State federations, labor councils issue joint restructuring plan

A coalition of AFL-CIO state federations and local Central Labor Councils has agreed on a federation restructuring plan that calls for two-year specific state and local strategic organizing plans–and for the AFL-CIO to be able to dump inactive state feds and CLCs.

Meeting at the National Labor College/George Meany Center in Silver Spring, Md., just outside of Washington, 42 feds and CLCS –including Illinois, Oregon, California, New York and Michigan state feds, and CLCs from St. Paul, St. Louis, Chicago, its northern suburbs, Cleveland, Kansas City, San Jose and several from Los Angeles–decided the national AFL-CIO should provide technical support, training and coordination for mass campaigns.

The state fed-CLC plan was the latest in a series of restructuring proposals sent in to the AFL-CIO. Service Employees President Andrew Stern touched off the restructuring debate last June by calling the federation outmoded, and demanding it be restructured or blown up.

The AFL-CIO Executive Council will take up the plans at its meeting in Las Vegas March 1-3, with an ultimate decision at the labor federation’s late-July convention in Chicago.

Restructuring became more urgent after labor-backed Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry lost the White House to union-hating GOP occupant George W. Bush. That loss, after millions of dollars in spending and mobilization of 225,000 labor volunteers, led AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney to issue a federation-wide call for reorganization plans.

Stern demanded forced mergers of the federation’s 60 unions into 20, creation of a more-top down and centralized structure, labor-wide spending of $2 billion on organizing and a special $25 million campaign to expose the bad working conditions of and unionize Wal-Mart, the nation’s biggest private employer and largest influence in retail.

Several unions–the Bricklayers were the latest–objected to forced mergers. Others, notably the Fire Fighters and AFSCME, demand more attention to politics, with IAFF saying the fed must become more bipartisan. The Teamsters and others recommended encouraging, not forcing, mergers, via rebates of half of any union’s AFL-CIO dues if it implements detailed organizing plans.

The state feds and CLCs took no position on the forced mergers, or Wal-Mart. They emphasized restructuring the federation to improve organizing. And they viewed politics as part of that effort. But they also warned that parent international unions can’t just sit on the sidelines.

“We are advocating for a national plan that targets resources in the field, closest to workers,” the state feds and CLCs said after they closed their 3-day meeting on Feb. 17. They then listed structures and supports they want:

* Consolidating power in “regional economic centers, with adequate resources for success.”

* “Expedited ‘New Alliance’ processes for targeted states and regions.” They would start with six states, then expand.

* “Ongoing development and implementation of strategic plans with full affiliation support for effective programs.” The 2-year plans would be submitted to the AFL-CIO for review.

* Training and development by the AFL-CIO to, among other things, “ensure capacity and diversity” at all levels of labor.

* “Evaluation, monitoring and possible receivership of area federations and CLCs in priority areas where capacity needs are urgent and unattained.”

But the international unions must themselves pitch in, the state fed-CLC conference said, advocating membership by all locals in the regional bodies.

“State and central bodies cannot hold local unions to a standard or a plan if the sponsoring international union will not do so. We need strong and vibrant locals to make a strong and vibrant movement. This can only happen if national unions have a program to grow and strengthen their locals. A changed structure can enable us to help our national affiliates move our members and locals to where they need to go,” they said.

For those who meet pre-set “standards and benchmarks” for organizing, mobilization and inter-union coordination, the federation would funnel in staff and resources, especially for “priority political and organizing targets,” they said.

For states outside the initial six, the AFL-CIO should “provide a model process for planning and restructuring to non-targeted states or regions, incorporating materials from the New Alliance and National Labor College training curriculum for state and local leaders.”

“Within our states, resources must be aggregated at the local level to achieve the capacity needed to succeed. This is a critical imperative for our central labor bodies. State by state, our recommendations involve creating more options” for that goal, “establishing stronger mechanisms for doing so, developing statewide strategic plans, certifying outcomes based on criteria for evaluating plans, structure and performance and securing the commitment to full affiliation upon such certification,” their plan explained.

If that can’t be done in a single-county CLC, the necessary capacity is not achievable within a single-county central labor council, the state fed-CLC plan advocates creation of multi-county council, more metro area labor federations and regional labor federations.

“Upon adoption of the organizational and strategic plans, all international unions will commit to full affiliation with the local central bodies and state federation,” they added.

Not all of the state feds and CLCs at the Silver Spring meeting shied away from dues and politics. In papers submitted beforehand, several were outspoken on those topics.

Jeff Crosby, President of the North Shore Labor Council in Lynn, Mass., dissented strongly from calls to cut unions’ dues to the AFL-CIO in half.

Crosby predicted if that occurred, the state feds and CLCs would get less support than now. “Field staff will be further reduced, overworked and demoralized,” he added.

“What will remain is the national electoral campaigns…and some lobbying on issues like Social Security…All other areas will suffer or disappear. The tragedy of the 2004 campaign–where labor spent over $50 million, of which not one cent went for permanent infrastructure–will be repeated as farce.”

The Boston Central Labor Council emphasized “creating a climate to support organizing, linking our political campaigns to organizing campaigns and passing ordinances in cities and towns that level the playing field for workers. For example: Right to organize resolutions, project labor agreements and responsible employer ordinances.”

It said CLCs “must be the place where the mobilization of union members across union lines occurs” against anti-union employers, for organizing and first contract campaigns, bargaining support and politics and legislation. They also should be the contact with community organizations to “enable them to fully participate in local campaigns,” Boston added.

Comments are closed.