Stern Should Run for AFL-CIO President
Stern Should Run for AFL-CIO President
To Test His Proposals at the Convention
By Harry Kelber
Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, has received the most elaborate and highly favorable media exposure of any labor leader in many decades. His latest achievement is a flattering portrait of his personality and ideas for modernizing the AFL-CIO that appeared in the Jan. 30, 2005 issue of The New York Times Magazine, consisting of a front cover in color plus 11 pages of text. Stern's high-powered media campaign has enabled him to promote himself and several of his provocative proposals which, he says, would enable the labor federation to regain the membership strength and economic influence it enjoyed in the 1950s.
Here, in large black type, are the opening sentences in the article on Stern: "Andy Stern, who leads the largest and fastest-growing union in the country, is determined to save the American worker. And he¹s willing to tear apart the labor movement--and perhaps the Democratic Party as well--in order to do it."There is hardly any disagreement with Stern about the necessity for making major changes within the labor movement, but there are differences of opinion about what structural, functional and financial reforms are needed to make the labor movement strong enough to meet the challenges of the 21st Century.
The linchpin of Stern's restructuring plan is to merge the AFL-CIO's 58 international unions into no more than 20 "mega-unions," with each responsible for organizing non-union corporations in a specific sector of the economy, such as health care, construction and airlines.
There would also be forced mergers of local unions, central labor councils and state federations to combine their resources and staff. Many labor leaders see major problems with Stern's proposal: Who would select the favored 20 unions? What would happen to the other 38 internationals that were not selected or refused to accept Stern's restructuring process? Would union members have any voice in voting on the proposed mergers, and how would mergers affect their pensions, health care and other benefits in their collective bargaining contracts?
But the most important objection to Stern's restructuring proposals is that it would cause turmoil within the AFL-CIO and possibly open warfare between unions. The dominant feeling among union leaders and members is that they wanted reforms `that would unite, rather than divide, the labor movement. Stern hurt his image within the labor movement by issuing a virtual ultimatum to the Executive Council that if it not accept his restructuring plan, he'd quit the AFL-CIO and start his own labor federation.
Stern deserves a great deal of credit for opening up a long-overdue debate about labor's future in an economy that has changed dramatically in the past three decades. His initiative prompted AFL-CIO President John Sweeney to establish an open forum on the federation's Web site that has been soliciting "recommendations, ideas and priorities from union members, activists and allies that will help strengthen and grow our union movement as a voice for working families."Posted on the online forum for all union members to read and download, if they wish, are detailed proposals from at least 15 international unions, some 20 state federations and central labor councils, a dozen affiliated organizations and hundreds of responses from average union members.
The 25-member Executive Committee will review all proposals, including Stern's, and then forward its recommendations to the Executive Council winter meeting in Las Vegas. The final step in the process will take place at the federation¹s convention in late July in Chicago.
Actually, many of the proposals in Stern¹s 10-point program, as described in SEIU¹s "United We Win" are hardly new and have been advocated by progressive labor leaders and activists for years, such as more funds for organizing, universal health insurance, support for the Employee Free Choice Act, improving political action efforts, strengthening central labor councils, greater diversity in leadership and building international labor alliances. There is certainly room for compromise.
Stern's media campaign has brought him favorable name recognition far greater than that of any national labor leader, including Sweeney. But the fate of his reform plan will be decided not by the public, but rather by the nearly 1,000 convention delegates who will determine whatever changes are to be made. With only six months before the convention, the logic of Stern's position is that he should run for the presidency of the AFL-CIO. If he wins, he will have strong authority to put his proposals into practice. He could easily defeat Sweeney, who compiled a dismal record after 10 years in office and can hardly make a convincing case that he ought to be re-elected for four more years.
The only viable candidate that might oppose Stern is Richard Trumka, the federation's secretary-treasurer. Trumka, a former president of the United Mine Workers and a hero of the historic Pittston Coal Co. strike, has broad ties with leaders of the building trades and manufacturing unions. He is an excellent speaker, who knows how to rouse an audience at labor rallies, and he is the AFL-CIO's leading strategist in organizing campaigns and labor¹s capital investment activities.
Stern's three colleagues from the New Unity Partnership who have been mentioned by the media as potential candidates for the AFL-CIO presidency are John Wilhelm and Bruce Raynor, co-presidents of UNITEHERE, and Terence O¹Sullivan, president of the Laborers. They do not have the stature, credentials or oratorical skills that Stern has to win a majority of convention votes. There's a rumor that Wilhelm is a stalking horse for Stern, who will announce his candidacy at a politically appropriate time.
It would be a disastrous mistake if Stern decided, in a fit of frustration, to start his own labor federation. It would unleash a fratricidal war that would weaken the labor movement even more than in its current feeble state. In the course of events, the AFL-CIO has, at long last, created an open forum where leaders and members can exchange experiences and views on issues of concern to working people. it is unprecedented for AFL-CIO leaders, who, in the past, preferred to discuss their views privately behind closed doors, to now talk openly about labor¹s problems and invite rank-and-filers to express their opinions.
This is a remarkable advance in union democracy, long advocated by labor activists. This new openness can have a strongly positive influence at the AFL-CIO convention and beyond.
Our weekly "LaborTalk" and "Labor and the War" columns can be viewed at our Web site, My e-mail address is .
To Test His Proposals at the Convention
By Harry Kelber
Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, has received the most elaborate and highly favorable media exposure of any labor leader in many decades. His latest achievement is a flattering portrait of his personality and ideas for modernizing the AFL-CIO that appeared in the Jan. 30, 2005 issue of The New York Times Magazine, consisting of a front cover in color plus 11 pages of text. Stern's high-powered media campaign has enabled him to promote himself and several of his provocative proposals which, he says, would enable the labor federation to regain the membership strength and economic influence it enjoyed in the 1950s.
Here, in large black type, are the opening sentences in the article on Stern: "Andy Stern, who leads the largest and fastest-growing union in the country, is determined to save the American worker. And he¹s willing to tear apart the labor movement--and perhaps the Democratic Party as well--in order to do it."There is hardly any disagreement with Stern about the necessity for making major changes within the labor movement, but there are differences of opinion about what structural, functional and financial reforms are needed to make the labor movement strong enough to meet the challenges of the 21st Century.
The linchpin of Stern's restructuring plan is to merge the AFL-CIO's 58 international unions into no more than 20 "mega-unions," with each responsible for organizing non-union corporations in a specific sector of the economy, such as health care, construction and airlines.
There would also be forced mergers of local unions, central labor councils and state federations to combine their resources and staff. Many labor leaders see major problems with Stern's proposal: Who would select the favored 20 unions? What would happen to the other 38 internationals that were not selected or refused to accept Stern's restructuring process? Would union members have any voice in voting on the proposed mergers, and how would mergers affect their pensions, health care and other benefits in their collective bargaining contracts?
But the most important objection to Stern's restructuring proposals is that it would cause turmoil within the AFL-CIO and possibly open warfare between unions. The dominant feeling among union leaders and members is that they wanted reforms `that would unite, rather than divide, the labor movement. Stern hurt his image within the labor movement by issuing a virtual ultimatum to the Executive Council that if it not accept his restructuring plan, he'd quit the AFL-CIO and start his own labor federation.
Stern deserves a great deal of credit for opening up a long-overdue debate about labor's future in an economy that has changed dramatically in the past three decades. His initiative prompted AFL-CIO President John Sweeney to establish an open forum on the federation's Web site that has been soliciting "recommendations, ideas and priorities from union members, activists and allies that will help strengthen and grow our union movement as a voice for working families."Posted on the online forum for all union members to read and download, if they wish, are detailed proposals from at least 15 international unions, some 20 state federations and central labor councils, a dozen affiliated organizations and hundreds of responses from average union members.
The 25-member Executive Committee will review all proposals, including Stern's, and then forward its recommendations to the Executive Council winter meeting in Las Vegas. The final step in the process will take place at the federation¹s convention in late July in Chicago.
Actually, many of the proposals in Stern¹s 10-point program, as described in SEIU¹s "United We Win" are hardly new and have been advocated by progressive labor leaders and activists for years, such as more funds for organizing, universal health insurance, support for the Employee Free Choice Act, improving political action efforts, strengthening central labor councils, greater diversity in leadership and building international labor alliances. There is certainly room for compromise.
Stern's media campaign has brought him favorable name recognition far greater than that of any national labor leader, including Sweeney. But the fate of his reform plan will be decided not by the public, but rather by the nearly 1,000 convention delegates who will determine whatever changes are to be made. With only six months before the convention, the logic of Stern's position is that he should run for the presidency of the AFL-CIO. If he wins, he will have strong authority to put his proposals into practice. He could easily defeat Sweeney, who compiled a dismal record after 10 years in office and can hardly make a convincing case that he ought to be re-elected for four more years.
The only viable candidate that might oppose Stern is Richard Trumka, the federation's secretary-treasurer. Trumka, a former president of the United Mine Workers and a hero of the historic Pittston Coal Co. strike, has broad ties with leaders of the building trades and manufacturing unions. He is an excellent speaker, who knows how to rouse an audience at labor rallies, and he is the AFL-CIO's leading strategist in organizing campaigns and labor¹s capital investment activities.
Stern's three colleagues from the New Unity Partnership who have been mentioned by the media as potential candidates for the AFL-CIO presidency are John Wilhelm and Bruce Raynor, co-presidents of UNITEHERE, and Terence O¹Sullivan, president of the Laborers. They do not have the stature, credentials or oratorical skills that Stern has to win a majority of convention votes. There's a rumor that Wilhelm is a stalking horse for Stern, who will announce his candidacy at a politically appropriate time.
It would be a disastrous mistake if Stern decided, in a fit of frustration, to start his own labor federation. It would unleash a fratricidal war that would weaken the labor movement even more than in its current feeble state. In the course of events, the AFL-CIO has, at long last, created an open forum where leaders and members can exchange experiences and views on issues of concern to working people. it is unprecedented for AFL-CIO leaders, who, in the past, preferred to discuss their views privately behind closed doors, to now talk openly about labor¹s problems and invite rank-and-filers to express their opinions.
This is a remarkable advance in union democracy, long advocated by labor activists. This new openness can have a strongly positive influence at the AFL-CIO convention and beyond.
Our weekly "LaborTalk" and "Labor and the War" columns can be viewed at our Web site
posted by T. Scott Brineman at 8:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home