Unions Reject Bid for Change at AFL-CIO

Dissident union presidents pushing for radical change in the AFL-CIO failed Wednesday to win approval of their proposal from a majority of the federation’s 58 unions.

The dissidents, led by the president of the nation’s largest union, said they would continue to seek support through July, when delegates from member unions are scheduled to vote on reform proposals and the federation’s top officers.

The proposal rejected Wednesday would have deeply cut the AFL-CIO’s budget and directed the money toward aggressive union-organizing efforts. The defeat came during unusually intense and rancorous discussions during the second day of a three-day semiannual leadership meeting.

The drama underscored deep schisms within the increasingly weakened U.S. labor movement. Unions represent about 12.5% of all U.S. workers, and only 8% of the private-sector workforce, compared with about one-third of workers 50 years ago. For the most part, unions have been fighting defensive battles in recent years and have been unable to advance their political and legislative agendas.

But federation leaders downplayed the rift and said there was broad agreement on most issues.

“We agree that there is an assault on wages, pensions and Social Security, that workers have been working harder and getting less for a long time,” said Richard Trumka, secretary-treasurer of the federation and the top officer behind President John J. Sweeney. “We’re both talking about [dues] rebates and massive change. The difference is in the details.”

Individual union presidents described the conflict as more profound. Those in the minority faction said the federation leadership and its supporters were stodgy, afraid and unwilling to make the tough choices necessary for labor’s survival.

On the other hand, backers of the current AFL-CIO leadership said most unions were already changing and that the proponents of change were driven by egos or hidden agendas.

Leaders of unions representing about 40% of the federation’s 13 million members -- including the Teamsters, Laborers, Unite Here and United Food and Commercial Workers -- openly sided with Andrew Stern, the firebrand president of the Service Employees International Union, the nation’s largest union.

Stern has threatened to pull his 1.8 million members out of the federation if the changes he advocates aren’t implemented.

The dissidents said they were encouraged by growing support and thought they could gain a majority by July. Stern said he didn’t intend to defect immediately, but left the door open even as he vowed to keep fighting.

Some who oppose Stern, both because of his proposals and what they complain is his outsized personality, said the battle was over.

“The other side has become entrenched in their ideas, but in a democracy, you have to accept that there are winners and losers,” said Tom Buffenbarger, president of the International Assn. of Machinists and a leading critic of the SEIU approach. Buffenbarger described the debate as “between autocrats and democrats” and said the democrats won.

The minority faction wants the AFL-CIO to rebate half of the $90 million it collects from affiliated unions in dues to help qualified unions run aggressive organizing campaigns. Unless labor regains density in the workforce, they argue, it will be increasingly hobbled politically.

Rules for doling out the money would also encourage mergers of smaller unions. Stern has said the AFL-CIO should have about 20 big unions, each with a specific industry focus, down from 58.

Critics said the 50% rebate was too extreme and would gut the federation’s budget, forcing about 200 layoffs and undermining its political and legislative programs. They say the money would be better spent trying to elect more labor-friendly political candidates who could push changes that would make it easier to organize new members.

After sifting through dozens of proposals from member unions, AFL-CIO President Sweeney responded this week with a rival proposal that would funnel about $45 million into AFL-CIO political campaigns, with a much smaller amount set aside for rebates for political and organizing work by affiliates. That proposal was approved by a majority of the largest unions, and will be put to a vote by the full federation body in July.

Stern’s backers said the Sweeney proposal was merely an attempt to stop their initiative by tying up so much of the federation’s budget that significant rebates for organizing would be impossible.