Oh, oh.

The news for unions is not good. But maybe that means the news for America is.



washingtonpost.com
Labor's Divisions Widen As Membership Declines

By Thomas B. Edsall
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 7, 2005; Page A02

LAS VEGAS -- AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney last week won the latest round in
a bitter internal clash over the future of the labor movement by insisting that
more money go for future campaigns to unseat Republicans than for trying to
shore up the federation's sagging membership.

That showdown pitted Sweeney, AFSCME's Gerald McEntee and the Steelworkers' Leo
Gerard against such powerhouse dissidents as the Teamsters' James P. Hoffa, the
Service Employees' Andrew L. Stern and the Laborers' Terence M. O'Sullivan.

Since the merger of the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of
Industrial Organizations 50 years ago, labor has been in a relentless downward
spiral, and factions have bitterly squabbled for years over how best to reverse
the trend. Today, the most urgent question among labor leaders and experts is
whether a victory by either Sweeney's forces or the dissidents will be enough to
pull organized labor out of a nose dive that began when Sweeney, 70, was a
20-year-old student at Queens College.

"These are the darkest days that I have ever seen for American workers across
the United States," said McEntee, one of Sweeney's strongest allies.

John Wilhelm, a president of the recently merged Unite Here union, who is
contemplating a challenge to Sweeney in the July election for president, added
that "we are in deep trouble."

By a 2 to 1 margin, the AFL-CIO's executive committee last week rejected the
dissidents' proposal to boost spending on union organizing and membership drives
by roughly $35 million. Instead, it adopted the Sweeney plan to nearly double
spending on political and legislative mobilization, raising the AFL-CIO's annual
commitment to these activities to $45 million.

In 1953, 36 percent of private-sector workers were union members; today, fewer
than 8 percent belong to unions. Sweeney argued that the only way to stem the
collapse of unionization is to win back Democratic control of the Congress and
the White House. Union organizing, in the view of Sweeney and his backers, will
be futile in the face of hostile Republican leaders and regulators who allow
employers to block union-certification elections and use stalling tactics and
threats to discourage organizing drives.

Hoffa, Stern and Wilhelm countered that labor must build up its membership
through organizing drives before it can effectively flex its political muscle.
They say that over the past decade the AFL-CIO and its member unions have
dramatically increased political activities, only to suffer defeat at the polls
while seeing a widening of income inequality and a steady decline in union
membership.

But some experts warn that neither proposed strategy will work in the face of
such overwhelming forces as globalization, the shift of production and services
to low-wage countries, and the emergence of Wal-Mart and other mega-corporations
that have undermined -- and in some cases obliterated -- union efforts.

Leo Troy, an economics professor at Rutgers University, predicted that
unionization in the private sector "will continue to ebb" worldwide in all
advanced industrial countries.

Most labor leaders agree that the decline of unions has reached a crisis point.
They concede that much of their work is a fight to preserve pay and benefit
levels for currently employed members, as opposed to vigorously fighting for
improved benefits and expanding membership into new sectors of the economy.

O'Sullivan, president of the Laborers' International Union, said 80 percent of
negotiated wage and benefit increases go just to pay for rising health care
costs. The price of health coverage, in turn, is being driven up partly by the
costs of paying for the uninsured, many of whom work for non-union companies
without benefits, O'Sullivan said. "This pattern of cost-shifting is decaying
the foundation of our bargaining efforts," he said. "Our members are shouldering
the costs of health care for unscrupulous employers."

While the threats facing organized labor have become increasingly apparent,
labor leaders for decades have been reluctant to take them seriously.

The decline in union membership had become evident by the early 1970s, but the
AFL-CIO president at that time, George Meany, dismissed the decline as
irrelevant. In 1972, Meany declared: "To me, it doesn't mean a thing. I have no
concern about it, because the history of the trade union movement has shown that
when organized workers were a very, very tiny percentage of the workforce, they
still accomplished and did things that were important for the entire workforce."

By the late 1970s, labor leaders were caught by surprise when American
businesses, faced with foreign competition, abruptly began demanding
concessions. This was followed in the 1980s by widespread manufacturing layoffs
and plant closings. One of the most stunning blows to labor was Republican
President Ronald Reagan's decision in 1981 to fire striking air traffic
controllers who were members of a union that had endorsed Reagan's campaign in
1980.

Today, the vast majority of union members -- 84 percent -- live in only 12
states, leaving workers with little organized power in much of the country,
according to O'Sullivan of the Laborers union.

"The executive committee has given us a mandate for really big changes in the
labor movement," Sweeney told reporters at the end of the meetings in Las Vegas.
"I was elected in 1995 on a change platform."

Moments before Sweeney spoke, Wilhelm, at an impromptu session with reporters,
anticipated Sweeney's comments and preemptively dismissed them as empty promises
and "the rhetoric of change."

© 2005 The Washington Post Company
Advertising Links What's this?
World Travel and Medical Plans
World travel and annual medical insurance plans from independent advisors
Medibroker International. Free quotes.
www.medibrokerinternational.com
Save up to 75% on a World Cruise
Looking to travel the world at a great low rate? Check out our complete,
up-to-date listing of discounts on cruises departing in the next 90 days.
www.vacationstogo.com
World Travel with Travel Guard
Travel Guard - plans fit travelers of all ages, featuring 24-hour service.
Coverages include: Trip cancellation, baggage delay, missed connection, medical
expenses and much more.
www.travelguard.com


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

You think the possibility of even less security for American workers and
their families is good?


Typical of the people who will willingly take any benefits and wages won by
union brothers but don't want to contribute to the cost or effort of winning
same. Maybe JohnH should checkout the salaries of teachers before they
became unionized. I doubt he'd be willing to work for what he's actually
worth.

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 19:05:11 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

You think the possibility of even less security for American workers and
their families is good?


Typical of the people who will willingly take any benefits and wages won by
union brothers but don't want to contribute to the cost or effort of winning
same. Maybe JohnH should checkout the salaries of teachers before they
became unionized. I doubt he'd be willing to work for what he's actually
worth.


I'm one of a large number who disagree with the concept that higher teacher pay
results in a better educated student.

In my opinion, the teachers unions do more harm than good now. I don't really
care what they did 40 years ago, and I hold no allegiance to unions for their
activities in the past.


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 19:05:11 GMT, "Don White"

wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

You think the possibility of even less security for American workers and
their families is good?


Typical of the people who will willingly take any benefits and wages won
by
union brothers but don't want to contribute to the cost or effort of
winning
same. Maybe JohnH should checkout the salaries of teachers before they
became unionized. I doubt he'd be willing to work for what he's actually
worth.


I'm one of a large number who disagree with the concept that higher
teacher pay
results in a better educated student.

In my opinion, the teachers unions do more harm than good now. I don't
really
care what they did 40 years ago, and I hold no allegiance to unions for
their
activities in the past.

Salaries at private schools are typically far below that of public schools,
yet outperform the public schools by miles.



John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:28:03 -0500, "P.Fritz"
wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 19:05:11 GMT, "Don White"

wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

You think the possibility of even less security for American workers and
their families is good?


Typical of the people who will willingly take any benefits and wages won
by
union brothers but don't want to contribute to the cost or effort of
winning
same. Maybe JohnH should checkout the salaries of teachers before they
became unionized. I doubt he'd be willing to work for what he's actually
worth.


I'm one of a large number who disagree with the concept that higher
teacher pay
results in a better educated student.

In my opinion, the teachers unions do more harm than good now. I don't
really
care what they did 40 years ago, and I hold no allegiance to unions for
their
activities in the past.

Salaries at private schools are typically far below that of public schools,
yet outperform the public schools by miles.



John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."


QED

The big difference is that the parents are directly footing the bill and take a
*very* active interest in their children's education.

Some reasons teachers will work at private schools for a significant salary
decrease are student motivation/discipline, smaller class sizes, and parents who
actually care.


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:28:03 -0500, "P.Fritz"
wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 19:05:11 GMT, "Don White"

wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

You think the possibility of even less security for American workers
and
their families is good?


Typical of the people who will willingly take any benefits and wages won
by
union brothers but don't want to contribute to the cost or effort of
winning
same. Maybe JohnH should checkout the salaries of teachers before they
became unionized. I doubt he'd be willing to work for what he's
actually
worth.


I'm one of a large number who disagree with the concept that higher
teacher pay
results in a better educated student.

In my opinion, the teachers unions do more harm than good now. I don't
really
care what they did 40 years ago, and I hold no allegiance to unions for
their
activities in the past.

Salaries at private schools are typically far below that of public
schools,
yet outperform the public schools by miles.



John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."


QED

The big difference is that the parents are directly footing the bill and
take a
*very* active interest in their children's education.

Some reasons teachers will work at private schools for a significant
salary
decrease are student motivation/discipline, smaller class sizes, and
parents who
actually care.

But that is the point......teachers salaries are NOT the significant factor
in student success.....parental involvement is......and the teacher's
unions...at least around here, stymie parentla involvement as much as they
can.



John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:55:27 -0500, "P.Fritz"
wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:28:03 -0500, "P.Fritz"
wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 19:05:11 GMT, "Don White"

wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

You think the possibility of even less security for American workers
and
their families is good?


Typical of the people who will willingly take any benefits and wages won
by
union brothers but don't want to contribute to the cost or effort of
winning
same. Maybe JohnH should checkout the salaries of teachers before they
became unionized. I doubt he'd be willing to work for what he's
actually
worth.


I'm one of a large number who disagree with the concept that higher
teacher pay
results in a better educated student.

In my opinion, the teachers unions do more harm than good now. I don't
really
care what they did 40 years ago, and I hold no allegiance to unions for
their
activities in the past.

Salaries at private schools are typically far below that of public
schools,
yet outperform the public schools by miles.



John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."


QED

The big difference is that the parents are directly footing the bill and
take a
*very* active interest in their children's education.

Some reasons teachers will work at private schools for a significant
salary
decrease are student motivation/discipline, smaller class sizes, and
parents who
actually care.

But that is the point......teachers salaries are NOT the significant factor
in student success.....parental involvement is......and the teacher's
unions...at least around here, stymie parentla involvement as much as they
can.



John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."


Are we both preaching to each other's choir? I think so!

:-)


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."