United Farm Workers joins dissident group demanding AFL-CIO changes

AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 7/22/05 | Ron Fournier - AP

[NormsRevenge]

WASHINGTON (AP) - The small farm workers' union founded by labor hero Cesar Chavez joined a coalition of labor groups demanding changes in the AFL-CIO as the 50-year-old federation inched closer Friday to breaking up.

The United Farm Workers union, based outside Bakersfield, Calif., brings to seven the number of unions in the Change to Win Coalition. Four of the coalition unions have threatened to bolt the AFL-CIO - the Teamsters and service employees, along with food and commercial workers and hotel, restaurant, retail, textile and laundry employees.

The UFW, organized in 1962 and now consisting of 27,000 members, intends to stay in the AFL-CIO. Nonetheless, its partnership with the dissident unions gave the new coalition momentum headed into a fateful weekend.

The announcement came as federation officials gathered in Chicago for a contentious weekend of negotiations before the AFL-CIO's annual convention. The dissident unions are threatening to bolt the convention and, eventually, the AFL-CIO itself unless their demands are met. In addition to seeking the ouster of AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, the dissident unions want more money spent on recruiting union members and are seeking to merge several of the smaller unions.

Sweeney and his supporters are urging the dissidents to remain in the AFL-CIO, arguing that a divided union movement will embolden political opponents and employers who might want to take advantage of weakened unions.

Union officials on both sides of the fight said there were few signs of progress Friday. Some labor leaders sounded resigned to an eventual breakup, which could cost the AFL-CIO up to a third of its membership.

"I'm going to continue hoping that we will find a way to bridge the gaps and stay together, but I'd have to be naive to say that we've moved any closer down that road and there was less likelihood that they may leave the federation," said Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, who had been trying to broker an agreement.

At its executive council meeting in Chicago, the AFL-CIO's executive council took two actions designed to show its opponents that it was willing to reform the federation.

The first would strengthen the executive committee, transferring powers from the federation's headquarters to individual unions, including the coalition unions. The second provision would do away with a first-come-first-serve approach to organizing and instead find the union that is the best fit for the workers.

The executive council also passed a rule against raiding unions that may force the Service Employees International Union to decide sooner than it had planned on whether to bolt the AFL-CIO.

Members of the Change to Win Coalition represent more than 5 million of the federation's nearly 13 million members. At 1.8 million, SEIU's membership is the largest of the coalition members.

The coalition heralded the UFW's decision to join.

"It's a historic day," coalition spokesman Eric Hauser said. "The farm workers represent the best of the American labor movement. Their commitment to organizing is an inspiration and will help fuel the coalition's focus on bringing more workers to unions."

The UFW has members in Arizona, California, Florida, Texas and Washington state.

UFW President Arturo Rodriguez, who made reference to Chavez' cry of "Si se puede," Spanish for "Yes, we can," said at a press conference that joining the coalition was "not intended as a negative statement about the AFL-CIO or President Sweeney."

"It is a positive statement," Rodriguez said. "We believe that with new strategies and with new unity we can win."

There was no immediate reaction from the AFL-CIO. The coalition's official goal is to spearhead new efforts to recruit union members. Unofficially, it's the home of the effort to reform - or divide - the AFL-CIO.

Only 12 percent of the nation's work force is unionized, down from the 1950s when about one of every three workers belonged to a union.

--

On the Net:

AFL-CIO: http://www.aflcio.org/

United Farm Workers: http://www.ufw.org/

[jmaroneps37]

Here it comes and how sweet it is!!!!!!!!!!
The ratunion tower of babel is sliding into the mud with the head skunk john swiney at the helm driving it as fast as his stupid mind can. When the SEIU complained to swiney that he was wasting their money with rat social programs, swiney's response was to announce that they afl-cio would now support queer marriage. You can't make this shiite up.

[FlingWingFlyer]

I think the biggest change Sweeney could give his members is to get rid of the stars and stripes and bring back the hammer and sickle. I know this would please most of the membership.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

I think you have it backwards. The real Communists are at the top.

[ARCADIA]

I think you have it backwards. The real Communists are at the top.

I agree; at least that is where the bulk of the pork is headed.

Before we break out the marching bands and celebrate the breakup of the AFL-CIO, we should consider that this may be the kind of shift that can lead to a political realignment. It may force the Democrats to move, from the extreme dingbat fringe on the left, over to a more centrist position. If that happens the Republicans may find themselves with a real fight on their hands.

If they drop the gay marriage, antiwar, anti religion, minority racism, pro-abortion, and environmental wacko messages; and take up protective tariffs, anti-illegal immigration, re-industrialization, health care reform, better border security, and social security*. They can put together a solid selling message that would appeal to the lower and middle classes.

This shift does not mean that unions are not going away. It just means that the leadership of the AFL-CIO which had signed on to the leftist Democratic platform is losing control. What we should be concerned about is what may eventually replace it.


*(as in pulling the tax cap to safeguard the program)

[ARCADIA]

Correction:

"This shift does not mean that unions are not going away" s/b "This shift does not mean that unions are going away"

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Any shift on their part would be purely cosmetic. If it worked in getting them elected it still wouldn't last long as that is not who they are nor why they want to be in office. They are Communists and the best we could hope for is that they would start with socialsism.

[ARCADIA]

They are Communists and the best we could hope for is that they would start with socialsism.

Their leadership is unquestionably socialist, the rank in file is not; if we start to see significant leadership changes in 2006, it may be the beginning of a real shift to the middle. The polarization of the parties has left a vast political vacuum in the middle, and the Democrats are so screwed up that they may be forced to do a real shift in that direction. They no longer have the benefit of an unfettered MSM to cover their antics, and their rank and file may be losing their patients with a leadership that has failed to deliver.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

I agree with you as to what will happen short term. However, I still believe it will all be cosmetic rather than a sea change. They will go underground and slyly continue as they have since the early 1900s in slowly sneaking more and more socialism into our society until they can finally proclaim the Victory of the Revolution. Then we are all sunk.