associated with these unions believe it is not a matter of if, but when, the Supreme Court undoes public sector fair share.

A potential Trump NLRB threatens to undo union rights for graduate students and others

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled in August 2016 that graduate research and teaching assistants have the right under the National Labor Relations Act to form a union and collectively bargain with their private university employer. The decision reversed a 2004 NLRB ruling, which had found that graduate assistants at private universities were not employees and had no right to collectively bargain under federal law.

In the months since the August decision, graduate assistant employees at Columbia University have voted to join the United Auto Workers (UAW). Graduate workers at other universities have since filed for their union election as well. Private university graduate workers and union organizers fear that a Trump-appointed NLRB will reverse the 2016 decision and undo recognition of their right to collectively bargain.

In December 2014, the NLRB issued several rules that updated procedures for resolving representation disputes. The rules helped speed up the timeline for elections, which generally benefits workers and the union by limiting the amount of time the boss has to use union-busting tactics to scare and divide workers, allow for the electronic filing of union petitions, and require that employers provide additional available contact information such as personal telephone numbers and email addresses to the union when it provides voter lists.

These rules are minor reforms in the larger landscape of U.S. labor law, but they have helped streamline election procedures on a more level playing field for workers and unions.

According to CNN, Trump will soon appoint three of the NLRB’s five members. He will have the opportunity to fill two of the vacancies immediately upon assuming the presidency. The third spot will open in December 2017. With the terms of the two Democratic members of the Board expiring in 2018 and 2019, Trump may actually end up filling all five spots on the Board. This would dramatically remake a Board that in recent years had taken some concrete steps to make it easier for more workers to join a union and negotiate a first contract. A Trumpian NLRB threatens to undo progressive Obama-era NLRB rulings on graduate worker organizing and union election procedures.

Anti-union legislation looming as Republicans assume power at every level of government

Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton won the popular vote decisively, but the former Secretary of State and corporate Democrat who once served as a member of the board of directors at low-wage employer Wal-Mart led her party to a landslide loss in terms of branches and levels of government. Republicans are now in control the White House, and the U.S. House of Representatives, and the U.S. Senate giving them a lock on the national elected government.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, the Republican Party was also elected to control of both legislative chambers in 32 states, a record high. Republicans control 33 of the country’s governorships, and Republicans control both legislatures and the governorship in 24 states, giving them complete control in those states.

Total Republican control of the executive and legislative branches of government at the national level and in 24 states has created concern about both national and state ‘right to work’ legislation. ‘Right to work’ is a misnamed law that prohibits private sector unions from negotiating contracts that require all workers covered by a union to pay dues for the cost of negotiating contracts and representing workers. It essentially creates a class of freeloaders who get all the benefits of a union with none of the responsibility that full members share in terms of financial support.

An analysis by the AFL-CIO, the country’s main and largest labor federation, found that ‘right to work’ laws hurt workers in several different ways. States with ‘right to work’ laws have lower wages and incomes, lower rates of health insurance coverage, higher workplace fatality rates, and higher poverty and infant mortality rates. ‘Right to work’ laws do not guarantee anyone in the states that adopt them the right to any sort of job, despite what the name implies.

Labor’s concern about state ‘right to work’ legislation is not unfounded. Kentucky became the 27th state to implement ‘right to work’ legislation on January 7, 2017. Missouri and New Hampshire are considered top targets for additional ‘right to work’ laws that would further undermine worker rights and starve labor unions of much needed resources.

The worst-case scenario is one where the U.S. Congress passes national ‘right to work’ legislation that Trump then signs into law. The likelihood of national legislation is more difficult to predict. Most Republicans, and the section of the U.S. corporate interests who back them, would certainly like to see national ‘right to work’ legislation.

However, Republicans already have their plate full attempting to repeal the Affordable Care Act (commonly referred to as Obamacare) and pass massive corporate tax cuts. It is an open question how long it will take them to implement those parts of their agenda, assuming they are even successful, and if they’ll have the political capital to pass national ‘right to work’ legislation after doing so.

Regardless of what attacks come their way, rank-and-file militancy is required to push many union leaders out of the dead-end strategy of campaign contributions to Democrats and lobbying behind closed doors in between elections. Direct action – especially direct strike actions and mass protest in the streets – is the strongest tool workers have in their arsenal to fight back against the attacks on worker rights.

David Hoskins is a senior research analyst on staff for a major labor union headquartered in Washington, DC. The thoughts and positions in this article are his alone and do not necessarily reflect those of the labor union by which he is employed.

#WashingtonDC #Labor #LaborMovement

Taking an honest look at the labor movement, it doesn’t take a genius to find it at a low that hasn't been seen since the early 1930s. Unions are taking a beating from politicians, who rather than taxing the ultra-wealthy, take the ‘easier’ road of demanding cuts on government workers. At the same time, private sector employers scrape more and more from the workers in order to maintain massive profits. No-strike agreements and open shop clauses in the private sector and right-to-work legislation and restrictions on collective bargaining in the public sector strike right at the heart of what's left of organized labor's gains. In that sense, I applaud the public statements of President Richard Trumka and the AFL-CIO in their recent meetings that recognize the fact that labor needs to change course in the U.S.

Changing course is not only the right thing to do; it has become necessary. According to the March 3 In These Times article, the new AFL-CIO plan is searching for “new forms of worker representation,” including Working America, Workers Centers, and a general low-wage worker campaign at Wal-Mart and in the general service industry. It is a mixing bowl of good and bad ingredients. The approach labor takes with the ingredients will determine if what comes out is any good.

As far as Working America, the supposed 3.1 million-member community affiliate of the AFL-CIO, I have direct personal experience. I worked for Working America for a year and a half, rising to become one of a handful of field managers in Wisconsin. I traveled to different cities, attended leadership conferences and met national leaders of Working America. I spent hours on doorsteps, signing up thousands of new ‘members’ and raising tens of thousands of dollars for the effort.

Working America is not what its pumped up to be. There is almost no ‘community’ involvement in Working America offices, given they are open only a few months of the year, with three exceptions nationally. Working America is a traditional fundraising canvass, subsidized by unions, exclusively to gather names, addresses, emails and phone numbers for national elections. Quite frankly, very few people even recognize that they are ‘members,’ nor are they contacted other than for get-out-the-vote purposes or to be asked for more money. The ‘alliances’ with community groups that Working America builds are hollow and empty and usually involve, again, asking for money from already cash-strapped community organizations and union locals.

One example from my time working in Wisconsin was the canvassing of the city of Manitowoc during the Machinists Union Manitowoc Crane strike in 2011-2012. In ‘support’ of the striking workers, Working America staff canvassed with discussion points vaguely linking to the strike in this small industrial town, fundraising as we went. The funds, despite demands from several of the staffers, did not go to supporting the strikers, but instead directly to Working America's state and national accounts. These thousands of dollars could have supported the Machinist strikers, who ultimately failed in their fight to oppose an open shop clause in the new contract.

It bears saying that a similar technique was employed during the Walker recall race, to great fundraising effect. While we only collected a scarce thousand or so Recall Walker petitions, we raised tens of thousands of dollars for Working America by promoting the Walker recall. In the end, we only canvassed for two to three weeks against Walker in the election itself. While Wisconsin’s trade unions gave the Walker recall every effort, the AFL-CIO put their efforts elsewhere.

Working America is a multi-million dollar part of the pipe dream of a better future with the Democratic Party. Labor leaders should have walked away from this partnership nearly 20 years ago with the passing of NAFTA under Bill Clinton. Instead millions in dues money are used to support politicians who either turn a blind eye toward, or actually vote against the interests of workers.

As for Workers Centers, they have exploded across the U.S., with hundreds now in existence. The question is, “Why, when labor union halls themselves are supposed to be centers for worker power and organization, do these new structures exist?” The answer: Largely because the labor movement had not been filling that role for decades, and in response, workers in these communities were forced to reinvent the wheel, struggling with tiny resources to accomplish something that a multi-million dollar union federation had failed to do: be an active voice in actual struggle on the shop floor, whether it is a fast food restaurant, retail conglomerate or a steel mill. Over the past years the AFL-CIO has recognized the need to join forces with these labor centers. Let’s hope workers can gain union representation through them and not just be used.

Building in expanding areas of the economy such as retail, fast food and service and joining with campaigns such as the OUR Wal-Mart movement should be the next logical step for unions. As a warehouse worker and a Teamster I have a huge amount of respect for the folks I know fighting for better wages and working conditions in Wal-Mart's warehouses. It is an enormous task that will take grinding effort and actual blood, sweat and tears to accomplish. The millions of dollars lost on Working America's current empty shell and misspent on the Democratic Party, could be used to produce a tangible result. A victory in the warehouse struggles could be this generation's 1937 GM sit-down strike and change the face of U.S. labor relations for decades to come. Providing that type of solidarity and funding it, to unionize these warehouses and corporate giants, should be at the top of the AFL-CIO list.

Will it be the top-down, four-letter-word kind of solidarity of the union leadership coming in to run the show and shepherd over workers, or will it be the solidarity that lends voice, leadership and strength to the rank and file (who, despite all the speeches, TV interviews, and news articles, don’t need to be told they're overworked and underpaid)? For us, our own version of falling off the ‘fiscal cliff’ is job loss, homelessness, hunger and the death of our dreams and aspirations as working-class people.

Let’s get down to brass tacks: union representation needs to grow. Community partnership, alliances with workers centers and developing new campaigns in expanding areas of the economy are crucial, but the devil is in the details. What has been announced does not tackle the problems of our labor movement. No bold new strategy is going to solve what is in reality a simple problem of growth.

Want to grow the union? First make an example of the power union workers have, and show bosses and workers alike that we can fight in union workplaces that have been suffering from decades of management harassment and concessionary contracts. What we need is militant workplace action in our own shops. New organizing drives mean nothing and signed contracts provide nothing, if we cannot demonstrate power in our own workplaces.

From a rank-and-file Teamster and union activist, here's the strategy we need: cut the fat, get mean, curtail the spending on elections and instead build struggle through funding ordinary workers fighting bosses in the workplace.

#UnitedStates #unions #AFLCIO #Trumka #LaborMovement