Chris White Online

I was in that great city San Francisco in March 2007 and looked at the union question. Australian unions are dependent on US unions’ surviving, whether we like it or not. I talked with union activists and report on union debates:

∑ social unionism lives;
∑ organising for growth, the SEIU;
∑ militant left unionism surviving; the ILWU
∑ the union split with AFL-CIO, and Change to Win;
∑ Jobs with Justice;
∑ the health care debate;
∑ the issue of ‘illegal’ immigrants;
∑ the Employee Choice legislation before Congress;
∑ organising US Labor against the War;
∑ facing the China question;
∑ the imperative for global unionism;
∑ and the global warming challenge.

PRESIDENTIAL POLITICS

First, San Francisco politics is Democrat and even more deeply anti-Bush since the 2006 Congressional elections. Both the rich electorates and nearby ‘redneck’ seats voted Democrat. The latter saw extreme right-wing Republicans defeated by strong grass-roots union campaigns. Nancy Pelosi the impressive Democrat Speaker is from San Francisco. Union leaders look to a Democrat President.

The political fever is as if the Democrat primaries are in full swing. But the election is not until November 2008. While I was there, Hilary Clinton did a private fundraiser and is leading in the polls. But Barack Obama had 10,000 attending his meeting, is impressive on TV telling his story and is close behind. I agree with Charles McPhedran ‘Hillary Clinton’s robotic performance alienates grassroots Democrats, Barack Obama is looking like a real contender for US President in 2008,’ in New Matilda. http://www.newmatilda.com//home/articledetail.asp?NewsletterID=315&ArticleID=2224&email=1

I liked John Edwards who goes out of his way to talk to union members and accept some time ‘walking in their shoes’ at work. But in the news was his wife’s cancer.

HARD WORK

Rick Fantasia and Kim Voss in their book ‘Hard Work Remaking the American Labor Movement’ analyse the exceptionally hostile terrain for US unions to exist.

Employers and neo-liberal politics push virulent anti-unionism, refusing wage increases and attacking workers’ conditions and labor rights. Historically company union-busting offensives continuously assaulted US unions.

Restrictive labor laws and judicial assaults weakened the ability to unionise. There is little left of any class struggle, any anti-capitalist union opposition.

A tamed right-wing bureaucratic service business unionism only concerned with occupational issues was allowed to survive.

Employers shredded the post-war workplace consensus of good employment contracts with economic growth in manufacturing sectors and in the 1980’s dominated with union busting, concession bargaining, outsourcing of jobs and driving down conditions.

This powerful employer offensive tried to completely close off unionism to US workers. Would unions survive or was it the end?

In the 1990s, some ‘social movement unionism’ revitalization was evident. ‘Hard Work’ shows how rather than retreating further into business unionism, an alternative integrating the union into the community was viable. Social unionism has some force. But still only 12% are in unions.

SOCIAL MOVEMENT UNIONISM

Social unionism organises more widely with communities for workplace and social justice, a democratic and social citizenship organising model.

Workplace gains come via rank and file workplace organising with public anti-corporate campaigns and tactics of community/union demonstrations with media expose of the corporate brand.

The SEIU success in Los Angeles and HERE, the Hotel Union in Las Vegas are two social unionism wins in the 1990s amongst others reported in ‘Hard Work.’

Unions in regional Labor Councils such as San Francisco are working through a ‘Union Cities’ project for unions to be socially useful with community bargaining through mobilization. Local rapid response mobilization over social justice and workplace issues are organised as new solidarity and longer-term union and community alliances develop.

The face of union leaders is more ethnic, racial and women leaders. Social unionism is one road for the survival for US unions.

The question for the next decade is will it be able to fight back against the worldwide race to the bottom in workplace rights and conditions. Although strong battles are fought on union recognition elections, the ‘card recognition’ system is favoured.

The revitalization comes from unions with social polices and community support that is growing. 1999 saw union mobilisation in Seattle with environmentalists, NGO’s for fair trade not free trade against the WTO World trade negotiations.

I met Katie Quan Chair of the UC Berkeley Labor Center a leader on immigrant labor issues and training new unionists for leadership http://www.newmatilda.com//home/articledetail.asp?NewsletterID=315&ArticleID=2224&email=1

I liked John Edwards who goes out of his way to talk to union members and accept some time ‘walking in their shoes’ at work. But in the news was his wife’s cancer.

HARD WORK

Rick Fantasia and Kim Voss in their book ‘Hard Work Remaking the American Labor Movement’ analyse the exceptionally hostile terrain for US unions to exist.

Employers and neo-liberal politics push virulent anti-unionism, refusing wage increases and attacking workers’ conditions and labor rights. Historically company union-busting offensives continuously assaulted US unions.

Restrictive labor laws and judicial assaults weakened the ability to unionise. There is little left of any class struggle, any anti-capitalist union opposition.

A tamed right-wing bureaucratic service business unionism only concerned with occupational issues was allowed to survive.

Employers shredded the post-war workplace consensus of good employment contracts with economic growth in manufacturing sectors and in the 1980’s dominated with union busting, concession bargaining, outsourcing of jobs and driving down conditions.

This powerful employer offensive tried to completely close off unionism to US workers. Would unions survive or was it the end?

In the 1990s, some ‘social movement unionism’ revitalization was evident. ‘Hard Work’ shows how rather than retreating further into business unionism, an alternative integrating the union into the community was viable. Social unionism has some force. But still only 12% are in unions.

SOCIAL MOVEMENT UNIONISM

Social unionism organises more widely with communities for workplace and social justice, a democratic and social citizenship organising model.

Workplace gains come via rank and file workplace organising with public anti-corporate campaigns and tactics of community/union demonstrations with media expose of the corporate brand.

The SEIU success in Los Angeles and HERE, the Hotel Union in Las Vegas are two social unionism wins in the 1990s amongst others reported in ‘Hard Work.’

Unions in regional Labor Councils such as San Francisco are working through a ‘Union Cities’ project for unions to be socially useful with community bargaining through mobilization. Local rapid response mobilization over social justice and workplace issues are organised as new solidarity and longer-term union and community alliances develop.

The face of union leaders is more ethnic, racial and women leaders. Social unionism is one road for the survival for US unions.

The question for the next decade is will it be able to fight back against the worldwide race to the bottom in workplace rights and conditions. Although strong battles are fought on union recognition elections, the ‘card recognition’ system is favoured.

The revitalization comes from unions with social polices and community support that is growing. 1999 saw union mobilisation in Seattle with environmentalists, NGO’s for fair trade not free trade against the WTO World trade negotiations.

I met Katie Quan Chair of the UC Berkeley Labor Center a leader on immigrant labor issues and training new unionists for leadership http://www.seiu.org/

I talked to one leader in social unionism, the Service Employees International Union SEIU in San Francisco. The SEIU is similar to the Liquor Hospitality Miscellaneous Union LHMU. I am a former LHMU research officer before election to the UTLC of SA. So I was familiar with the SEIU, their social unionism, their organising of immigrant workers, with militant social justice and solidarity with community groups and trying to put a movement back into the ‘labour movement’. The SEIU organising for growth has been rationalising resources, amalgamating smaller Locals and resourcing to further organise non-unionists.

In 1992, I was first in the USA and in Los Angeles met the SEIU celebrating bargaining victories, their Justice for Janitors successful strategy for organising the lower paid and growing the union.

For an analysis read ‘H e l o t s N o M o r e : A C a s e S t u d y o f t h e J u s t i c e f o r J a n i t o r s C a m p a i g n i n L o s A n g e l e s ’ from t h e C e n t e r f o r R e g i o n a l P o l i c y S t u d i e s U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , L o s A n g e l e s http://repositories.cdlib.org/lewis/wps/15

‘This 1996 paper analyzes the recent growth of janitorial unionism in LA against the background of the previous history of unionism’s rise and decline in the city’s building service industry, asking how and why the Justice for Janitors campaign succeeded in LA, and whether its success will last.

This case study indicates the continuing relevance of questions about how poor immigrant workers are able to build successful and enduring organizations and about the relationship between immigrant workers and the rise and decline of unions.’ I had met John Sweeney, the new SEIU strategist, soon to be elected in 1995 to President of the AFL-CIO (same as our ACTU) with an organising reform programme overturning many years of business unionism (see one report in ‘Hard Work’).

Josie Mooney SEIU San Francisco knows of the ACTU campaign against WorkChoices and the LHMU campaigns, the recent Clean Start Fair Deal for Cleaners www.lhmu.org.au

I went organising on a site visit to the San Francisco airport. I listened to the workers and the Phillipino organiser about their issues. All airports after 9/11 dismissed their unionised security workforce replacing them with non-unionists; except at the San Francisco airport the unionists resisted. I found that even in union contracts wages are low. But not as bad as the minimum wage about $7 an hour!

I gave the SEIU Your Rights at Work literature and WorkChoices in the first year (my paper is available). Unionists were flabbergasted about the details of WorkChoices and alarmed by what is happening to Australian workers and their unions.

I sat in on a training session for rights for public sector workers. I informed them that Australian members now had less union rights. They were alarmed about PM Howard’s extreme anti-unionism, such as ‘prohibited content’, the prohibition on employers agreeing to union organisational rights. Such rights have been removed from our workplace agreements.

Australian unions can be fined if they make a union organisational claim and if employers agree they are fined. PM Howard does not trust employers = so much for freedom of contract. Protected action is not allowed. My report on PM Howard’s political correctness with prohibited content is posted on this blog.

I gave then the good news that according to current polls PM Howard is likely to lose the election. The ACTU and union campaigning may succeed against the exploitation of the lower paid and the repressive anti-union laws. I told them of our new ALP leaders Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard. Corporate interests may be pegged back. If Howard wins, US unions see the Australian WorkChoices model as indeed ominous.

The SEIU’s leader, Andy Stern, in his book ‘A Country That Works’ makes a personal passionate plea that many things are wrong for working families with an America that helps the rich get richer while most people get squeezed. See “http://”>www.ACountryThatWorks.com

Stern tells his personal story working for the union. He initiates his social unionism strategic shift away from business unionism. The challenge is to build back up union strength. The SEIU in the last decade has their members dressed in purple protesting on social justice issues for public sector and low wage service workers. Stern rejects class struggle and is not against the employer, offering strategic partnerships. These have validity with union health workers in employer alliances with other health groups.

His book ends with his plan to make America work; less tax on workers; a proper health care plan (citing Australia’s Medicare); a new retirement system (our national Superannuation system is cited); investing in internet access for all; a world class education system, skills training and retaining jobs.

He ends in high spirits ‘Americans should pause and take the time to appreciate the glory and grandness of our future. Humanity faces a quantum leap forward, and we are engaged in building a remarkable new civilization from the ground up. No single generation has ever been offered such possibilities; we should seize them with passion and zest.’

UNIONS SPLIT AT THE TOP

One question I asked was why Andy Stern led the SEIU in a split in 2005 inside the AFL-CIO (our ACTU). 40% of unions left and started Change to Win see “http://”>www.changetowin.org that is seven major unions with 6 million workers, 1 million in California: the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, United Farm Workers, United Food and Commercial Workers, Laborers International Union of North America, the Service Employees International Union and Unite Here, which represents textile and hotel workers. Change to Win said it focuses on organizing growth and developing joint strategies on three issues: retirement security, healthcare and immigration.

I was critical, coming from a Labor Council viewpoint where unity across unions is essential.

Stern explains why the SEIU split off over the organising model: Proposals included:
∑ AFL-CIO resources for organising non-unionists is a national priority (50% of dues returned to unions with a growth plan),
∑ for amalgamation to twenty industry unions,
∑ coordinated bargaining,
∑ global union alliances with unions overseas,
∑ shifting organising resources to technological growth areas,
∑ rejecting the Wal-Marting of jobs with low pay and few benefits and no unions,
∑ and less finance to Democrat campaigns, but more member involvement in electoral political activity.

The Stern story has the AFL-CIO union leaders and President Sweeney not adopting this union reform agenda. Some union leaders saw it as a frontal assault on their authority. A split and a new union group had to happen. This reform programme is similar to what the ACTU started; rationalise, modernise, amalgamate and resource organising non-unionists.

Read Michael Crosby’s book 2005 ‘Power at Work Rebuilding the Australian Union Movement’ (The Federation Press, Sydney). Political campaigns against WorkChoices are still necessary.

I asked unionists about the split. It is still controversial. Some liked it for opening up more competition amongst the unions. I was told one reason the Teamsters split was they aim to organise in any industry. Some favour the split arguing it pushed the AFL-CIO in acting militantly to compete with the Change to Win unions.

On political funding, both union groups in the 2006 Congressional elections, put in millions of dollars resourcing their challenges to the Republicans, with ‘shoe leather’ organisers and member activism in the community…a winning strategy as fascist-type Republicans were voted out.

I asked about the Democrat vote and yes it was the Iraq war. This is because working people are suffering more as President Bush cuts jobs, public services, education and health services to finance the war. These are the Republican working class ‘redneck’ vote. They switched due to the job loss of collapsing industry and being hit hard in their hip pockets. These right-wingers protested because rather than small government, Bush intervenes more into people’s lives, Homeland Security being one example.

Some unionists see the division as providing little difference for workers in their jobs, no improvement. One long time union delegate at the Convention said it was a very bad day for the labour movement and union members do not understand why it had to happen. Others see no united union or political voice, as the end of US unions. Other labor activists say the debate never came to grips with US labor’s basic problem, that US capitalism is harmful to the health of workers.

Another activist called the split a ‘Palace Coup’, only at the top of the union leadership as the members of Change to Win unions did not have a vote to split. George Strauss told me one factor was personal politics, leaders’ egos and power plays as the battle of the ‘strongmen’, and the antagonism between Andy Stern SEIU and his mentor John Sweeney AFL-CIO.

There may rocky roads ahead for Change to Win, according to this news report while I was there,

‘Rifts threaten breakaway union coalition The 2-year-old Change to Win group’s failure to achieve consensus may test its viability.’ Joe Mathews report was in the Los Angeles Times March 27, 2007. ‘Change to Win faces internal divides that could threaten its own viability, according to documents obtained by The Times. In splitting with the AFL-CIO, which represents 10 million workers, Change to Win unions pledged to build a new labor movement that would focus less on presidential politics and more on aggressively increasing labor power through organizing.

The split is so new that assessing its effect is difficult. But the internal documents suggest that the new coalition is fragile. In a three-page letter sent last month to his fellow Change to Win leaders, Joseph Hansen, President of the United Food and Commercial Workers, wrote that the unions need to “resolve issues that I see as a threat to the existence of Change to Win.” He also declared that his union would withdraw a promised $200,000 contribution to an effort by the coalition to put pressure on Wal-Mart by informing Change to Win members about the company’s practices. “I am concerned that there is an increasing drift away from our growth partnership into one more bureaucratic and similar to the autocratic and less productive aspects of the AFL-CIO,” Hansen wrote. He said that a March 6 meeting with other union presidents had allayed some, but not all, of his concerns.

Anna Burger, chairwoman of the Change to Win leadership, said the group was making progress but also acknowledged “serious concern about the future and direction” and raised her own issues about the group’s failure to implement its plans. In interviews, union officials downplayed the concerns. A spokesman for his union said Stern had discussed the issue with other Change to Win leaders and that they were united in their goals.’

I have not dealt with the question of those unions suffering decline due to US manufacturing moving offshore. Nor the low-density unionism in the high technology corporations. Many sectors face revitalization challenges.

MILITANT UNIONISM: THE INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE AND WHAREHOUSE UNION

I met briefly ILWU organisers, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union; href=”http://”>www.ilwu.org

San Francisco has a proud tradition of militant unionism. The legendary Australian born Harry Bridges led the ILWU 1934 to 1977, organising the Pacific Coast, from Alaska and Canada to the south, Hawaii and all of the industry and much connected to it, warehouses, pickers etc. In the first part of the 20th century, the ILWU defeated goon squads, blacklisting, wage cuts, many accidents and employer anti-unionism.

In the 1950’s it resisted the constant government attacks, surveillance, attempted deportation, and illegal imprisonment of Harry Bridges’ for his alleged Communist affiliation (untrue). In the last decade, the ILWU handled the transition to modern containerization and technological advance. Through historic lengthy strikes, the ILWU defeated the powerful employer anti-unionism.

The ILWU’s history is dedicated to the idea that solidarity with other workers and other unions is the key to achieving economic security and a peaceful world.

‘An injury to one is an injury to all.’ ILWU members have high wages, good health insurance, a strong pension fund, good OHS and a proud record of struggle in the community, practices non-discrimination and now ensures women union leaders.

The ILWU remains strong, democratic, militant, left and continuing international solidarity campaigns. You may remember in the first days of the 1998 Waterfront battle, the San Francisco ILWU turned around a Patricks ship and showed great solidarity with the MUA boosting the morale on the waterfront community assemblies. The ILWU knows about WorkChoices.

I went leafleting. This ILWU campaign supports women almond workers. Here the multinational company is exploiting immigrant labour in the largest almond factory in the world and denying them the right to join the ILWU. We leafleted outside chocolate shops that used the almonds. For an insight into the dispute, see www.bluediamondunion.org US unions organise what is to us outside their industry. The ILWU history of unionising packing sheds etc. and almond workers is related to their warehousing division. In San Francisco they have unionised bookshops, with young women organisers.

The ILWU stayed in the AFLCIO and the San Francisco Labor Council http://www.sflaborcouncil.org/ The SEIU also remained rather than split. The SEIU’s Josie Mooney is also the President San Francisco Labor Council.

When Harry Brides died in 1990 the West Coast shut down from noon on March 30 to 8am March 31. Then, simultaneous with the departure of the San Francisco ferry-boat carrying Bridge’s ashes out of san Francisco Bay for burial at sea, all West Coast, Alaska, and Hawaiian ports shut down for two hours. (ILWU history).

JOBS WITH JUSTICE

An example of social unionism is the ‘Jobs with Justice’ organisation; see “http://”>www.jwj.org

This engages workers and allies in campaigns to win justice in workplaces and in communities where working families live. JwJ was founded in 1987 with the vision of lifting up workers’ rights struggles as part of a larger campaign for economic and social justice.

They believe in long-term multi-issue coalition building, grassroots base-building and organizing and strategic militant action as the foundation for building a grassroots movement. They believe that by engaging a broad community of allies, they can win bigger victories. They reach working people through the organizations that represent them—unions, congregations, community organizations—and directly as JwJ activists.

Nearly 100,000 people have signed the Jobs with Justice pledge to Be There at least five times a year for someone else’s struggle as well as their own. (From their introduction). Such a Jobs with Justice initiate could be built in Australia.

Like Australia, the issue of work family collision sees many campaigns, such as the Labor Project for Working Families campaign for family friendly workplaces, see www.working-families.org

On November 7, 2006 San Francisco became the first city in the country to require paid sick days for all workers in the city, requiring 9 days annually for large employers and 5 for small business. One in two US workers have no right to paid sick leave.

THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM DEBATE

US unions collectively bargain in union agreements for health care benefits with the corporations that provide insurance coverage. This is in the absence of a national health system, like Medicare. But where there is no union, there are inadequate health benefits. More and more it is difficult to bargain with US corporations. They complain that their labour costs are not competitive as they pay health benefits that other countries’ corporations do not, as all are under a national health care system.

Stern has a progressive voice on health care issues where millions of workers do not have health coverage (and his is a health union).

But showing the contradictions, Andy Stern in recent actions formed a healthcare alliance with employers that has rankled other unions. Stern announced SEIU joining with corporations including Wal-Mart to develop a plan for universal health coverage by 2012. He supports alliances for more private health insurance and is strongly criticised for not backing a public health system (details available).

Other unions call this ‘a publicity stunt that Wal-Mart orchestrated.’ Some SEIU Locals repudiated the move, voting for a Bill for a National Public Health system. This is interesting politics for any Democrat President. The current system is not viable and requires a National Health system. There is current criticism with Stern’s recent agreement with Nursing Home employers (details available.) The US health care system debate is lively amongst unions.

IMMIGRANT LABOUR FIGHT BACK

I talked to activists about immigrant workers. Unionising ‘illegal’ immigrants is a major challenge in California. President Bush tries to crack down with legislation against ‘illegal’ immigrants, making it a felony crime. He wants to round up millions and send them back, build a border wall, then allow then in legally as lawful wage slaves. Constant police raids terrorise these ‘illegals’, and deportation if e.g. they are union activists who go on strike.

But for the first time ever, 5 million immigrant workers in Los Angeles rallied in protest for their civil rights on March 24 2006. Then on May 1 2006 a successful national economic boycott. Bush is in trouble. Employers relying on illegal immigrants do not want to lose their cheap labour. Public opinion favors policies allowing these immigrant workers getting the ‘green card’ and permanent visa residence.

Immigrant workers have community organisations across the border. I heard more from San Francisco Berkeley photo-journalist David Bacon, from his recently published photo-journal on images and voices from the world of Californian migration, ‘Communities without Borders’ and from his website on the labour movement www.dbacon.igc.org

Stories and photos of the struggles and activism of immigrant working families, show the connections across the border in community political organisations. Activists are prominent in the labor movement. US unions put effort to unionising immigrant workers and express solidarity with their grievances. The UC Berkeley Labor Center provides Latino Leadership training.

LABOUR LAW REFORM: THE EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE BILL

Both the AFL-CIO and Change to Win websites show all unions lobbied for the Employee Free Choice Act EFCA.
This was passed I March by the House of Representatives in a vote 241 to 185. Democrats do not possess a 60 percent majority in the Senate, so even if a majority of votes develop to pass the EFCA, there would be no way to stop Republicans from filibustering the Bill and stopping its passage. Vice-President Cheney stated President Bush would veto the Bill.

What is the EFCA Bill? George Strauss from the UC Berkeley Labor Centre explained it. Chris Townsend, Political Action Director for the United Electrical Workers, says in ‘Labor Law Reform Could Turn Tide on Organizing’:

‘The goal is to remedy the outlandish violations of human and labor rights that are routinely visited on workers who attempt to organize a union in their workplace. Passage of the EFCA would be a good step in the direction of bringing larger numbers of workers into unions. EFCA’s primary function would be to facilitate speedy union recognition via the “card check” mechanism. This would replace the current employer-dominated and corrupted National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) union election route.

The EFCA “card check” would allow for rapid certification of private sector bargaining units. The NLRB would automatically certify the union as the collective bargaining agent for workers in any unit where a majority of workers have indicated their desire to have the union represent them in contract talks by signing union cards. The bill provides for quick negotiation of a first union contract, a mediation process for unsettled contract negotiations, an expedited defense of fired or harassed workers with a back-pay remedy, and civil penalties of up to $20,000 per incident on employers who violate the rights of workers during this process.

Employers and their front groups are mounting a ferocious counterattack on the EFCA. The EFCA is not a fix-all, but it offers a tremendous platform for labor and our allies to expose corporate abuses, lawbreaking, union busting, and government sanction of the same. It also offers labor an issue by which to measure our own union leadership, as well as Congressional Democrats.’

In the USA political process, remember US labor law is still governed by the 1940’s, the Taft-Hartley Act and subsequent Court jurisprudence. It is difficult to get new legislation passed.

The AFL-CIO use to refuse to seriously support labor law reform, privately fearing that it would serve only to expose Democrats who were happy to accept labor’s support while doing nothing to address the labor rights catastrophe. Promotion of labor law reform by organized labor was minimal-to-non-existent throughout the Clinton years, despite some early optimism under Robert Reich in Labor, but overall being routinely dismissed as unrealistic.

David Brody in his book ‘Labor embattled’ shows how the 1940’s system of union recognition by the democratic election by employees for a union representing workers for bargaining in a business has been turned over the years by the ideological US courts from a law to unionise workers to one that hijacks the process, defeating union organising. In the election ballot, powerful company union-busting and legal resources intimidate workers from voting yes. Even if there is a ballot win, a hostile employer can for years delay a collective bargaining agreement. The right to strike in the US is similarly legally restricted. But not as bad for workers as the suppression of strikes in WorkChoices see www.JAPE.org On the US limited right to strike, read Josiah Bartlett Lambert 2005 ‘If the Workers Took a Notion: The Right to Strike and American Political Development’ and review at www.JAPE.org On the US limited right to strike, read Josiah Bartlett Lambert 2005 ‘If the Workers Took a Notion: The Right to Strike and American Political Development’ and review at href=”http://”>http://laborstrategies.blogs.com/global_labor_strategies/.

Although the US notion of ‘good faith bargaining’ sounds attractive, the US courts have so diluted its value that it is useless against determined employer opposition. The National Labor Relations Act is analysed by David Brody as a bulwark of the ‘union free environment’ that describes nine-tenths of the US economy.

The EFCAct would make a difference if there were a Democrat President in 2009 with control of Congress, a possibility. If the ALP wins government, the current US system for union recognition is not recommended (see the ACTU report on collective bargaining reform).

US LABOR AGAINST THE WAR

I met with a strong group of San Francisco union activists, US Labor against the War, USLAW. Read and bookmark and get their bulletins their excellent website http://uslaboragainstwar.org.

USLAW reports on debates, issues bulletins and analysis on the Iraq war.

What on the surface looks like a good development by the Democrats, led by Nancy Pelosi the impressive Speaker, on their recent resolution in Congress for a timetable and withdrawal from Iraq requires deeper analysis.

Michael Eisenscher, national coordinator, critiqued all Democrat contenders as they say only some troops will be withdrawn from the Iraq disaster. In oil areas, the US will keep troops indefinitely to protect US and western corporate access to oil reserves.

The US convinced the Iraq government that Iraqis could hold the current oil supplies. But the huge oil reserves are to be privatised. The occupation is to be maintained so that US corporations with 9 world oil majors can invest in developing the reserves. Iraq public opinion is against these private contracts.

The current fighting does not allow enough security…hence the surge, hoping in 5 years time western exploration and development is possible. For background on the Iraq Oil privatisation, see USLAW and the Platform briefing for the World Social Forum in Nairobi January 2006 in www.carbonweb.org/iraq and subsequent news of privatisation contracts. One factor is the rise of Iraq Oil Trade Union Federations rejecting privatisation.

Although US union leaders were slow in getting out union members to anti-war demonstrations, more labor activists are campaigning. Many unions pass resolutions against the war, USLAW started in January 2003, now a permanent national organisation, with many affiliates. The organisers wanted more union Locals to join. Their strategy was to gradually win over those in the labour movement in favour of the war.

A successful strategy was the 2005 tour of US Union halls by Iraqi labor leaders. They debated their issues direct with US workers. Such debate spurred union leaders and the AFL-CIO to oppose the war.

This report on the AFL-CIO meeting is from journalist David Bacon www.davidbacon.igc.org

UNIONS AT WAR San Francisco Bay Guardian, 8/10/05.

‘In Chicago’s cavernous Navy Pier convention center, delegates were lined up at the four microphones scattered across the floor. San Francisco’s Nancy Wohlforth stood at mic number 2. She’d been waiting for this moment for two years. The mic went live, and she stepped forward. Wohlforth is a slight woman, but her voice cut through the hubbub of the little conversations across the floor, stopping them dead. With the intensity and anger of a twenty-first century Mother Jones, she began to give her fellow delegates a dose of straight, unvarnished truth.

“All we hear are the lies and deceit of the Bush administration,” she called out, “that put us in Iraq on a false pretext, and keep us in Iraq for absolutely no good reason except to enrich his cronies in Halliburton,” Her voice rising, she pointed to a group of Iraqi workers who’d braved the long, dangerous road from Baghdad to get to the AFL-CIO convention. “I’ll tell you what they want,” she thundered. “They want an end to the U.S. occupation.” Applause broke into her speech. “They want it now, and not yesterday.” The applause got stronger. “Because as long as we are there, they can never really achieve self-determination and build a truly democratic state.”

She brought the house down. Wohlforth, whose face breaks into sharp angles around flashing eyes, is a piece of San Francisco in Washington, DC. As secretary-treasurer of the Office and Professional Employees union, she’s one of the highest-ranking labor leaders in the country. She heads Pride at Work, the national organization of gay and lesbian union members. For two years, she and her anti-war cohorts in USLAW fought the long battle that finally put the Iraq war on center stage at the AFL-CIO’s Chicago gathering.

At the debate’s end, the AFL-CIO passed a resolution, calling for the “rapid withdrawal” of US troops from Iraq. For progressive trade unionists, it was a bright moment, but one that came in dark times.

San Francisco’s Tim Paulson connected the dots for his fellow delegates between the war and the problems facing workers closer to home. According to the city’s central labor council secretary, “all this money that is being spent on bombs and occupation could have been used for health care, jobs, and infrastructure. It could have been used for the things that working men and women value. That’s what we believe in.”

The tour received much publicity, changed senior union leaders’ positions, saw Iraq oil workers talk with US oil workers, developed committed union delegates, tapped into the growing popular dissatisfaction with the occupation and started to debate the return of troops as President Bush’s support plummeted.

USLAW campaigned in the last Congressional elections and are actively involved in supporting the Democrats but critiquing their positions. The USLAW has resolutions, speeches, and reported on the accounts of the Iraq Labor unions and their severe difficulties of organising under the occupation, with harassment from US soldiers.

US labor activists went to Iraq. Journalist David Bacon related the strength of Iraq oil workers and newly formed oil unions. Early in the occupation, the US army first threatened the workers with guns, but had to back off after unions imposed bans.

Later, the oil workers were not getting paid for a long time, so workers protested and got their wages.

Another worker tactic was to put cranes across the entrances of the oil refinery, when many oil trucks stopped and backed up. The US army moved in tanks and troops threatening to fire. But the key workers lit up their cigarette lighters and stood next to the oil trucks. You start shooting and the whole place goes up! The US army left and the workers negotiated their demands.

When Halliburton took over, more confrontations occurred. Halliburton backed off after a strike and now respects the unions and pay higher wages. This does not stop US troop harassment of union leaders. A number have been murdered.

The Iraq Oil unions in March 2007 resolved that they oppose the privatisation of their oil reserves in line with public opinion. The higher standard of living under Saddam was due to oil finances. Iraqis want their oil reserves.

‘USLAW received the following communiqué 22/3/2007 from Falah Alwan, President of the Federation of Workers Councils and Unions in Iraq, reporting on an historic meeting of five Iraqi labor federations with representatives of the World Bank and IMF in Amman, Jordan. John Sweeney AFL-CIO led a delegation attending.

The labor movement of Iraq strongly and unequivocally rejects the “structural adjustment” policies of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, and considers any agreements reached between those institutions and the regime in Baghdad to be illegitimate and not binding on the Iraqi people.

It categorically rejects the Oil Investment Law imposed by the Bush administration on behalf of the oil industry on the government of Iraq. That law has been approved in secret by the Council of Ministers and has been forwarded to the Parliament for action.

The unions declare any effort to privatize Iraq’s oil resources to be a line in the sand they will not allow the government to cross. (Information about the fight against this law is on the USLAW website.)

Common Dreams “>http://www.commondreams.org/ makes good analysis on the Iraq occupation.

USLAW tapped into the turning tide of Americans punishing Bush and Republicans. One voice is the organisation Military Families Speak Out. They achieve much media attention.

There is no similar union anti-war organisation in Australia like USLAW. This is a disgrace and a major failing to build opposition to PM Howard’s war position, as well as the union campaign against WorkChoices. The USLAW is driven by dedicated political activists able to mobilize worker opposition to the War. This could still be done here, especially if a successful tour of Iraq unionists is organised.

FACING THE CHINA QUESTION

I was in China early this year. I reported on how the All China Federation of Trade Unions, the ACFTU was the first in the world to unionise Wal-Mart, the biggest US anti-union corporation.

US union leaders know about China. The impact of US jobs moving to China is a real experience, as is the downward pressure on world wages with the exploitation of Chinese workers. They know how the ACFTU unionised Wal-Mart. The SEIU is in dialogue with China’s ACFTU. Andy Stern recounts his first visit to the ACFTU in Beijing in September 2002. Josie Mooney SEIU San Francisco has been to China five times, to talk to the ACFTU on organising and solidarity. US unions overcome official difficulties with dialogue with the ACFTU at the AFL-CIO level.

US unions support China’s Employment Contract law reform and oppose the US corporate lobby against these reforms. Liu Cheng is Professor of Politics and Law at the Shanghai Normal University involved with drafting labour laws for regulation of overseas capitalist excess and exploitation of Chinese workers. See my reports “http://”>http://evatt.labor.net.au/publications/papers/

Liu Cheng’s recent US tour was through Universities such as the Labor Centre UC Berkeley (who had held a Labor Conference in Beijing), the Global Labor Strategies group, unions and the NGO sweatshop lobby. In Washington he urged Democrats to expose US corporations opposing the China labour law reforms (with some success).

He wanted to get support internationally for the labor laws reform. Liu told me that support for the new law within China is not enough “if there is no support from labor supporters outside China…Some National People’s Party Congress representatives are influenced by the employer lobby. Although the principles of the amendments are secure, there may be concessions on the details, so we call for help.” See report http://www.commondreams.org/ and the longer analysis ‘Undue Influence: Corporations gain ground in battle over China’s New labor law – But Human Rights and Labor Advocates are Pushing Back’. http://www.commondreams.org/ and the longer analysis ‘Undue Influence: Corporations gain ground in battle over China’s New labor law – But Human Rights and Labor Advocates are Pushing Back’. http://www.commondreams.org/ The AFL-CIO in 1997 warned about signing the Kyoto protocol. The opposition to Kyoto was led by the activities of a union group United for Jobs and the Environment focusing on possible job loss. Although there are union exposes of US oil corporations’ denial of their responsibility and lobbying against those warning about global warning, there is little on the websites. But Andy Stern now supports an immediate cut in carbon emissions. Conferences of unionists and environmentalists are beginning to work for policies for clean energy. The Steelworkers Union develops environmental alliances ACTU on the economic crisis and unions a debate where to now.

FWB: Unions downgraded

Concerns for the right to strike: Kevin Rudd ‘Facing the Future’ 17/4/2007

Creative Unions

Unions must move left