ProgressOhio

With all the back and forth about the protest at the Labor Notes conference, it’s time to set the record straight.

Here are the facts:

* Most of the SEIU members who traveled to Dearborn to express their disapproval of the CNA’s tactics were women. They were primarily home care workers, nursing assistants, and other caregivers. Some brought their children with them.

* They had gathered at the conference hoping to voice their disapproval of the CNA’s anti-union campaign in Ohio that stripped more than 8,000 hospital workers of the opportunity to freely choose whether to form a union with SEIU.

* Despite efforts to prevent the health care workers from making their voices heard, the rally was a peaceful one. Protestors talked to individual conference attendees about what happened in Ohio. They chanted “union busting is disgusting.”

* At no time did they engage in or witness the kind of activities described by the CNA.

--posted by Nadia, SEIU staffer

I believe one reason for the varied accounts is that there were 2 different scenes. The one inside the ballroom and the one in the foyer. Thankfully, SEIU did not make it into the ballroom. That thanks goes to those who joined together in a chain to keep them out. Only those planted inside-very few- stood up and protested. Outside those doors lies a completely different scene. I was with NNOC and I was away from my table with 2 other RN's in the foyer. We were not with the rest of our group and therefore witnessed the surge. You can read multiple accounts here: Link
April 15, 2008

SEIU Intimidation: More than a tactic

By now, many have heard of the rally turned violent when SEIU brought hundreds of members and staff to the Labor Notes conference in Dearborn on April 12th. From the perspective of the eyewitnesses of this account the raid was an aggressive raid. It was clear to those who witnessed the pounding on the glass, the “football rush” of people entering, and wearing of bandanas over faces that the intent was not peaceful.

Some from SEIU claim that the intent was a peaceful demonstration and for most this may in fact be true. SEIU staffers have claimed that they were attacked by beefed up security and CNA/NNOC sympathizers as the inciting event that turned the demonstration to violence. As an eyewitness, I can tell you this is not the case. However, even if we give SEIU the benefit of the doubt we must examine their behavior and how it could lead to such a response.

Imagine that you are standing witness to a mob of people yelling, screaming, carrying large sticks and pounding violently against doors demanding entry. Now imagine them suddenly rushing toward you by the hundreds. How would you respond? Well documented psychology states you will respond in one of two ways- fight or flight. This response is part of every person’s human programming so deep within our nervous system that often one cannot control it. Individual previous personal experiences will cause great variability to the threshold of tolerance before this response sets in. I am certain the responses of a Vietnam vet, abused woman, immigrant who has had to flee from a war torn country and others that have traumatic incidents in their past might vary greatly from others. Factor those types of psychological responses with others and you can see the danger of these intimidation tactics. While SEIU may believe they can toe the line between intimidation and violence they are not in control of the situation when they confront society.

Dearborn is not an isolated incident of collective intimidation as a tactic employed by SEIU. In Springfield, Ohio as I participated in leafleting hospital workers to expose a rushed and unfair election between SEIU & CHP. I witnessed the more common variety of SEIU thuggery. Almost immediately upon my arrival I found myself surrounded by SEIU staff organizers, approximately 10, mostly men. They surrounded me and two other women yelling obscenities standing within inches of us. SEIU followed us around town and into stores continuing to engage in aggressive behavior that fell just short of assault. This continued for days and was obviously planned, coordinated intimidation. As we walked to our cars on the icy streets in a blizzard they used their vehicles to “push” us off the road. A dangerous move, especially considering the road conditions, that could have had unforeseen and unintended consequences had one of us slipped or the car skid on the ice. Again, SEIU forgets that they do not have control of the situation.

Many who have had interactions with SEIU staff can repeat similar experiences on more than one occasion. In fact, it seems that whenever SEIU engages CNA/NNOC this is their approach. The LA Times article that tells of a CNA organizer slapping someone from SEIU leaves out the fact that she was encircled by many men who were yelling at her and preventing her from walking away. Her response was the natural one of fight or flight.

The consistency of this aggression demonstrates that the response it elicits is intended and taught to the staff of SEIU. Considering that the primary target on most occasions is CNA/NNOC an organization primarily comprised of women I do not believe their choice of tactics is a coincidence.

Glenn Greenwald, an attorney who has studied collective acts of intimidation in the context of the radical right states “ it is not only those who engage in the tactics themselves who bear responsibility for the consequences, but also those who offer coldly bureaucratic indifference towards these tactics, or even an implicit defense of them”. It is important to recognize SEIU behavior as more than a tactic. Collective intimidation is dangerous and can illicit unforeseeable responses. SEIU’s strategic aggression is in fact widespread abuse that should not be tolerated in our society.

Michelle Mahon, RN

This was sent by Susan Rosenthal, an author who attended the conference (I should say an attendee who paid at the front door and didn't sneak in the side door) I had the pleasure of co-facilitating a health care workshop at the Labor Notes Conference:

War in the House of Labor
by Susan Rosenthal
The American medical system ruins people’s lives for profit. Fortunately, union organizing drives in the medical industry are enjoying a higher-than-average rate of success. Unfortunately, two major health workers’ unions, the California Nurses Association (CNA) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), are at war – a term used by both sides. CNA accuses SEIU of making deals with management that hurt workers, and SEIU accuses CNA of sabotaging its union drives.

This is a real battle. The CNA website posts a sign on its home page, "Had it with SEIU? Work for a REAL union." To protest the CNA, hundreds of SEIU members physically stormed the Labor Notes conference in Detroit on April 12.

Cynics view this war as reason to dismiss all unions. That’s a huge mistake. Workers need unions to counter the relentless greed of business. Employers, politicians and the mainstream media consistently attack unions because even the worst ones block bosses from having complete control of the workplace.

Statistics show that unionized workers are more likely to have medical coverage, pension benefits and protection from sexual harassment and wrongful dismissal. Areas with more unions enjoy higher wages, longer life spans, lower infant death rates, better education and less poverty.

The Issues

American unions were so powerful in the 1930s that employers needed Washington’s help to crush them. Today, after decades of union busting, fewer than eight percent of private-sector workers are in unions, the lowest rate in over a century. Moreover, the remaining unions have been transformed from fighting organizations controlled by workers to bureaucratic organizations dominated by middle-class professionals. For most Americans, the result has been a steady decline in working and living standards.

The battle between SEIU and CNA arose in the context of renewed efforts to defend workers’ rights and centers on three disputes over how to organize:

Should medical facilities be organized wall-to-wall (SEIU includes all health workers) or by trade (nurses in one union and support staff in another)? Wall-to-wall or industrial unions have more power to fight management than craft-based unions. However, in practice, workers organize as best they can in the particular circumstances they face.

Another concern is whether management should be involved in the process of union certification. Labor-management collaboration is generally opposed because it favors management. However, every union contract is a form of labor-management collaboration. SEIU and CNA differ in where to draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable degrees of collaboration.

The third issue is the extent to which unions should be controlled from the top-down or the bottom-up. A rank-and-file rebellion inside SEIU, United Health Workers-West (UHW) is pushing for more democracy through one-member-one-vote. CNA is using this split to press its case that SEIU is a business union that doesn’t represent workers’ interests. However, UHW also condemns CNA for its top-down sabotage of SEIU union drives.

Instead of debating these three issues in a way that would benefit all workers, the leaders of SEIU and CNA are conducting a divisive turf war that is hurting them both.

Taking Sides

In any conflict, there is pressure to take sides. Supporters of CNA insist that it is a more progressive and democratic union than SEIU. The leaders of CNA talk left and have taken a public role in fighting for national medicare. However, in Ohio and on other occasions, CNA leaders have gone over the heads of SEIU rank-and-file workers to dictate what should happen in a particular workplace. That’s not democratic.

Those who favor SEIU point to its proud history of organizing immigrant workers (Janitors for Justice) and supporting social reforms. However, top leaders in SEIU have also functioned undemocratically. The split inside SEIU was provoked when head office moved to silence debate within the union.

Recent labor coverage has favored CNA, especially after busloads of SEIU members stormed the recent Labor Notes conference. A good example is Steve Early’s article in Counterpunch (Link. Early begins by calling SEIU protestors a "rowdy, punch-throwing, rent-a-mob."

I was inside (and later outside) the Labor Notes banquet hall when SEIU members tried to break through the doors. Such tactics must be condemned. However, this was no "rent-a-mob." Most were ordinary union members, including families with small children, most looking poor and many of them Black. I am certain they boarded those buses to defend their union. If they knew they were going to be in a fight, they would have left the kids at home. One SEIU member died of a heart attack, and another union militant suffered a head wound.

This tragedy was created by the leaders of both unions, who are pitting their members against one another.

I attended several meetings at Labor Notes, where activists from SEIU and CNA expressed their grievances against each other’s unions. I concluded that both sides have legitimate concerns. At the end of his article, Early acknowledges the same, by favorably quoting a member of UHW,

Many participants, who can fairly be described as members of the labor left and generally suspicious of top union leaders, were actually very sympathetic to the SEIU’s grievance against CNA surrounding the events in Ohio.

Sadly, Early concludes by returning to his condemnation of SEIU as the moral loser of the latest round in a continuing battle. This is not helpful. Those who cheer for either side only fuel a war that is hurting both sides. So, what’s the solution?

Rank-and-File Unity

In any union, leaders should be supported ONLY so far as they represent the interests of the rank-and-file. By this measure, the leaders of SEIU and CNA both fail because, if this war is not stopped, one or both unions will be ruined. As it is, bitterness and resentment have already crippled organizing efforts at several sites, to the benefit of management. To advance the interests of workers in both unions, we must distinguish union bureaucrats from rank-and-file workers.

Modern labor unions are cross-class organizations, being both working-class organizations of self-defense and part of the management system of capitalism. Most union members are working-class (the rank and file), while most union officials are salaried professionals who negotiate with employers to set the terms of exploitation. Turf wars for union recognition arise from this class conflict.

Because most unions are run like businesses, from the top down, more members means more money and more power for union bureaucrats. They want this power to gain more leverage at the negotiating table. That’s why leaders of different unions compete to represent a workplace or group of workers instead of pooling resources and cooperating. Inter-union rivalry is usually justified by claims that one union is better at representing workers than the other. However, divisions between unions only weaken the ability of all workers to stand up to management.

Over the past few decades, rank-and-file workers in different industries have pushed for more militant and democratic unions controlled by members, from the bottom up. Such worker self-organization is opposed by bureaucrats because their power to negotiate with management rests on their ability to control the ranks.

Struggles for rank-and-file control of unions offer a different kind of power, one that rests on the ability of workers to stop production. Because all workers have similar concerns, worker-controlled organizations have the potential to unite workers across divisions of union, workplace and industry and do what bureaucrats have never been able to achieve: build a labor movement strong enough to reverse decades of defeats and concessions.

During the Labor Notes conference, as accusations flew between CNA and SEIU, Patricia Campbell of the Independent Workers Union of Ireland (IWE) stated. "You must stop fighting among each other and unite. You need to kick out the bureaucrats in both your unions. That's the only way you can advance your struggle for patients’ and workers’ rights."

She is right. In each workplace, rank-and-file workers must decide how they organize: whether in wall-to-wall groupings or by trade; and the extent to which they collaborate with management and with other unions. Free and full debate must be encouraged, with votes binding on all. Such self-organization is critical to build workers’ confidence and create unions powerful enough to win real gains.

Of course, people make mistakes in any process. That is no reason to deny them the right to decide what happens at work and in their lives.

Right or wrong, and regardless of their intentions, no union official has the right to IMPOSE policy on rank-and-file workers without their consent. This is just as true for CNA as it is for SEIU. To move forward, workers in SEIU and CNA must build on-the-ground unity, based on common class concerns.

Susan Rosenthal is the author of POWER and Powerlessness (2006), and Class, Health and Health Care (2008). She belongs to the National Writers Union and is a founding member of International Health Workers for People Over Profit. She can be reached through her web site Link or by email powerandpowerlessness@rogers.c om