[van-discuss] Organizing Unions Without Contracts

[Pat S]

The Minority Report By Alexis Buss
http://vancouver.iww.ca/iw/200212.htm#200212minority

Most union campaigns get off the ground by finding out what problems exist 
in a workplace or industry. Workers form union committees, a campaign is 
launched, and workplace issues are articulated to attract more and more 
support for the unions cause. Most often, this organizing is done with the 
goal of the union being formally recognized by the boss, either by a 
card-check agreement or an election of some sort, so that a contract can be 
bargained.

But what usually happens when it is time to sit down and bargain the 
contract? It isnt true to say that at negotiation time the boss and union 
come to the table as equals and work out the best possible deal for both 
parties. The union most usually comes to the table from a very weak 
position, because it has been built not to fight for and enforce its 
demands, but rather to ask the boss to give it legitimacy.

This method came about when NLRA was enacted in 1935. Labor peace was a 
desirable concept for the bosses, the government and entrenched union 
bureaucracies. The bosses were tired of dealing with rising labor militancy 
factory takeovers, strikes, walk-outs, sit-ins, etc. Government officials 
had to deal with helping their pals in big business recover from the effects 
of this kind of organizing. And the labor bureaucrats were worried by 
workers who were getting too uppity and demanding the same kind of respect 
from them that they were demanding from the bosses. So a system was created 
for bosses to be given a legal mandate to bargain with the unions, and a set 
of laws and rules were created so that bargaining became a gentlemans game.

The expected way that unions and bosses dealt with each other was that the 
contract was improved upon with each new set of negotiations, so long as the 
company was in good health. This has changed. It is now routine for 
companies, ones with and without unions, to shut down plants and offices, 
downsize jobs, reduce pay and benefits, and generally show no consideration 
to workers, even during profitable times.

But heres something that has been true ever since our present set of laws 
was enacted: it is usual and expected for contracts to contain completely 
useless (worse than useless, positively harmful) language for workers the 
management prerogatives clause, and no-strike clause.

Because most unions accept that workers are on earth to be managed, and 
bosses should run the world as they see fit, it isnt a surprise that most 
union contracts allow management to have total control over a workplace. 
During the term of a contract, when the union is entitled to collect dues 
from workers through dues check-off, limiting the ability of workers to 
strike is also desirable for many unions to make sure that their main 
revenue streams are not cut off. Let alone the added benefit of avoiding the 
hassle of managing uppity workers.

When we think of how we can turn around the labor movement, we must keep 
these things in mind. We cant just accept more organizing. Because even if 
we had more organizing of the kind we have now, we would still have to 
address the issue of unions not helping workers to pursue job control. We 
would still have to deal with concessionary bargaining.

How are we going to get off of this road? We must stop making gaining legal 
recognition and a contract the point of our organizing. Our unions and 
networks of solidarity must be able to deal with the issues that inspire 
most campaigns wages, benefits, working conditions. But just as necessary is 
to have a way for us to organize to address the respect (or lack of respect) 
workers feel on the job, our ability to control how we work, how our 
workplace is going to interact with our community and our world.

We have to bring about a situation where the bosses, not the union, want the 
contract. We need to create situations where bosses will offer us 
concessions to get our cooperation. Make them beg for it.

This is one of the potentials of minority unionism (by the way, this is the 
last column that Ill be using this term in the next month, Id like your help 
in figuring out a new name to describe the kind of unionism weve been 
talking about in the pages of the Industrial Worker).

The point of unionism as the IWW sees it is to organize workers in ways that 
our power cannot be ignored or co-opted. Minority unionism is one way to do 
this, because we can organize around demands without worrying about if we 
have a contract or legal standing. As much as possible, we should seek to 
avoid situations where our power is replaced by laws and contracts.

If contracts and agreements help us hold bosses to their promises, thats 
great. But if bargaining becomes an exercise in what rights we will give up, 
and deciding that bosses should in fact have total managerial control over 
our working lives, were going about it the wrong way.

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail