> What should be noted is, though, that the sector in which
> Stern's union SEIU organizes the best is one of the few
> where such partnership -- bosses and workers lobbying
> the state for fatter contracts -- can make sense
This is not an unfair point. The legislative interests of healthcare employers and those of the union and the people at large converge in many ways -- stopping Medicare and Medicaid cuts, for instance. Are there places where the legislative interests of hospital and nursing home bosses diverge from the interest of the public generally? Absolutely. Could unions be tempted to go along with the employers' legislative agenda in these cases? Yes. But any bad piece of public policy that a hospital association could come up with is still a far cry from numerous other cases where unions have teamed up with employers in lobbying for things that are not in the interests of society at large -- unions in the military industries being a prime example.
But SEIU also "partners" with sections of capital in other industries as well. The "Justice for Janitors" strategy is premised on bringing pressure to bear on building owners, so that they in turn will pressure the contractors. The goal is to eventually make it in the interests of the big building owners to rein in "bad actor" contractors. This is not an unreasonable strategy, and it works. Oftentimes it involves considerable militancy, but it does also mean that the union prefers employers it can work with and sees them as allies in some cases. Unless you're talking about overthrowing capitalism altogether (something that's not on the agenda any time soon -- and wouldn't be even if we had more unions who talked militant), this is the way it has to be done.
The leaders of most AFL-CIO unions do not take the time to repudiate class struggle because it's a concept that doesn't even cross their minds.
- - - - - - - - - - John Lacny http://www.johnlacny.com
Tell no lies, claim no easy victories