Well, the AFL-CIO's position is consistent with the historic hostility of many (such as Cesar Chavez) to the old bracero program.
It seems to me that people working under a guest worker program would have greater job security and freedom than undocumented workers currently have and might be more receptive to organizing. SR
-------------- Original message -------------- From: Wojtek Sokolowski <wsokol52 at yahoo.com>
>
> I am 100% with Medina on this. Not just because being
> part of the debate in Congress, but above all because
> of internationalism (remember workers of all countries
> unite?). US unions supporting migrant laborers is an
> excellent oportunity to build a truly interntionalist
> labor movement. It is because of the division of the
> working class by the national borders that allows the
> capitalist class the divide-and-rule approach to
> labor. Besides, immigrant workers are prospective
> union members, and this creates an opportunity to
> reverse the decline of union density in this country.
>
> The ALF-CIO's dependency argument seems to be a
> diversion to cover up xenophobia. Even if there is
> such dependency on the employer, it only creates an
> opportunity for unions to break it by organizing such
> workers, provding theme with legal assistance, and
> making sure that sweatshops laws are enforced. I
> think that the perception that migrant workers somehow
> "compete" with the US workers is mostly false because
> of labor market segmentation. Each of these classes
> of workers occupy different niches and seldom compete
> with one another.
>
> Wojtek
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <../attachments/20060408/55f27f12/attachment.htm>