AFL-CIO Chief to Seek 3rd Term as Labor Ponders Future
Amid a deepening sense of crisis in the U.S. labor movement, AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney said Thursday he would propose comprehensive reforms for the labor federation and seek reelection to a third term.
“We’re at a crucial time, and I think I’m in the best position to lead this whole process of change,” said Sweeney, 70, who won the presidency in 1995. He spoke to reporters by phone as leaders of the AFL-CIO and its 58 member unions prepared to debate labor’s future in Las Vegas starting Tuesday.
Elected on a reform slate, Sweeney had promised to make labor bigger, stronger and more vibrant. But despite notable successes in politics and organizing, union membership continued to decline and now stands at 8% of the private-sector workforce, its lowest level in decades. Labor also failed in its well-funded and determined effort to unseat President Bush, who is viewed by union leaders as hostile.
Few blame Sweeney for the setbacks. But several labor activists have privately said that new, energized leaders are needed to push reforms. Sweeney’s decision to seek reelection in June -- which was expected -- makes it more awkward for his rivals, though others are expected to seek his job anyway.
The most frequently mentioned potential rival is John Wilhelm, president for hospitality of Unite Here, formed by the merger of hotel and garment unions last year. Wilhelm, who won respect for his successful efforts to organize Las Vegas casinos, hasn’t said whether he will run. But at a recent labor forum in Los Angeles, he spoke of a need for new leaders.
The leadership discussion comes as union presidents push different reform approaches. Andy Stern, president of the 1.8-million-member Service Employees International Union, set off the debate in November when he released a 10-point proposal. His most radical idea was to cut the number of unions through forced mergers from nearly 60 to about 20, with each responsible for a sector of the economy.
Stern contended that bigger, more focused unions would have more resources and talent to organize workers strategically. He threatened to pull out of the federation if fundamental changes weren’t adopted soon. In recent days, Stern has said the SEIU might seek a “partnership” with the AFL-CIO, rather than being a dues-paying affiliate.
Since November, more than 80 national unions, regional labor councils and groups representing professionals, Latinos, blacks and women have submitted proposals. (All can be viewed at www.aflcio.org.) Many call for a combination of voluntary mergers, a streamlined AFL-CIO bureaucracy and rebates from the federation to unions that mount strategic organizing drives. Some also called for labor to more aggressively promote its message and to reestablish itself as an authoritative voice for workers.
The AFL-CIO is funded by contributions from member unions, totaling about 1% of membership dues collected, Sweeney said. He said he would put forward a plan next week to give financial incentives for smaller unions to merge, grant rebates to unions that set up strategic organizing plans and pare down federation activities to a few priorities, topped by politics.
He obliquely criticized Stern’s ultimatum and his call for corporate-style mergers. “No. 1, unity is our greatest asset and we shouldn’t do anything to undermine it,” he said. “Second, the democratic rights of our members have to be honored.”
Next week’s meeting in Las Vegas is an executive council session, normally a routine gathering held twice a year. Controversy over the restructuring proposals, Stern’s threat to leave and possible candidates for the presidency have drawn unusual attention.
It remains to be seen, however, whether this unprecedented period of self-examination can stop labor’s decline. Political and economic trends are against it, analysts say. The decrease in U.S. manufacturing and the privatization of government jobs have cut deeply into the ranks of some unions, and the National Labor Relations Board is considering policy changes that would make it harder for unions to organize workers.
Nelson Lichtenstein, a UC Santa Barbara history professor and an authority on the U.S. labor movement, said the debate was long overdue.
American union leadership was “extraordinarily complacent” from 1950 to 1995, he said. “At least now people know there’s a crisis. It means that wider and wider circles are involved in the discussion, and that’s a good thing. This is the kind of debate that took place in the ‘30s and, to a lesser extent, in the ‘60s when the United Auto Workers quit over how to get the movement dynamic again.”
However, Lichtenstein added, reforms may not halt the slide. “Labor could become completely irrelevant,” he said. “In fact, I think that’s already happening.”
