"Stern has also boosted his rolls with workers who aren't really workers at all. In California, for example, Stern cannily used political contributions and organizing to reroute welfare dollars into his union and create a whole new class of members . . . But most of those home-care workers are parents and children who got government money for taking care of family members or close friends. They didn't provide nursing services but simply bathed and fed their disabled children or elderly parents. Most home-care workers are part-time, working for one client. Their average pay is less than $700 a month (now minus dues to SEIU)."
http://www.slate.com/id/2123481/
And since they're not real workers, Fitch feels he can safely ignore the decades-long struggle of actual homecare workers to improve their own working conditions. Thus all one needs to know about homecare organizing is that Andy Stern cut some Dem politician a big check and SEIU suddenly finds itself with a bunch more dues-paying members. What rot.
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 23, 2010, at 11:23 AM, Mark Rickling wrote:
>
>> Paging Steve "workers who aren't really workers at all" Early!
>
> Please. His argument (and Fitch's) was that organizing home care workers isn't the same as organizing workplace-based workers. The home-based workers were organized through political deals - SEIU writes a gubernatorial campaign a big check and the gov says thank you by recognizing the union. SEIU has had a lot harder time organizing people in the workplace. Neither Early nor Fitch was disparaging home workers.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>