[mobglob-discuss] Teachers debate affiliation to BC Fed

[Alan Ward]

Dear Friend,

If you are interested in the affiliation debate,
here is an article arguing for the "No" side
from the left.  I would very much appreciate
getting your views on the subject if you
have a chance to write back.

Alicia Barsallo






BC FED:

DEMOCRACY AND UNION SOLIDARITY -
TWO ISSUES AT THE HEART OF THE AFFILIATION DISCUSSION




The BC Fed is an organization that is run top-down by its executive.  The
top brass's tight control over Federation decisions is not relinquished even
during conventions.  The delegates at BC Fed conventions can not pass
resolutions that have not been previously agreed to by the Federation's
executive.

Before every BC Fed convention, the leadership decides which resolutions it
"concurs" with.  And delegates are not allowed to vote on a resolution with
which the executive does not concur.

The delegates at a BC Fed convention may vote against the executive's
position of "non-concurrence," but they cannot vote in favour of the
resolution itself.  They cannot put the resolution to a vote.  So much for
the power of the grassroots.

A BCTF resolution at the 2005 BC Fed convention, asked that whenever the
convention voted to disagree with the Fed executive's "non-concurrence," the
resolution itself be put to a vote.  The convention voted in favour of the
executive's 'non concurrence' with the BCTF resolution, and the resolution
failed.


Can our own internal democracy be affected?

With many Fed affiliates voting as a block at convention, the prospects for
democratic reform are dim.  There is a real danger that instead, the Fed's
undemocratic methods may be exported to our locals and federation.

Gradually, insidiously, our efforts to make of our union one that is run by
its members, can give way to business unionism where contracts are
negotiated and grievances are handled by business agents (hired and
controlled by the executive).  That is not the kind of union I want.

I want BCTF conventions to continue to be conventions where agendas are
easily amended, Chairs are not always sustained, new delegates are helped
along, and delegates are free to amend, and vote on, resolutions regardless
of how the BCTF executive feels about them.  I also want the internal
democracy and the member participation in each one of our locals to grow and
flourish.


Will affiliation to the Fed mean more union support?

Federations cannot decree union solidarity, and in the case of the BC
Federation of Labour, the record indicates that the Federation is generally
unable to promote it.

In the last few years we have seen unions like the bus drivers, and later
the Telus workers, go out alone for months before reaching a settlement.

In 2004 the Health Employees Union strike quickly awakened public interest
and gained pledges of support from individual unions and other
organizations.  The Federation did not act to expand this support, but it
rushed to stop a flow of solidarity that could have cost the government a
well-deserved province-wide shut down.  The strike was ended without a real
fight and the settlement imposed allowed the privatization of hundreds of
jobs and a crippling wage cut for union members.

Recently when the teachers went on strike, we were able to win the
unconditional support of CUPE.  Our struggle was strong, and our credibility
with the public, impressive, and we had the possibility of attracting the
support of several other unions.  But the BC Federation went back on the
promised province-wide shut down.  What is worse, the President of the
Federation, Jim Sinclair, went on air to contradict Jinny Sims and call our
strike ended before we had even contemplated going back to work.

The BC Fed's inability to foster support for striking workers mirrors its
inability to play a leadership role in response to the unprecedented BC
Liberal attacks:  Schools and hospitals closed, social services slashed,
thousands of public employees fired, crisis centres shut down, collective
agreements dismantled, employment standards reduced, the minimum wage
lowered... and not even a one-day general strike!

An Action Plan put forward in reply to the calls to fight back, a plan which
contemplated an escalation of actions including a general strike, passed
unanimously at the 2002 BC Fed convention.  The plan was not implemented.
Neither was the plan to implement the plan, passed at the convention the
year after that.

The BC Liberals have been able to privatize, deregulate, and victimize the
most vulnerable citizens of this province without any labour unrest to speak
of.  Is this a corporate dream or what?

It is no wonder that the BC Federation of Labour - "unions" in general -
have lost credibility with the general community.  Why should anyone earning
the minimum wage or living without job security or suffering under a 'Work
Safe' decision, respect a union movement that seems to care only about its
narrow interests?

The myth that "union solidarity comes with affiliation" must be debunked.
When the solidarity of people who trust each other starts flowing,
individual unions are quite capable of going on strike in support of other
fellow unions, Federation or no Federation; and ordinary people who have no
direct gains to make can become attached to a struggle that they perceive as
timely and just.  This much we can learn from the 1983 Solidarity movement.

In 1983 renters, seniors, the unemployed - ordinary people -- got together
and gave a voice to the many who were unhappy with the Bennett government.
The movement grew fast, attracting the active support of individual locals,
among them bus drivers and teachers.  Protest rallies attracted up to 70,000
people.  The BC Fed, which had ignored the movement, joined it, took control
of it, and then stopped it.  Acting unilaterally, the Fed sent Jack Munro,
then leader of the IWA (and later a highly-paid executive in the wood
industry), to meet with Bennett to negotiate an 'accord' that became known
as the Kelowna sell-out.


Formed in 1910, the BC Federation of Labour of today is hardly the
federation of the heroic period that fought for fundamental labour rights
under leaders like Ginger Goodwin (elected VP of the Fed in 1917 and
murdered a year later by police).  It is now a federation dominated by a
deeply entrenched apparatus whose first priority is to perpetuate itself.
And the risks of affiliation, for us, outweigh the envisioned advantages.

Teachers are staunch trade unionists.  We have been the first ones to join
every mass movement for rights in the province.  And as staunch trade
unionists, we need to make it clear that the Fed has to acquire some basic
internal democracy, that as it functions now, it is not equipped to lead BC'
s trade union movement.

Until then, until we can be part of a federation that gives its affiliates a
true say in what goes on,
we may be well advised to remain unimpeded in our development.

If, however, we vote to affiliate, we must pledge to be vigilant.  We must
systematically promote elected committees and solid democratic methods, and
place in positions of leadership only those who stand for grassroots
empowerment - for union democracy.


Lissett Barsallo, Carson Graham Sec, North Vancouver  - Ph: 879-3246 -
arward at interchange.ubc.ca
For the April 2006
NVTA panel on affiliation