AFL-CIO Boss's Politicking Now Threatens His Job

CNSNews.com ^ | 05/06/2005 | Randy Hall

[bigsoxfan]

(CNSNews.com) - While most organizations celebrate anniversaries with great fanfare, the AFL-CIO may mark its 50th birthday in Chicago this July with an internal leadership struggle that threatens the job of the coalition's president, an avowed socialist who spent tens of millions of dollars in union dues in a failed ten-year quest to re-take the U.S. House from Republicans. That leader, John Sweeney, who turned 71 Thursday, also saw George W. Bush beat his favored Democratic candidates in 2000 and 2004.

It would mark only the second time in its half-century history that the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations witnessed a contested election for leader of its 57 unions, which together represent more than 13 million workers in the United States and Canada.

At the center of the conflict is Sweeney, whose policies have failed to halt the drop in union membership and a corresponding decrease in the organization's political clout.

In an effort to blunt criticism of his leadership before the July convention, Sweeney and other federation leaders released a report called "Winning for Working Families" on April 28.

"We must rebuild our movement to create a stronger voice and a better future for working people," the 26-page document states. "We must restore respect for work and rewards for workers in America. And doing that will take building not just strong individual unions, but a strong, nationwide movement -- united, principled and active."

Among its proposals, the report calls for increasing the federation's organizing fund by $10 million to $22.5 million, about half of which would be given in rebates to unions with strategic organizing plans; and adding $7.5 million to year-round political efforts, mainly educating union members about issues and mobilizing them to vote.

To pay for these operations, the federation announced on May 3 that it was laying off one-fourth of its 420 employees and ceasing publication of "America at Work," a glossy magazine that was being published 10 times a year.

Most of the 167 jobs being eliminated over the next several months are from the AFL-CIO's headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C. -- just two blocks from the White House -- but 61 of those affected are expected to be able to transfer to new positions created as part of the restructuring

The changes have not satisfied Sweeney's critics.

"Union members and workers who want a union are crying out for new energy, new leadership and a real focus on how to rebuild our labor movement," stated Bruce Raynor, general president of UNITE HERE, which represents nearly 500,000 textile, restaurant and hotel employees.

Another official at UNITE HERE, Hospitality Industry President John Wilhelm, is said to be considering a run against Sweeney for the AFL-CIO presidency, though he hasn't made an announcement of his intentions.

Also critical of Sweeney's policies is Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), a one-time protege of Sweeney who has threatened to pull his organization, the AFL-CIO's largest union, out of the federation unless major policy and program changes are made.

Other union presidents who have expressed a desire to see a change at the top of the federation are Joseph Hansen of the United Food and Commercial Workers, James Hoffa of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and Terence O'Sullivan of the Laborers International Union of North America.

The conflict claimed one of its first casualties on May 4, when Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, resigned his position as AFL-CIO executive council public affairs committee chair, complaining that he was "kept out of the loop" on Sweeney's plans to restructure the federation staff.

Ups and downs

Sweeney was elected president of the federation at its convention in October 1995, during his fourth term as president of the SEIU.

At that time, about 16 percent of American workers belonged to a union, and Sweeney -- who is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America -- promised to hold the post for no longer than 10 years.

The following spring, Sweeney began a campaign most pundits dismissed as hopeless: getting the Republican-controlled Congress to enact a higher federal minimum wage. But the Clinton administration quickly got behind the increase, which was passed in October of 1996.

The success of that effort, and the re-election of Democrat Bill Clinton as president a month later, seemed to signal the rise of a rejuvenated organized labor movement on the national scene.

Much less successful was Sweeney's attempt to reverse the "Gingrich Revolution," the Republican political tsunami of 1994 that turned leadership of the U.S. House over to the GOP for the first time in 40 years and leadership of the U.S. Senate to the Republicans as well.

Sweeney's $35 million effort in 1996 targeting freshman Republican House members for defeat yielded only eight seats for the Democrats -- not nearly enough to re-take the chamber. Democrats won four more in 1998, but still fell short. In the 109th Congress, ten years after Sweeney took over the AFL-CIO, there are 231 House Republicans, one more than was elected on Election Day in 1994.

Union membership has continued to decline as the number of Republicans in Congress increased and George W. Bush reclaimed the White House for the GOP in 2000.

Though the AFL-CIO has been joined by a few independent workers' groups such as the American Nurses Association, it has suffered two significant losses: the United Transportation Union, which represents about 125,000 rail workers, and the 500,000-member United Brotherhood of Carpenters, the largest building trades union.

While only 12.5 percent of workers are presently union members, the 70-year-old Sweeney has been re-elected to his post as federation president twice.

'Major break-up'?

John Carlisle, director of policy for the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC), told Cybercast News Service he considers Sweeney "culpable for the continuing decline of the labor union movement" and called the challenge to his leadership "one of the big stories of the year."

As a result of Sweeney's influence, the union movement is more politicized than ever, Carlisle said. "It's always been a strong supporter of the Democratic Party, but Sweeney took it to a new level of left-wing activism."

Sweeney "wants to continue pouring money into political campaigns," Carlisle stated. "The problem is that the other union members and leaders want to put much more resources into the nuts and bolts of organizing, which isn't -- strictly speaking -- political.

"But Sweeney is determined to pursue an overtly political agenda, spending millions of dollars on candidates and campaigns and so forth, get-out-the-vote efforts for mainly Democratic candidates," he noted.

"All these other union members may certainly be Democrats, but they simply see that as a mistake," Carlisle said. "The union has to first make itself credible, and that starts with organizing. That's why you have people like Hoffa of the Teamsters and Stern of the SEIU saying it's time for a change in strategy."

Carlisle also told Cybercast News Service he considers it "a distinct possibility" that Sweeney will face an opponent for AFL-CIO president, the first time that's happened since he defeated incumbent Lane Kirkland a decade ago.

"Given the level of dispute within the federation, and the fact that very influential unions like the SEIU are threatening to bolt, it's very possible you could have a challenge at the summer meeting," Carlisle said.

Noting that Sweeney probably has the votes to be re-elected, Carlisle added that the story might not end there.

Though it's possible Sweeney can "come up with some sort of a grand compromise that keeps everyone happy," Carlisle said that "the level of disagreement between the AFL-CIO leadership and the dissident unions is so deep that if Sweeney is re-elected, I think you're going to see a major break-up."

However, Justin Hakes, director of legal information for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, dismissed the "so-called rift" between some union leaders and Sweeney as "a non-issue" and mere "political posturing."

Hakes told Cybercast News Service he considers the debate between spending money on organizing or politics "two sides of the same coin."

Union officials "use their political power to aid organizing and vice versa. When you're able to coerce union membership, you're able to gain more forced union dues and thereby wield more political muscle," he said. "The two are inseparably intertwined in my mind."

While acknowledging that "workers are just not choosing to join unions, pure and simple, in the numbers they used to," Hakes noted that Big Labor is making great strides in the public sector.

"I'd say this idea that 'Big Labor is a paper tiger' is not true," he stated. "Union officials still wield quite a bit of political clout due to the fact that they can still collect millions of dollars in forced dues each year."

Hakes also said he doesn't think any internal struggles "will matter in terms of the overall direction of the AFL-CIO. I think you'll see a great push for more government-granted special privileges to coerce workers into union ranks, whether they like it or not.

"The privileges union officials currently enjoy, with compulsory unionism being the largest one, their political might and financial power are certainly not going away anytime soon," he said.

'Bread and butter'

Not all of the AFL-CIO's pressures are internal. The U.S. Department of Labor recently assigned 48 staff members to audit unions, a move Sweeney called "pure political payback for the labor movement's opposition to the president's anti-worker policies."

And on May 3, the Labor Department cautioned the federation not to use money from pension funds in its efforts to defeat President Bush's Social Security reform plan.

Carlisle from the NLPC told Cybercast News Service that the AFL-CIO could avoid such problems if the organization would simply "get away from politics and get back to the nuts and bolts of organizing.

"Actually, one of the biggest complaints I hear from rank-and-file members -- even those who may be registered Democrat -- is that they would rather see the union concentrate on the 'bread and butter' of organizing collective bargaining agreements and get away from this aggressive pursuit of a leftist agenda," Carlisle said.

[Cicero]

Sweeny is a disaster for the rank and file. He is far to the left of the average union member, especially on issues like abortion and sexual perversion. It will be a great day for our country if they manage to throw him out.

The other issue, getting more for the workers and increasing membership, would be impossible for any leader. You can't keep raising pay and benefits if you have to compete in the world market. Companies like U.S. Steel and General Motors went along with it in the old days, and they have paid the penalty.

[worldclass]

"It would mark only the second time in its half-century history that the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations witnessed a contested election for leader of its 57 unions, which together represent more than 13 million workers in the United States and Canada."

This could be part of the problem.

[telebob]

Keep Sweeney in. I'd love to see the SEIU and other large unions bolt. The leadership of these unions are just as hard core lefty as Sweeney. This is just a classic power struggle to see who will control the agenda and the swag.

Better to have Sweeney as a lightning rod to agitate the other wannabe dictators-for-life and hasten the demise of their political power.