Posted on 08/08/2005 6:12:56 PM PDT by betty boop
Why Did the AFL-CIO Self-Destruct?
The 96th Convention of the American Federation of Musicians — a unit of the AFL-CIO — gathered in Las Vegas July 17-20. I wasn’t there; but I have seen the write-up of the public meetings described in International Musician, the flagship periodical of the AFM.
I wanted to “file a report” on these proceedings. So in the interest of full disclosure, I need to give some background here. My husband has been a member of the AFM since he was 16 years old; but then he’s a fulltime working musician, and having a union card “can make life go more smoothly.” I was a long-time member, until five years ago, when I couldn’t stand it anymore and quit in disgust. What I couldn’t stand was the way the union was being co-opted by political interests that tended to resonate with the Left Progressive wing of the Democrat party. Or so I thought then. And still do, as it turns out. The problem seems only to have grown worse in the last five years.
But be your own judge of that, dear reader.
The great theme of the Convention seems to have been “HEALING.” Let me present a numbered list of the main business before the General Assembly at the Convention. As Marcia Schweitzer writes [for IM August 2005]:
(1) “The two years since the 2003 Convention saw increased discord and erosion of trust among several segments of our membership [e.g., between AFM and certain other closely-related unions that have long-standing contractual relations with AFM].”
(2) Skipping over a lot of “internal business” (i.e., internal politicking), other “actions of note included passage of a resolution calling for a North American boycott of the anti-union Blue Man Group….
“…which has been staunchly refusing to bargain with any unions in any of the cities in which it performs. A strong coalition of the Toronto Musicians Association and the Canadian Actors’ Equity Association, and the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE) has been holding firm in its boycott and public education campaign in Toronto, causing much bad press and mediocre ticket sales for the Blue Man Group there. This resolution urges all AFM members and locals to spread the boycott across North America.”
(3) Next item: “Another passed resolution, to ‘bring our troops home from Iraq as expeditiously as possible,’ elicited some of the most passionate and profound oratory on the Convention floor.
“Some delegates spoke against the resolution as unpatriotic or against the troops. However, several delegates who had attended parts of the Iraqi Labor Tour spoke of the need to support workers in Iraq by ending the occupation and restoring true sovereignty. Other delegates brought up concerns about the siphoning off of billions of dollars of taxpayer money from social programs – and support for the arts – to line the pockets of multinational corporations. One delegate, a veteran of the Korean War, spoke movingly of his experience as a young soldier and of the ongoing effects of the horrors he witnessed. 'I only wish,' he said, ‘that people back home had tried to get me out of there, too.’”
(4) Continuing on, “In response to one delegate’s questioning [the AFM] getting involved outside music, International Officer Ken Shirk pointed to the tradition of unions, particularly the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), using their clout to make political statements, sometimes effecting beneficial outcomes almost single-handed. This was perhaps the most provocative statement on the power of unionism in the whole convention.” [Note to reader: the most recent ILWU dispute basically was about maintaining $120+K annual salaries, plus benefits, for the people who offload ships in U.S. ports. ILWU won. I can’t figure out why…. To put that into perspective, think about the typical annual salaries that school teachers earn....]
Alas, it seems that, for all his incisiveness and profundity, Mr. Shirk lost his re-election to the International Executive Board of the AFM at this convention. [I have actually met this person. I do not mourn his loss….]
SO, to return to our original question, Why Did the AFL-CIO Self-Destruct? A couple of weeks ago, the SEIU and the Teamsters peeled off. My suspicion is that their leaderships are no longer willing to settle for the “wardheeler style of leadership” of AFL-CIO’s John Sweeney. But even more than that, I think SEIU/Teamsters realize that “union bosses” like Sweeney have abandoned the “classical union model”: Which requires the leadership to serve the actual, direct interests of their members. What people may be catching onto today is that the “union model” has changed in recent times. Now, local boards, and international leadership, think their job is to “hire on” the “right politicians” to do the job of “looking after the interests of the membership” for them. Which is a joke: If you make “a deal with the devil,” count on it: he’s not working for YOU; YOU are working for HIM.
And IMHO, that is why SEIU and Teamsters – two huge sectors of the “triumvirate” that had up till now constituted organized labor in the United States and Canada – have split from AFL-CIO.
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi must be having fits over this … in private, of course.
It’s probably obvious that I have a point of view here, but I’ve tried to keep it down to a dull roar. What I’m mainly interested in here is: What do you, dear reader, think about these potentially momentous developments? (That might possibly affect the Democrat party’s pocketbook in a very serious way before too long? Does that mean that the “Hollyweird crowd” increasingly must pay the freight for its candidates, going forward?)
You don't need to defend your statement. I was floored when the teamsters split.
Union workers who depend on private industry for employment, and their unions for standards and long term security have found it increasingly difficult to side with communists and anarchists who intend to destroy private industry and transfer their long term security over to a government entity.
A government entity that is controlled by communists who aggregate more power based on the number of people they can make suffer.
The rats thought that they could control the people they prevented from being properly educated. They never counted on the historical reality that uneducated people act in enlightened self interest.
I just couln't stand handing over hard earned pay to some fat, greasy bastard with soft hands.
How much do you need to know? They've government subsidized extortion rackets, consisting of thuggish, greedy, corrupt lazy goons extorting far too much money, for doing far too little, for morons often doing things monkeys would happily do for a couple of bananas now and then.
Like those button-pushers getting $120k + bennies for "unloading" ships. Like they actually break a sweat as they get machines to grab containers. The extortion rackets ensure that the 30,000 other dolts who could easily do the same job of each union thug never get the chance to compete.
Unions must die. Die, unions, die. Die, Die, Die!
And you know what? They are dying! Cool.
I may have to catch a Blue Man Group show next chance I get.
Anyway, thx for the awful (but appropriate) image.
Regards, DS.
He'll be back in the news tomorrow. Your turn then!
Apparently what's going on with the breakup is the beginning of a super union with an international reach.
The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review(no stranger to union thuggishness)published a disturbing article in yesterday's paper about it March of the union elite
Oh dear Bill -- I think you have got that exactly right....
Thank you oh so very much for writing!
I hire people who don't need the handholding of corrupt thugs.
Thank you so very much for writing -- and for the valuable link!
Go work at McDonalds for awhile. See if you can buy a home or a car on those fat wages. I assume you think 6 or 7$ an hour is too much pay for simply flipping burgers?
Damn those button pusher who make$15 an hour. Damn those road construction workers making $20 an hour leaning on their shovels in 100 degree heat while you sip coffee in your air conditioned office.
Damn those workers who live in a city where houses cost an average of $350,000 and gas is $3.50 a gallon and property taxes are sky high, who have to work overtime to make ends meet. Does $100k a year sound like too much money?
How much $ do you make? What kind of car do you drive?
Your take on unions is about 50 years old and a lot has changed. Some things remain the same however. People still have to work to make an honest living. In my union slackers do not have employment. How many government employees retire with lots of perks and fat pensions?
I doubt Unions had much to do with the wages of those people.
Enron took how many people for how many hundred million dollars with their corruption? How many retirement pension funds got took by Global Crossing? Don't tell me about corruption as a singular issue that only involves unions!
Perhaps you employ illegal immigrants because you believe they can do a job for much less than American citizens?
It's ok to break the law to pad your pocket yes? And it does no harm to America either does it? Maybe 50% of your doctor bill goes to cover government mandated medical treatment of your illegal imported immigrants that work for cheap?
I have no use for people with your attitude. Your failure to grasp the scope of the entire big picture is narrowmindedness and harmful to America. Drive your KIA down to WalMart and go ahead and support America with your phony flag sticker. Your attitude will be the death of America.
Jeepers, PH -- the fact that I'm no "expert" on unions doesn't mean I have to shut up. And as you may have noticed, I don't do that too much. That's probably because I do not believe that self-described "experts" have a monopoly on Truth.
Why can't you just reciprocate every now and then? That is, just let your hair down and tell me what you actually think?
My concern has to do with corruption,whether it be in organized labor,or government for that matter.When either one shows evidence of promoting a socialist agenda that is detrimental to capitalism and free markets,well then that is bothersome.
>> In my union slackers do not have employment.
With the carpenters only the stweart does not get the ax for nomperformance.
Last company I worked for before going back to my company brought in 27 sheetrockers on monday, by friday they had the 7 they were looking for.
I look foreward to these jobs, as they are like family reunions; and you know at the beginning who will go bad by the end.
Every year it is the same. Union companies pay top dollar, but only for performance.
My company just dumped two guys today, and called the hall for two more, anyone but them. It will take all week to get me another partner... My regular partner was injured, and hauled off last week with a slipped disk. I guess he should have worked safer before he fell... If it was a non union job, he would not have had a harness and would be dead today.
I am glad I missed his performance, I heard there was a lot of screaming before and after the shock cord kicked in. I hate it when they scream, it gives me nightmares.
The old labor model was based on organizing and negotiating wages and benefits -- things upon which all (or nearly all) of it's members could agree. Politics beyond that, while heavily slanted to the Dems, was at least slightly non-partisan. To wit: Labor would support Republicans who were friendly to their interests and, generally, eschew issues in which they had no stake and which might divide their members (gun control, abortion, school prayer, etc).
Under Sweeney that all changed. He made the AFL-CIO a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party. That meant signing on to "non-labor" issues and dumping a ton of money into campaigns, most of which were failures. It served to both alienate much of the rank and file and, also, Republicans who might have been predisposed to support some of labor's issues. It also sent a signal to Dems that they could take "labor's" support for granted. That's a bad move at any time, but it's especially ridiculous when redistricting and simple mathematics guarantees a Republican majority in the House until a least 2012, and in the Senate until at least 2009.
Sweeney is either an idiot or he's been bought an paid for by the DNC. I'm guessing the latter.
I am not union, never have been, and have never been related to anyone who was except the teachers in the family. But, Jeepers, why would a regular union meeting of a non-government funded group become a political rally off season?
Something terrible happens when an organization or government beaurocracy outlives its reason for existing. Seems to me, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy, probably the closest thing to immortality on earth. It's as if the whose purpose morphs from satisfying a need to creating a need (often, an ideology) to justify its continuing existence.
My two cents, FWIW…
Nah; union thugs got in the way of actual work, productivity and creativity a few times too often, so I (and everyone else I know who has started companies) started to go around them and make sure they have no impact.
We form voluntary associations amongst competent professional individuals, and if the companies do not provide proper safety standards our voluntary association of competent professional carpenters will not work for them; not a one of us.
Does your "voluntary association" force people to join "voluntarily" to work at a company under the thumb of the "voluntary association"? Or can free people work alongside of, and compete with, members of your "voluntary association" without intimidation?
Can a company pick and choose to hire the people they prefer from amongst your "voluntary association" as well as free people, or do you picket and harass companies that choose to freely associate with those who haven't "voluntarily associated" with your gang? Blue Man Group comes to mind as an example in this thread.
Professionals with self-respect form associations all the time, such as the ASME, IEEE and the like. These serve to educate members and promote their interests. But they're not thugs going around trying to force companies to hire them, at their prices (regardless of what the market will bear), if someone isn't a member it's no big deal and if a company doesn't choose to hire members, that's fine too.
That's not a union. Unions are thuggish gangs of extortionists, supported (for now) by bought politicians. You tell me why some moron pushing buttons to load/unload already-loaded containers are "worth" $120k/year plus bennies? They'll be replaced by robots, guaranteed, and will spend the rest of their stupid lives bitching about it because they "deserve" outrageous compensation.
And unions are dying, for good reason. Those who are desperately trying to prop them up, here and elsewhere, are having fits about it - that's just gravy, but fun to watch.
The other evening, a local agent for a union of highly skilled professionals told me that he was hearing from the AFL-CIO that the Teamsters were in a cash bind and could not repay borrowings from the AFL-CIO. In time, we will know more, especially as new union financial reporting requirements go into effect. I surmise that a lot of problems and chicanery will become evident.
Well, I know enough about economics to give an extemporaneous lecture for a few hours about the benefits of free enterprise compared to any form of un-free enterprise, and I can easily discuss the role of unions within that general framework. When they go beyond being purely voluntary associations, then they're bad -- by definition. But as for the AFL-CIO, I'm not informed enough. Although no one may have ever noticed -- I try not to speak unless I can make what I judge to be a meaningful contribution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.