<HTML>I think it is a mistake to see NYC labor unions as having a similar, undifferentiated approach to the Guiliani regime. There were at least three distinct approaches. First, there was those unions who supported him/capitulated to him. This starts with the PBA, who were his biggest boosters in his first successful campaign -- for all of the wrong, racist reasons. It continues with DC 37/AFSCME under Stanley Hill, which endorsed him in his second run for mayor, and extends to minor unions which also endorsed him, such as the CSA [Principals and Assistant Principals in NYC public schools]. In each and every case, he turned on his union supporters with a vengeance. The police have gotten absolutely nothing from him in collective bargaining, and are now stuck trying to get a state arbitration system which is no great shakes; DC 37 under Hill set a lousy pattern for the other municipal unions with a stolen contract ratification vote; and the CSA ended up giving up tenure and working a much longer year to get what was basically a time for pay raise. What these folks did was wrong both because it was unprincipled and because it was a naive estimation of a politician who is the equivalent of a schoolyard bully. Cave in to his demands, and he will demand more. The leaderships of these unions have either retired, been voted out or indicted out [in the case of DC 37, which was the shame of the NYC labor movement.] The second approach was to avoid, as much as possible, an open confrontation with a man known for his vindictiveness without ceding any ground or principle. This was the strategy adopted by the UFT and eventually 1199/SEIU in Guiliani's 1997 reelection campaign; it was clear that he was going to win, and by a substantial margin, so the unions stayed neutral. With nothing to gain, as a matter of realistic politics, and something to lose, in terms of his vindictiveness, staying out of a losing fight seemed the wiser approach. The third approach was to go head to head with Guiliani in open confrontation. The UFT has done this since our contract expired last fall -- pretty much the first time a major union has done that with him. We have done two major rallies at City Hall, with 20,000 and 30,000 members coming out, a number of smaller actions, a major ad/public relations campaign in the media, and about as much political pressure as we can muster [not insubstantial]. Everything short of a job action or strike which would be illegal under the draconian Taylor Law has been undertaken, and for a number of reasons, it would not make sense to have a job action/strike until the end of this calendar year. One could argue, and some have, that we should have just waited Guiliani out, given term limitations, and negotiate a contract with the next mayor, who had to be better, even if he ended up being Bloomberg. Guiliani himself clearly did not want to negotiate a contract with us; he would rather it happen with the next mayor, who he could then condemn as selling out to the teachers' union where he had been 'tough.' But it was clear to us that (1) there was a massive looming shortage of qualified teachers in NYC public schools, which would only get worse without a contract that had a substantial pay raise that made NYC competitive with the suburbs; and (2) the economy was not likely to get better, and could very well get worse, making it hard for the next mayor to negotiate the sort of raise that is needed. So we did everything we could to force a contract out of him in a head to head confrontation. I don't regret having gone the route of head to head with him, as I think it was important for our morale and unity as a union, and for setting the stage for whatever we can get from the next mayor. The issue of teacher salaries has become so dramatic that the health of the public schools requires that it be fought out, regardless of the short term consequences. But we have clearly paid a price for it. Guiliani has settled with all of the other unions, excepting the PBA, but us. He has made it clear that he is prepared to go beyond the 4%/4% pattern set with DC 37 with the librarians and the uniformed services, which is what we were asking for in making our salaries competitive with the suburbs. He has engaged in a constant campaign of teacher bashing in the media. Perhaps most importantly, he has exacerbated what will be a very bad situation in the public schools in September by not merely withholding the contract, but by cutting significantly the Board of Education's budget when there was no fiscal need to do it. Add to that the drastic cuts in state aid coming about because of the battle in Albany over who will control the state budget, and you are going to see real damage and havoc in the public schools next month. Since Guiliani does not care in the slightest what happens to public schools and their students, [hell, he does not even seem to care what happens to his own children as he drags their mother through the scandal tabloids], he can undertake such 'payback' without the slightest second thought. But a union that understands one of its major responsibilities to be the defense of public education and the protection of the interests of the working class and poor students who rely upon it, can not be so blithe about such matters. When I read the type of criticisms Doug made of the approach of NYC unions to Guiliani, I am troubled not only by the failure to distinguish among the various unions, but also by the view that nothing less than a union charge of the light brigade is a defensible way of dealing with a Guiliani. While I would join him in condemning the unions which capitulated to Guiliani, they are a minority; I think that either strategy 2 or strategy 3 are entirely defensible ways of dealing with him. And strategy 3 has its costs. The UFT is not the only example; take a look at what happened to the Legal Aid Attorneys, and to legal aid for poor people in the criminal justice system as a result. Leo Casey United Federation of Teachers 260 Park Avenue South New York, New York 10010-7272 (212-598-6869) Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has, and it never will. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its waters. -- Frederick Douglass -- </HTML>