Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Unions Gear Up to Push Agenda at the Polls
Unions have intensified political fundraising and spending for the upcoming midterm elections, which union leaders and political analysts alike describe as the most important campaigns for the labor movement in decades.
"We need another stimulus package," UAW President Bob King, right, with the Rev. Jesse Jackson, told Ford workers in Wayne last month. (Steve Perez / The Detroit News) The
result this Labor Day is that unions are forging closer alliances with
each other as they strategize about how to spend money, deploy staff and
determine which races to target.
National AFL-CIO Executive Vice President Arlene Holt Baker will march in the Detroit Labor Day parade today as part of an effort to call for good-paying jobs and to boost get-out-the-vote efforts for the Nov. 2 election.
Amid steep membership declines, unions are trying to maintain their clout in Washington, where union-friendly Democrats control Congress and the White House, and in Lansing, where Democrats hold the governorship and rule the state House of Representatives, but not the state Senate.
At stake is whether Congress will continue to embrace labor-backed policies to address unemployment and other problems, and whether the Michigan Legislature will try to cut benefits for unionized public employees that are straining the state budget.
"The most important thing in this election is how to get the economy back on track," UAW President Bob King said in an interview last week. "We need an FDR-type (public works) program so that the millions of people who want to be working can have available work."
The UAW is "going to be very aggressive in forming coalitions," said King, who already has worked with the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. and other leaders in holding advocacy marches. "We're trying to say that at least President Obama and the Democrats have been trying to do something. Republicans have abused the filibuster and made irresponsible and immoral decisions to not do anything."
On Oct. 2, UAW members will be among thousands of union marchers expected to converge in Washington for a rally initially organized by the NAACP to advocate for more federal jobs programs, better public education and to blast Republican policy alternatives.
Putting aside differences
A prominent example of union cooperation is that leaders of the national AFL-CIO and the Service Employees International Union have formed a coalition to target the Michigan elections, along with races in 25 other states, by coordinating spending and staff to support pro-union candidates, most of them Democrats. Five years ago, the unions angrily split over differences on organizing.
The AFL-CIO and SEIU still worked together at the local level after the split, said Harley Shaiken, a professor at University of California, Berkeley, who follows the labor movement. But the national coalition "shows how much unions have put aside differences to work for the greater good," Shaiken said.
Unions face an uphill battle both in Washington and Michigan, said Steve Mitchell, a conservative political consultant in East Lansing.
Numerous polls indicate Republicans could win enough seats to gain control of the U.S. House of Representatives and perhaps the Senate, as well as make significant headway in the Michigan Legislature. In the state governor's race, initial polling shows Republican nominee Richard "Rick" Synder has a double-digit lead over Democrat Virgil "Virg" Bernero, who is backed by unions.
"There is just too much anger over the health care bill, the (lack of effectiveness of) stimulus package," Mitchell said.
One labor analyst said unions are fighting to remain relevant.
"Unions have become demonized over the past two years," said Gary Chaison, a professor at Clark University at Worcester, Mass., who closely follows labor. "At this time of high unemployment, unions have been characterized as part of the problem, not the solution. They are fighting the real possibility of becoming irrelevant to the process."
Unions were not irrelevant when Obama took office in January 2009. He signed executive orders that gave union work forces advantages in federal contracting decisions. He guided a $787 billion stimulus package with aid for the states and jobless that the labor movement backed. His auto task force helped the UAW, through its health care trust, get a 39 percent equity share of General Motors Co. and a 55 percent share of Chrysler when the two automakers went through bankruptcy.
Teamsters President James P. Hoffa wrote in a February 2009 column in The Detroit News that "Obama championed labor unions in a way that no U.S. president has done in my memory."
But the Democratic Congress and Obama have struggled to pass the labor movement's biggest priority, the Employee Free Choice Act, which would eliminate secret-ballot organizing elections and make it easier to form unions.
If the Democrats lose control of Congress, chances of passing the legislation will die, Chaison said.
Midterm elections crucial
That's why unions are focusing on the midterm elections.
Although UAW membership fell last year by 76,000 to a post-World War II low of 355,191, the UAW's political action committee, or PAC, in Michigan has already raised 13 percent more, $852,000, from January to July this year than it did during the same period in the 2008 election.
Union PAC fundraising in Michigan is up 3.5 percent from the same time in the 2008 election cycle, according to the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, a Lansing nonprofit that tracks political fundraising and spending.
"My sense is that unions are investing heavily in governors' races because a lot of labor policy is made at the state level and redistricting is coming up," said Jennifer King, editor of the Cook Political Report in Washington.
The UAW has supplied much-need staffing resources to Bernero's once long-shot campaign.
The midterm election in Michigan is also more important than usual, analysts contend. For only the second time since World War II, no incumbents are running for all four constitutional offices -- governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general and secretary of state.
And many of the 38 seats in the state Senate and 110 state House seats are open because of term limits.
"This election is so, so important," said David Hecker, president of the Michigan chapter of the American Federation of Teachers. "We are taking a real deep look at our finances. You know, it doesn't do us much good if we held onto money. Why hold back?"
Many union leaders say their contributions are dwarfed by Republicans and corporate donors.
The Michigan PAC that has collected the most money is the national Republican Governors Association, which formed a state PAC that had raised $4.3 million through July. That's $2.6 million more than the second highest PAC, the Michigan House Democratic Fund.
Nationally, unions have six of the top 10 nonpolitical party PACs in campaign spending this year, and half of the top 10 campaign fundraising PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. They traditionally are among the largest fundraisers and spenders.
Unions have poured millions of dollars into "issue ads," such as a $750,000 television spot that began two weeks ago called "Burnt Dignity" in the Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo-Battle Creek media markets.
The ad was paid for by AFSCME, the municipal workers union, and is aimed at supporting first-term Rep. Mark Schauer, a Democrat, against the Republican he replaced, Tim Walberg. Their 2008 race was settled by about 7,500 votes.
It is one of two Michigan congressional seats that Democrats won from Republican incumbents in 2008 that the GOP hopes to regain -- the other is now held by Rep. Gary Peters, D-Bloomfield Hills.
Walberg skipped the vote on the auto industry bailout, the ad says, but "sided with big oil and hedge funds -- gave them tax loopholes."
"Haven't we been burned badly enough?" the announcer asks.
While labor union leaders say they haven't gotten everything they wanted, they blame Republicans and some Democrats for blocking legislative progress.
"We need another stimulus package," King told workers at a Ford Motor Co. plant in Wayne he visited last month.
Dave Turner, a crane operator and 37-year veteran at the plant, was receptive to King's message.
"I'm glad our president is out here trying to charge everybody up," Turner said. "We need people to stand up and save American manufacturing and American jobs. I don't think most Republicans have a clue about that."
34 Comments so far
Show AllBIG UNIONS -- RUN BY BIG BUSINESS
For 15 years I worked under the slavery of unions the biggest and the worst: the Teamsters while installing microwave equipment for AT&T, AFL-CIO while troubleshooting computerized machines at 3M Co, UAW while at American Motors also Teachers Union, Steel Workers Union and never did I meet one of their union officials who was not a paid actor working for the company.
A great many small unions are great for both their members and society, but all the big unions have united to totally destroy the labor movement in America.
Interesting point... Big unions as bad as big corporations!
Excellent comment. And I'm glad you mentioned the small honest unions that take csare of therir members.
yup, that is exactly what I saw just a couple hours ago at the 100K strong Labor Day Union parade in my home town.
For the first time in years, the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO will be endorsing the Democrat challenger in my congressional district (PA 18th) - an young business-cut suit of some sort.
Every union associated with coal power generation - the UMWA, boilermakers and steamfitters - were waving industry "clean coal" banners. This is particularly comical for the raucous but shrinking contingent of UMWA members (and the retiree with-black-lung-bus following behind). Because, for all their pro-industry "clean coal" ass-kissing, there will probably not be a single unionized mine in the Appalachians in another decade.
This is a good point. People are going to go for the money, in-spite of the fact that they are not acting in their own ultimate self-interest. Sounds to me like the unions need to become more like schools and EDUCATE people, rather than just simply representing them.
"But the Democratic Congress and Obama have struggled to pass the labor movement's biggest priority, the Employee Free Choice Act, which would eliminate secret-ballot organizing elections and make it easier to form unions.
"If the Democrats lose control of Congress, chances of passing the legislation will die, Chaison said."
As a union member, I am completely disgusted by the cheerleader tone of this whole article. Obama and the Democrats have not "struggled" to pass anything for the working people of this country. Instead, they have worked hand-in-glove with the Repubs to stroke the wealthy elite who own them all, and to kick the rest of us in the teeth.
The Employee Free Choice Act was dead as soon as Obama quit campaigning and took office.
Now we are treated to the disgusting spectacle of the union bosses crawling back to the feet of the Dems, whom we got elected, and rewarding their sell-out with still more of our money.
Honest union leadership would have been out there organizing and fighting, and posing a real threat to all the Dems who gave us the shaft. The "Tea Party" would have been nothing compared to a "Work Party" of all of us who are done with the sell-out Democratic party.
Whoa! You nailed it Petrkrop!
On the money! No pun intended. Honest Union leadership wouldn't be spending I believe a total over 100 million dollars on elections when so many members need help.
Democrats, republicans...makes no difference. The working people of America don't sweem to have many friends left.
Until all the unions unite to agitate for and organize a natioinal strike they can all go to hell as far as I'm concerned.
As they should equally unite to agitate for Medicare for All and enhanced Social Security, as espoused by Steven Hill. This should be a no-brainer to unions, as it would be a real boost for job growth, not to mention two things that would never have to be mentioned at the bargaining table again.
Now theres a thought!!
Democrats are not the answer for unions. The Bankruptcy Bill was a litmus test. All the (R)s and ½ the (D)s in the Senate voted for banking industry-sponsored legislation against the interest of the people. Today, bills die in the Senate. Half the (D) senators are wolves in sheep's clothing. (D)s control the WH, House and Senate and still no Employee Free Choice Act! Obama always has more pressing issues and tells the unions to keep supporting him till he gets around to the EFCA. Now it is too late. Obama is a corporate (D) and not a progressive.
Unions and "We" progressives need to wake up. The WH, Senate and court have moved to the right and beyond the control of our democratic process. Our only hope lies in the House. All our effort and money needs to be directed at electing progressive house candidates. I will only vote for progressive House candidates. My Rep. is a DLC Dem and I will be voting Green or (R) just to get him out of office. Every two years "We" could gain seats till "We" have a say again.
"We" progressives need to move left. The right is making a similar move with their Tea Party. Progressives elected to the House need to vote in a block and vote NO on every funding bill until "We" start getting what "We" want. Newt did it in ‘94. A small block in the House could bring home the troops among other things. It is always about the money and the House controls the purse strings. Pelosi is ceding her power to Obama and Reid. The House should be the target for unions and progressives. The House is our only hope.
Fortunately, there already is a party into which the "progressives" and unions could move if they decide to move left. It's called the Socialist Party USA. Google for the website (I've had my posts deleted when I've posted the SPUSA's website URL on CD). Check out the platform and statement of principles, consider joining.
"I will only vote for progressive House candidates."
Hello SJ.
If the entire progressive movement followed you lead, we would eventually produce a progressive congress. We need a minimum list of what it means to be progressive. ... Pull all troops out of the Middle Eastern Wars; Cut military budget and bases; Tax the rich; Create employment through massive WPA style public works, housing and education funding; Single Payer healthcare.
Any Democrat who adheres to the minimum program, OK, we can vote for them if the polls are close. If not, vote third party, and don't be afraid in the beginning to let the Republicans win and show the population the meaning of true misery. Meanwhile, organize radical unions and communities.
I know a lot of CDers prefer a straight third party, but this "Inside - Outside" strategy bears thinking about.
Great. And if candidates lie their way into progressive office and then come up with all sorts of excuses, they can be voted out two years later as a lesson for others. No prisoners!
Two key points:
1 - Be prepared to vote in (R)s over corporate (D)s - show DLC/Corp (D)s no quarter and not one dime of campaign contributions. Things may have to get worse before they get better.
2 - Progressives need to vote in a block and vote NO on ALL funding until "We" get what "We" want. Fund nothing until "We" get progressive legislation enacted. No more compromising in the Senate. NO MORE FUNDING ANYTHING ON THE IF-COME!
Laurenceofberk
Could you define "rich" in "Tax the rich"
I know this is a republican ploy/taliking point to blunt taxing anyone...but who exactly are you speaking of? Where is "rich" in your opinion? And what about the S-Corps and small business's? In that respect the Bozo's have a point.
Also, after Obama/Pelosi and their "spend for friends policies"...where do we get the money for large government programs?
Thinking about your organized communities as described last week, there is a lot to like.
I will vote for progressives only. Small groups can be king makers or spoilers. Look at how many small groups and individuals Obama had to bargain with over health care. There is more strength than people realize in small numbers when the general atmosphere is polarized. Issues many times tip on one vote.
The key is to concentrate our little strength on one thing - The House of Representatives and just keep saying NO to every funding bill till it matters.
Another thing. I will vote twice to get rid of my DLC House Rep. - legally. I will vote (R). My DLC Rep will lose one (D) vote, mine, and have another (R) ballot cast against him, mine. He will need two votes just to offset one PO'd progressive. Move left or start looking for work you DLC/Corporate shills.
Hello Ardent,
In order to have a real and radical third party, that can compete with the money and the media, you first have to have a movement of radical unions (the equivalent of the CIO in the 30's) and radical communities. IF we had a mass left wing social movement, then I would agree with you: straight third party would be the way to go. But we don't.
In the meantime, political parties are not as important as movements. Most people spend a few days a year trying to decide which party to vote for. But people spend MOST OF THEIR TIME living and worrying about their jobs, their homes and their communities. That is where change has to happen first. When it does, then we can start building a serious third party.
Working where people spend their lives is much harder than party work, but it is also more fun and more real. And that is where we have to go.
EFCA was the test. The Dems got elected with solid labor support. They had the Presidency and the votes in Congress. What did they do? Nothing! Yet the labor leaders still endorse these jerks. What will it take????????????????
Exactly.
Our little Green Party/single Payer Healthcare contingent, graciously allowed to march with the Postal Workers Union, were all alone in the big Pittsburgh Labor Day parade.
Rep. Sestak (D-Philly) who is running for US senate (Specter's seat) walked right into our group - doing the hand-shaking-politician thing. He didn't even recognize the Green Party US senate candidate amongst us Mel Packer. He obtained the needed amount of signatures in PA's arcane manor-party ballot access system, but a democrat challenge of the signatures - which the minor party must pay for if they "lose", forced him to withdraw. The Greens were just a little gnat in the way of his ambitions - which will probably end with the Republican being elected.
UAW no longer stands for United Auto Workers, it stands for U-AREN'T-WORKING. The best thing that could happen to America's auto workers is that the UAW died a quick and very painfull death so that the workers could organize a new and better union! After seeing the way that Obama and the Democratic Party had treated national labor after the 2008 elections, I had hoped that labor had learned it's lesson and would dump the Democrats for either the Green Party, Social Democrats or at the least start a workers party! Unfortuately it seems that organized labor has beaten wife syndrome (Stockholm syndrome), they throw their money and support behind the Democrats every election cycle and get bitch slapped, screwed and not even a kiss for their efforts! Rahm Emanuel "Fuck the UAW" or the Obama White House after the Arkansas primaries "They just wasted ten million of their members dollars" or Rahm Emanuel again Where are they going to go?" Well, it is time for organized labor to show Rahm Emanuel, Barack Obama and the Democrats that they do have somewhere else to go besides the Democratic Party! As far as those working Americans who still have a job and have fallen for the right wing psychobabble about unions being bad for America, just remember, if it wasn't for organized labor in this country you would not have a 40 hour work week (Though most working Americans have already surrendered that for longer hours and lower pay), time and a half for work over 40 hours, medical benefits, sick days, child labor laws and paid vacations!
Seems to me I read recently of at least one large union advising the Democrats that its endorsement was no longer to be automatic. Endorsing progressive challengers who wish to replace the Blue Dogs who vote with the farthest-right of the fiscal and/or religious right might make the party sit up and take notice. And the administration stop campaigning on behalf of these Democrats in Name Only.
I marvel at, and admire, the leaders and members of the many union organizations that keep on fighting and believing no matter what the right wing throws at them (and the Dems fail to counter).
Professor Chaison is quoted in the above article as saying that, "Unions have been demonized over the past two years." He is off by about 30 years. It started (at least) with Reagan's firing of the air traffic controllers and has grown into an entire industry of "consultants" who help businesses avoid unionization or kill already established unions. Search "anti labor movement" for details.
Seems to be a lot of stupidity on our side. Why do the unions keep coming back for more? Obama did not deliver the EFCA - end of story. Rahm says that progressives will come around. Obama does not even need to negotiate with progressives. "We" have no place else to go. Look what voting straight (D) for the past 50 years has done for blacks - 50% unemployment in what used to be a union town - Motor City. Is there not a lesson here for US? The lesser of two evils is the death of a thousand cuts. "We" are still dead in the end.
As an SEIU member, now retired, I think it's relevant to dust off and refurbish a previous comment written when Andy Stern, former SEIU president, announced his retirement earlier this year. FWIW, I've never met Stern and have no personal animus towards him.
Unions came into existence to concentrate and amplify the political power of individual workers, by definition "bottom-up" organizations adversarial to management-- and by corollary, adversarial to a government allied and partnered with management.
Union officials like Stern made a career out of declaring this model of union activity obsolete and self-destructive. Instead, he substituted a model in which the union became a kind of "service institution" for member workers.
Although nominally retaining the rhetoric of traditonal labor and worker empowerment, Stern's new kind of union is a top-down organization. It showcases its own executive elite, who are in effect labor lobbyists and power brokers with "clout" in the duopolistic crime syndicate called the federal government. The rank and file, i.e. ordinary unprivileged workers, likewise are reduced to the status of "internal customers" of the unions.
Stern, like other "third way" snake-oil salesmen, would have us believe that the old-school concept of labor and management locked in a mortal adversarial struggle has matured into a professional relationship that transcends destructive and inefficient conflict and instead seeks "partnership" and a convivial, even amicable working relationship between boss and worker.
In this Brave New Labor/Management World, national union leaders still pose as anti-Fat Cats, but have themselves become Fat Cats; they've become professional Ruling Class elites who've abandoned the natural adversarial relationship between the Bosses and the Bossed. They are proud and professional Bosses in their own right, making the self-serving claim that this brand of "partnership" with the political and business elite is really the only approach that will benefit the rank and file.
IMO, this philosophy is an ironic return to legitimizing what are in effect "company unions"-- management-leaning unions created to provide the illusion of worker solidarity.
Executives like Stern, like our political Elected Misrepresentatives, are nominally elected by the rank and file. But they don't "serve" the rank and file, nor do "bottom-up" demands and needs of the rank and file set the union leadership's agenda. It's exactly the opposite: the rank and file only exist as catalysts to propel the executives to power, and as "internal customers" who allegedly benefit from the "services" provided by their paternalistic VIP leaders, who always Know Best.
The membership cedes power to the leaders, and essentially sustains leadership with trusting, uncritical support; the leadership rewards them with "bennies".
In summary, unions have tragically devolved into still another ancillary para-corporate service-delivery system symbiotically attached to the political duopoly and business and financial elites. They're no longer True Friends of the Little Guy.
Thank you. Now I know why unions keep coming back for more. Their leaders are just another part of the great charade.
Exactly! This analysis highlights the reason that the craft-union model is a failure. It's past time to reorganize the unions into a grass-roots system that creates One Big Union that opens its membership to all workers, skilled or unskilled.
As OS eloquently describes, the union bosses have become indistinguishable from the corporate bosses and the sell-out politicians.
Obedient Servant
Beautifully put. And I'm glad you mentioned you have no animus for Andy Stern as I feel he is among the most corrupt of the Union Boss's and has betrayed his membership more than most. So if I said what you did it wouldn't carry the same impact.
"They're no longer True Friends of the Little Guy."
True. But there are a lot of smaller unions out here that retain the original purpose of our unions and serve their members well. We don't want to tar them with the same guano as the ("Big Boy's)
When you vote for the lesser of two evils, you always end up with the greater one: Obama, because of his color and his rhetorical skills, has been getting away with crimes against labor that McCain would've never even tried.
Democrats have proven themselves to be the death of the labor movement in America for decades, still, there are millions of idiots contributing to and voting for these mobsters.
All out for the workers. And the unions? Who do they represent anyway? At their best unions represent the spirit of the all for one and one for all in pursuit of a better world. That describes unions right now? If not now, for sure, once each and every one of us climbs aboard. Does this hold for our other struggles, peace on earth, universal acceptance of a woman's right to choose, Medicare for all, hardly anyone giving a damn about what someone else's gender identification happens to be, to mention but a few? Yes, if the above spirit prevails.
The craft union that exist have effectively been emasculated by the politics of fascism exhibited by the two-party duopoly.
Additionally, corrupt or weak union bosses who signed long-term contracts with corporate profiteers have caused demoralized and betrayed workers to end their associations with unions.
Workers must unite under One Big Union that does not enter into long-term contracts with employers. Solidarity among workers not encumbered by employer-favored contracts would do more to raise wages and benefits for workers. One or two general strikes could turn the advantage to workers and wrest control of their lives from the plutocratic-oligarchy.
HUMAN NATURE -- A PENDELUM THAT SWINGS HARD
If you feel that you deserve to live, then no choice do you have but to feel that you deserve the wealth needed to live. Which will give you no choice but to feel deserving of the wealth needed to be all you can be, to own all you can own and to be a dictator over all who are on land that you own.
Whereas, feel that this day of life is more then anyone deserves, and no choice do you have but to feel guilty if ever you fail to give all you can give.
So, the vast majority feels that they deserve more and take all they can take, whereas a minority feel that they deserve less and give all they can give.
And so, if human nature is by evolution, then all is doomed to destruction. Whereas if this world was created to prove the harm in it, then when things cannot possibly get any worse, then all things will turn toward the good.
UNION EQUALITY
(1) One wage for everyone, from the janitor to the electrician, to the union president all paid the same.
(2) Seniority means absolutely nothing, all get treated equal.
(3) Workers with the most children get laid off last.
(4) No pension program, as a young worker has children to support and needs the maximum take home pay possible.
(5) Same pay and benefits for all, even new workers during probation period.
(6) Companies with more then 50 employees: Once a year a vote to see if workers want a union, don’t want a union or want to change unions.
(7) If wages and benefits for management increase by 10% so shall they for the workers. Goal being for management and workers to be paid equal.