Joseph, I really missed you while I've been offlist the past few months! : ) You're correct--- the courting of labor nerds that is done by the CNA and UE, and to a lesser extent the CWA, doesn't really get them anything of substance. There's no reason to promote yourself to, or even deal with, radicals in the US these days. They add nothing to your project except a world of headaches and impotent rhetorical critique.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:03:28 -0400
> From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
>>
>
> Sometimes I think both sides should just go to their rooms for a time
> out.
I would -strongly- support any such time out. Actually, there was one a while ago. People were calling it the 'detente' between seiu and the cna. I don't know why it fell apart. At some level, many high- ranking people in both unions seem to have almost pathological hatred of the other side. This is troubling to me, because it's totally unlike the war of positioning that took place between seiu and afscme over homecare and childcare workers. That mini-feud eventually ended the way such things should end--- in a sensible and reasonable negotiation between the two unions, after which they go their separate ways and see who can do a better job with each's respective strategy. The thing with CNA, on the other hand....
> But short of that, what's your source on this? The only people
> I've heard make such claims about CNA are SEIU people; the claims
> about SEIU have been made by internal dissidents, including the
> leader of a large local who's about to be trusteed. Are there CNA
> dissidents? I'm not saying they don't exist - I just haven't heard of
> any. Have you?
I'm not trying to take us down into a big discussion of the whole brouhaha, but Doug remember--- the conflicts in seiu are hardly the only source of problems a given union might confront. While there are many good things about the CNA (and also some awful, unethical acts--- like the recent ones in Ohio), there are also some good material reasons for some of these strengths. It is after all a craft union of nurses, which heretofore has basically represented only the wealthiest workers in the wealthiest and most liberal state in the country---- and one where union power in healthcare and the rest of the private sector is massive, and where probably a greater portion of the general population leans left than anywhere else (and where the right has been largely castrated over the years). Why in that situation you will indeed find an awful lot of energy and funds to build an amazing union with great contracts and political education and progressive stances and so on. On the other hand, if your project is to organize on an industrial basis (uniting all workers in these companies, not just the 'professionals') in the 48 states that lie in between the labor movement's strongholds of NY and CA, why, you might wind up with a brutal strategic realpolitik oriented towards winning organizing rights on a gigantic scale company-wide in your targets, and a public outlook that seeks the lowest common denominator between a nurse in rural Nevada, a nurse's aid in appalacian kentucky, a janitor in bed- stuy, a dietary worker in tampa, a building inspector in san jose, a head start employee in bexley west virginia, a security guard in suburban minneapolis, a resp therapist in connecticut, a social worker in oregon, and a homecare aide in flint.
What I'm saying is: if seiu seems to have more conflict inside it, it might have something to do with its far larger scope and strategy and the inherent difficulties of its project.
In the past, I used to always say that by having a good relationship with the cna, seiu could hopefully import some of the positive aspects of its culture and strategy and politics. That's not gonna happen now. The opposite is gonna happen. These two are gonna tear each other apart and both will get very dirty in the fight. By the end of it its entirely foreseeable that each one could lose much of each's respective strengths in the conflict.
>
>
> To me CNA seems more democratic than SEIU. Stern is no democrat nor
> is senior VP Eliseo Medina.
> Medina was a top lieutenant of Cesar Chavez, who never really broke
> with Chavez's leadership
> style, which was anything but democratic.
Well Michael, is your goal to have happy, solidaristic unanimity between the members of unions which represent 7% of the workforce? Or do you place a higher premium on rebuilding union power and numbers to something higher than it is now? I know most labor-nerd leftists would say the two aren't exclusive, and that you can only achieve organizing gains through union democracy etc. But what if, hypothetically, almost no unions were having any success doing either one? And the exceptions--- the few unions having success at winning large organizing gains nationwide in the private sector--- said that what they had learned in the course of their work is that they could only get that success by prioritizing new organizing and corporate campaigns to get organizing rights above anything and everything else?
There's plenty of strife inside unite-here. But you know what?
They've kicked fucking ass. And seiu has a million ugly things worthy
of improvement or critique. But you know what? They've kicked
fucking ass. Numbers don't lie. Math matters. Results count. In my
experience, Stern is broadly quite popular with the bulk of the
membership, to the extent that the bulk of the membership gives a
shit. Because he has an extraordinary record of success at a time
when nobody else does. I don't mean to give the guy too much credit,
but he certainly has been part of a team of leaders that have executed
amazingly well in the past dozen years. Certainly there are signs
that some of his personal leanings and interests are goofy,
milquetoast shit that has no place coming out of a labor leaders
mouth. Hopefully the guy retires (I'd love me a President Dennis
Rivera of SEIU) and goes off to write his doofy books on his own
dime. But at the end of the day, private-sector organizing gains on a
national scale company-wide in healthcare, building service, and
hospitality make John Wilhelm and Andy Stern more relevant to the
working class of the United States than any radical leftist in the US
could even dream of being.
> ****************************************