8.10.2005
The Politics of Raiding
I've been thinking a lot, with the recent split in the AFL-CIO, about the politics of raiding. Just to make sure we're all on the same page, raiding occurs when Union A tries to get an already-unionized group of workers to disaffiliate from the Union B and sign on with the Union A. While this process can be good because it puts pressure on Union B to really work hard and keep their members happy, it also wastes resources, creates animosity between unions, and allows unions to look like they are increasing their membership rolls, when really they are just stealing members from other unions and not increasing the total number of unionized workers.
Members of the AFL-CIO pledge not to raid one another, and so up until a few weeks ago, raiding was not a serious problem between unions who were all part of the AFL-CIO. The problem was with non-AFL-CIO unions (or "renegade unions," as the AFL-CIO calls them), such as the California Nurses Association and the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA). And of course, the raiding goes both ways, as AFL-CIO unions also raid non-AFL-CIO unions. Now that three major unions have left the AFL-CIO (the Service Employees International Union, the United Food and Commerical Workers, and the Teamsters), many in the AFL-CIO are increasingly worried about raiding. At the 2005 Convention, the AFL-CIO approved a resolution calling on all affiliates to work together to stop raiding and urging the executive council to "accord priority consideration to providing the resources needed to defeat these raids."
The Change to Win Coalition also has pledged labor solidarity, in the case of janitors in Houston and Indianapolis. In my opinion, we definitely need more teamwork between unions, not less. Andy Stern, president of SEIU, has often criticized the AFL-CIO because unions weren't working together - on July 13th, for example, Stern wrote:
Members of the AFL-CIO pledge not to raid one another, and so up until a few weeks ago, raiding was not a serious problem between unions who were all part of the AFL-CIO. The problem was with non-AFL-CIO unions (or "renegade unions," as the AFL-CIO calls them), such as the California Nurses Association and the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA). And of course, the raiding goes both ways, as AFL-CIO unions also raid non-AFL-CIO unions. Now that three major unions have left the AFL-CIO (the Service Employees International Union, the United Food and Commerical Workers, and the Teamsters), many in the AFL-CIO are increasingly worried about raiding. At the 2005 Convention, the AFL-CIO approved a resolution calling on all affiliates to work together to stop raiding and urging the executive council to "accord priority consideration to providing the resources needed to defeat these raids."
The Change to Win Coalition also has pledged labor solidarity, in the case of janitors in Houston and Indianapolis. In my opinion, we definitely need more teamwork between unions, not less. Andy Stern, president of SEIU, has often criticized the AFL-CIO because unions weren't working together - on July 13th, for example, Stern wrote:
"The concept of lead unions that unite workers in core industries or occupations is crucial to building new strength for working people -- but it offends unions that want to be free to divide workers by organizing in any industry and making deals with employers that undercut pay and benefit standards."Of course, I am not sure how much of a consideration raiding was for him when he decided to leave the AFL-CIO. Some of the AFL-CIO union members who I have spoken to have expressed concern that the raiding will mostly be the SEIU raiding their smaller unions. In any case, raiding will continue to be an issue, and it gets at the heart of what it means to have a strong labor movement.
