SEIU's version has not remained constant and stating this will not make it so. Also, your constant use of the term unionbusting is deliberately misleading and becoming irritating. Internecine conflicts between unions are not properly referred to as unionbusting. Unionbusting is a tactic by management (or those on managements payroll) to avoid a union from being formed. CNA's goal is not to prevent any union from being formed, only to prevent a specific union deal that they feel was bad for workers and to possibly offer one they feel was better for workers. Unionbusting does not describe internecine conflicts with other unions over differing opinions over union benefits and practices. If you wish to call it raiding you would be on firmer footing but even that is a questionable use of that term since the nurses in question did not yet have a union contract. If CNA feel they can offer a better deal to workers than SEIU should they just sit on their hands and say "Oh well, an injury to one isn't necessarily an injury to all?" and simply ignore what they feel is a bad union contract to other nurses? After all the nurses in question were not really involved in crafting the SEIU deal were they? Whether the CNA has engaged in similar deals in the past is irrelevant to the nurses involved in this particular conflict so bringing this fact up is a red herring. As an analogy if I slapped my wife once does that mean I can never call the police if I see my neighbor slapping his wife simply because I was guilty of the same offense once? This is the logic you seem fixated on and the answer is of course no.
If you wish your viewpoint and your posts on this matter to be taken seriously you can start by ceasing your constant use of the word unionbusting. It undermines everything else you write by demonstrating you are incapable of seeing this conflict in anything approaching an objective manner. Since you seem to have some insight into the SEIU you could offer constructive criticisms and insightful commentary, probably more so than many LBO list members, but instead you choose boilerplate language that alienates people interested in learning anything meaningful. You appear fairly knowledgeable concerning SEIU and it's a shame your constant use of hyperbole and your unwillingness to be objective undermines your credibility.
Whatever wrong CNA may be guilty of SEIU busing in people to forcefully (not peacefully) disrupt a meeting rather than attempting to solve the conflict through dialogue is stupid, dangerous, and is the tactic of bullies those who care nothing about democratic processes. It is the tactic of cowards and fearful management. To label an attempt to shout down speakers and crash a Labor Notes conference for whatever reason a peaceful protest is total bullshit and quite laughable. It is, as Max wrote, hooliganism. An injury to one and all that, remember?
Both SEIU and CNA have skeletons in their closets. Every organization run by humans does. The SEIU has played right into the hands of management with their heavy-handed tactics and this type of action focuses negative attention on unionizing attempts everywhere. People generally seek to avoid conflict. This strong-arm attempt to break up a pro-labor Labor Notes meeting will in all likelihood encourage some, perhaps many, to steer clear of unionizing in order to avoid getting involved in internecine conflicts. This was an incredibly stupid move on the part of the SEIU even if their viewpoint on the conflict is the correct one. One should also remember that this conflict is not directly related to the Labor Notes meeting which makes this attack even less "legitimate" than the examples you cited earlier. As if shouting down Buchanan is even remotely related to this incident. I readily admit I do not have enough information on all the facts to make an informed opinion concerning this particular conflict. Nor am more enamored with CNA over SEIU but SEIU just shit in the pool of labor organizers by their violent actions in this matter. SEIU has many of their members outraged over SEIU's actions in this matter. The same cannot be said of CNA's members. That might tell you something if you're willing to look at this objectively. I'm probably wasting my time writing this but I lament that someone who could prove to be a good source of information is more interested in fanning the flames of sectarian infighting than providing insightful commentary we can all learn from.
John Thornton