The focus of the unions of the government employees is to protect their own turf. A privatizing, wage & benefit cutting administration on a local, state or federal government level is not in their interest. They are negotiating with government administrations not corporations. This explains their timidity in taking on the WTO and the new world order. These are not service unions negotiating with corporations; these are government unions negotiating with government administrations. This situation is starting to cause problems and the non-governmental unions are getting blind sided by stealth legislation and short horizon administrative actions by both major political parties.
Tom
Max Sawicky wrote:
> [yet another installment in the "what is the AFL-CIO up to?"
> > melodrama - Mike Dolan is the chief Naderite organizer in Seattle -
> > Dolan was apparently a major source for the Seattle Weekly story that
> > said labor was retreating from a major presence at the WTO summit]
>
> [Comments that follow do not necessarily represent those
> of anyone else at the Economic Policy Institute.]
>
> Dolan is more right than wrong. I applaud the work of all
> those who are assembling in Seattle, but to my way of
> thinking, agreeing to participate in a consultative group
> is a sizeable concession with insufficient quid-pro-quo.
>
> The trade debate needs some shock therapy, like much
> else in politics. The better position for labor is that the
> U.S. should abstain until the WTO is substantively forthcoming
> on labor rights and environmental standards.
>
> Unions representing manufacturing workers have reason to
> be critical of this decision. Unfortunately, service workers'
> union leaders seem to think otherwise, but this is short-
> sighted. Surely the wages of their members are affected
> by erosion of the higher manufacturing wage.
>
> One related development is the unjustified AFL endorsement of
> Al Gore. While I think Bradley is marginally better, I would agree
> that at this point there is not much to commend either of them,
> so any endorsement is premature at best. But the WTO position
> stems in part from a desire to buck up Gore's stumbling
> campaign.
>
> An interesting sidelight here is that the unions do not line up
> "left-right" on this issue. The Teamsters and building trades
> are closer to the UAW and steelworkers on this, while the
> SEIU and AFSCME are in concert with the teachers.
>
> mbs