It’s about competition, not solidarity

Analysis:

On Saturday July 30, the Grand Rapids Press ran two articles in the business section about the split between the AFL-CIO and UFCW. The first article is a summary, noting some of the reasons for the split and quoting some of the union leadership. One of the points made in this article is that the union split could somehow be beneficial; noting that competition between the unions could spur both to increase membership. The article notes that when the AFL and the CIO were separate in the 1930’s they saw increases in membership. This idea that the split might lead to more powerful unions rather than less is continued in the other article entitled “Labor Rift could mean increased competition.” This article further explores this theme of the labor rift as a potential positive for introducing competition between unions.

This frame of “competition is good” is a rather simplistic way of looking at this issue. To say that the unions did better in the 1930’s when separate, compared to later when united ignores a great deal of historical context. So for example, the depression was going on in the 30’s, a fact which might have more to do with explaining labors successes in that period than simply internal competition. Also, different eras have seen different levels of corporate and governmental hostility toward labor. These factors have to be taken into account for explaining the relative amount of success or failure that unions have experienced over the last century. Additionally, it seems rather ironic to frame this discussion about unions in the language of the market, i.e., that competition is good. Given that unions were created in large part to protect workers from the excesses of the free market system, it seems odd that this issue is being described in terms of competition rather than the traditional labor motto of solidarity.

Story:

UFCW bolts AFL-CIO

Departure means loss of more than 4 million members
Associated Press

WASHINGTON – The United Food and Commercial Workers on Friday joined the Teamsters and Service Workers in abandoning the AFL-CIO, depriving the labor federation of three of its largest unions and close to $28 million of its estimated $120 million budget.

The departure of the 1.4 million member UFCW from the labor federation means the AFL-CIO is losing more than 4 million of its 13 million members.

Grand Rapids-based UFCW 951, one of the state’s largest unions with 33,000 members, endorsed the move and said in a statement it “looks forward to working with its coalition partners in building a new, vibrant labor movement in the United States and Michigan.”

Earlier this week, the UFCW joined the Teamsters, Service Employees International Union and Unite Here – a group of textile, restaurant and hotel employees – in boycotting the AFL-CIO convention in Chicago. The Teamsters and service workers announced then that they were leaving the AFL-CIO. Unite Here is still considering its next step.
During the convention, AFL-CIO President John Sweeney was re-elected to another term and he pledged to make changes to address the woes of organized labor. But the departing unions say those changes are insufficient.

“The world has changed and workers’ rights and living standards are under attack,” UFCW President Joe Hansen said in a letter delivered to Sweeney on Friday. “Tradition and past success are not sufficient to meet the new challenges.”
The departure of the unions has frustrated labor federation officials.

“The UFCW leadership decision to leave the AFL-CIO, especially when working people are up against the most powerful, anti-worker corporate and governmental forces in 80 years, is a tragedy for working families,” said Lane Windham, spokesperson for the AFL-CIO. “Only union’s enemies win when unions split our strength.”

The unions breaking away from the AFL-CIO want to commit more money to recruiting new members and complain that the federation has committed too much money and placed too much emphasis on backing political candidates – particularly Democrats.

Hansen of UFCW said during a conference call that his union is healthy financially and that its alliance with the Teamsters and service workers is about cooperation, not money. Hansen said leaving the federation was not about saving money, adding: “I plan to devote as much money as I can to organizing.”

Hansen noted that “politics are extremely important. We might be more selective in some ways, searching out politicians who will support workers.”

At the same time, he said politicians who support labor will still see “a broad front of support” from unions.
“While our affiliation ends, our commitment to work with the AFL-CIO and unions affiliated with the AFL-CIO on issues and programs where we share common goals remains unchanged,” Hansen said in his letter to Sweeney. “I believe our movement is united in our basic principles and values, even if we pursue different strategies.”

The departure is part of the biggest rift in organized labor since 1938, when the CIO split from the AFL. Supporters of the breakup note that labor made big gains while the two groups competed.

When the AFL-CIO merged in the 1950s, one of every three private-sector workers belonged to a labor union. Now, less than 8 percent of private-sector workers are unionized.

Labor rift could mean increased competition
by Adam Geller
Associated Press

An angry rift between union leaders filled the spotlight when big labor gathered this week in Chicago. But to figure out what labor’s divide might actually mean for workers and employers, look beyond the dueling press conferences and listen to the union talk at Grandma’s House, a child care center Angenita Tanner runs from her basement apartment on the city’s South Side.

Tanner is one of Illinois’ 49,000 home child care workers, many self-employed, who voted overwhelmingly this spring to be represented by the Service Employees International Union.

The vote capped a nine-year campaign by the SEIU, and a bitter fight with a rival union for the low-paid service workers. The workers, nearly all women and most minorities, once would have been far outside the muscle and manufacturing mainstream of organized labor.

“There’s power in numbers,” said Tanner, trying to keep her voice in check as the seven children in her charge nap. “You cannot go to (the state Capitol in) Springfield by yourself and talk to senators and representatives and get heard … but if you go as part of a group, being represented as part of the masses, they’re going to listen.”

The unions’ drive to sign up the child care providers – and another recent campaign in Illinois for home health aides -turned on winning higher pay and health insurance. But they also reflect the split in organized labor, one experts say could fuel increased competition by unions for workers, particularly in service industries that are becoming the economy’s mainstay.

“The story of home care workers and child care workers in Illinois is a nice sort of case study of what’s been writ large in Chicago this week,” said Robert Bruno, an associate professor of labor and industrial relations at the University of Illinois’s Chicago campus.

The SEIU leads the group of unions breaking away from the AFL-CIO umbrella federation, arguing it is past time for the struggling labor movement to focus on signing up new workers. Its rival in the Chicago campaign was the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, one of the loudest voices for maintaining labor solidarity.

The national fight is partly about the egos and ambitions of their leaders, and control of the money and power held by the AFL-CIO. It is also about how each camp would strike a balance between building membership and politicking.

But the union drive in Illinois was awash in politics, proof that the split is not simply a disagreement about whether to spend money on activism or organizing. And it offers a window into the battling between unions that could give some workers not just a choice over whether to bargain as a unit, but of which union to join.
Some experts say the split reminds them of 1930, when a similar rift occurred. The fierce competition between unions that followed took membership to record highs in the mid-1950s, but growth stalled following the merger of the AFL and CIO in 1955.

With the new split, “the constraints will come off and they’ll be in direct competition for a lot of those same people,” said David B. Lipsky, a professor at Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations.
Employers may interpret the labor infighting as disarray. But some experts say the divide could actually create more challenges for companies.

The labor rift “should be a huge wake-up call for employers,” said Philip Rosen, who leads the labor practice group at Jackson Lewis LLP, a law firm representing companies in workplace cases. “They really need to look at it and say: ‘The fight is coming to my worksite tomorrow.'”

Unions are already locked in scrums for some workers, although most of those have been in the public sector.
In Iowa, for example, the SEIU and AFSCME have also been competing vigorously for the right to sign up child care workers. The workers are not state employees, but run businesses paid by the state for caring for the children of lower income working parents.