nk and file key to union s’ future By VAL CAREY The debate on the situation facing the trade union move- ment being carried onin Labour Forum is very welcome and long overdue. I am convinced that only by openly discuss- ing our problems will we ever come to }. any solutions for | Sg, ee ee them. As a trade CAREY unionist all my working life I have seen with growing discomfort the lack of real demo- cracy in our movement, and I feel that unless we address the problem, we will con- tinue to decline. Union history shows us that the rank and file built our movement. It was they who faced the Pinkertons and the attacks by the state acting on behalf of the employers, and under those conditions, won many of the rights we take for granted. The Union Bury- ing Grounds, as Woody Guthrie called it, is filled with the martyrs of our movement. Men, women and children lie in that allegor- ical graveyard so that we may enjoy our weekends free from toil. My own grand- father was fired from the Southern Pacific Railway for agitating for one day off a week. He was a rank and filer. One wonders what those unnamed and unnumbered martyrs would think of our movement if they could see it today. They would be gratified to see our welfare plans, our paid holidays, benefits that are built upon their sacrifices. But I am certain that they would be shocked at the lack of partic- ipation of the rank and file in the decision- making of the unions. What would I tell them if they were to ask me why? Perhaps I could say that the members just do not care, and are too busy with their lives to bother with the union. I could shift the blame on to the rank and file, and be smug because I always attend meetings and involve myself anyway I can. After all, they are not around to defend themselves. But would I be honest if I blamed my non- attending co-workers? I don’t think so. I am convinced that the reason for non- involvement in the union movement by the rank and file is directly related to the ques- tion of trade union democracy. People do not participate in something that holds no meaning for them. Ask a co-worker some time why she/he belongs to the union, and the answer will be words to the effect that it is a requirement of the job. In fact, many workers see the benefits won for them by the union as having come from manage- ment. How are we to improve this situation before our movement dwindles away, depleted by legislation and apathy? I wish I had all the answers to a complex problem. But I am willing to bet that if we give our unions back to the rank and file, the strength to fight the legislative attacks on our movement would emerge. We must examine our structures, our methods, and learn our roots. — Labour Forum What I am about to say is unpopular with certain people, but not with the people who really matter, the members. The bureaucrats, both elected and hired, have far too much power, and are paid inapprop- riate salaries. That much of the union leadership is out of touch to the members is a clear fact. We need forms of organization that will reverse that. and soon. We have seen what the power of the people can do, in Eastern Europe, and that power can happen here. And those at the top need to make the first moves. Collectively, we need to begin to examine ways to involve the rank and file in the process of democratization. No sacred cows should stand in the way of progress. I have a few suggestions to make, some of which will probably be unpopular with certain trade unionists. First, we need to limit salaries to the highest wage in the union, perhaps a bit higher to recognize the long hours these people put in. Expenses, of course should be paid, but do any of us really need to stay ina hotel that costs far more than we could afford if we were paying ourselves? If the leadership of a union lives the lifestyle of a member of the board of directors of MacBlo, they have an interest in keeping that. This is not conducive to democracy. Second, the staff representatives must be directly hired by, and be responsible to, the membership . I know there are problems with this approach, but democracy is not easy, and abuses can occur. That is why the staff representatives should be union members themselves, negotiating their salaries and working conditions with the elected representatives of the membership, who are also responsible for their actions. Here I would like to present a personal beef that has rankled me fora long time. It is a practice in many unions for staff reps to pick up convention credentials. from locals who are not able to send delegations. It means that there is a serious over- representation from staff reps, who have been known to spend a lot of time working to influence delegates on issues at the con- vention. The only influence delegates should have is guidelines set out by their members at a meeting, plus the debate at the convention. Delegates need the room to make decisions themselves, answerable only to those that elected them, not the staff reps. Please do not get me wrong — not all reps act in this irresponsible way, but it is far too common. Third, ways must be found soon to directly involve as many of the rank and file as possible in the life of the union. I know this is an uphill battle against the hockey game on television, and other distractions, but workers must be brought back into the decision-making process. Perhaps those who never attend meetings have some answers that we who are in the thick of Boe Oe eee ere we Sere da ae i A, EW HH RD at i 2 oy} 3 © FIRIBUNE Published weekly at 2681 East Hastings Street Vancouver, B.C. V5K 1Z5. Phone 251-1186 oo SR RAL 2: 0° 0 Riel © Bie bao 6a. 0 Pee Oo: -e Dw Re BSS 88) + ee Ble 08 8 ewe oA hae Se SP ethno iets 6, ge © wh. @ 6 9.5. ¥ > © ‘a 6) o£ 0.8) we 0 00.0 ae Se Postal Code tamenclosing lyr.$200] 2yrs. $350) 3yrs.$5000 Foreign 1 yr. $320 Bill me later) ~Donation$........ a 0 0 6.070 6 ee 0°86 01a a 600 60 8 ee ee Se ee 8 e Pacific Tribune, May 14, 1990 things do not. And I refer not to just the contract battles, even OER we need them ‘there too. I seems to me that the fight against the - GST could provide possibilities for workers to really get involved. We know that they know how this will affect them, and we know that the members of our unions are just as opposed to this inhuman tax as we are. Why don’t we find out what they would like to do about it? Actions to follow the national referendum in April, creative ideas from our sisters and brothers, could be the first step to a new life for our movement. questions. No one person has the answers, but collectively, as our forbears gave birth to our movement, so we can collectively | infuse it with renewal, with new life, so that) we will never again have to complain about apathy. Let us remember the words of our anthem, * anywhere beneath the sun.’ Local 900 of the Canadian Union of Public | Employees. I do not have all the answers, only a lot of F: . there can be So power greater Val Carey is a member of the executive of d ~ The years 1989 and 1990 will be remembered for the democracy move- ments that swept Eastern Europe and saw, with the release of Nelson Mandela, the beginning of a new day in South Africa. ~ These changes are supported by workers around the world. Yet there seems to be a view that a democratic shakeup is fine as long it happens some- place else. The upcoming Canadian Labour Congress convention, starting May 14 in Montreal, is a case in point. For the first time, there are a number of resolutions to the convention calling for the Scrapping of the slate system. | This new focus on slates shou t be surprising. Identical to what was in place in Eastern Europe, voting slates ensure the perpetuation and entrenchment of leadership. Workers didn’t like it there, and they don’t like it here. | John MacLennan ‘Slate system’ at odds | with labour democracy | ” buck it, and pay a big price when they do, LABOUR IN ACTION The CLC’s draft political action reso- lution entitled “Taking hold of our Future: Fighting the Political Platform of the Tories and Big Business” calls for a more democratic Canada. It states: “We want a democratic country in which everyone has a fair say in how our society operates.” I wouldn’t want to cast any doubt on the sincerity of the authors, but it is fair to point out that, surely, demo- cracy starts at home. Delegates headed for Montreal are dreading it will be another dull affair. They point to the March meeting of the CLC’s executive council where all the decisions were finalized as far as the next leadership is concerned. But there are few buyers of this pre- tense at unity. Everyone knows there are differences in the leadership. Last December, when Canadian Auto Work- ers president Robert White criticized Shirley Carr, it was big news. When Canadian leaders of international unions met earlier this year, the CLC leadership was the only item on the agenda. The secret has long been out. Sitting on the executive are representa- tives of three major groups that have internalized their criticism and settled for a very tentative unity. The first are White supporters; then | there is the “anybody but White” camp; | _ and lastly there are the reluctant Carr | — supporters who’ll lend the president —_ backing for one more term. 5 The largest group agrees that White i is the best candidate for the job. The trade ~ union movement is in the fight of its life — against the Tory-corporate agenda, and — workers are desperate for creative lead- — ership. Yet despite the obvious dissatisfaction — with Carr, and broad support for White, there may be no leadership contest at the CLC. Since the chances of election for anyone not on the executive slate-are very. small, only the very brave dare to But the fact remains that there some- thing fundamentally flawed about q_ small number of individuals power-— broking for leadership, while 2,500 dele- gates representing 2.6 million workers” are left on the sidelines. Unless there is a “democratic upset” | in Montreal, an acclaimed leadership will — belly up to the executive board table for _ another two years, giving an appearance _ of unity, while the membership is left to. grumble its dissatisfaction. If we can take even the smallest lesson | from the upheavals in Eastern Europe, — and what happens to leaders who have lost touch with the aspirations of their — memberships, it should be to dump the | slate system. Slates haven’t always been with us. They grew out of the struggle between ;. the left and mght in the trade union — movement. Since the Cold War the slate | system has been employed in an adminis- _ trative way to freeze out the views of the | left. But the political climate has~ changed — there and here. Shouldn the electoral system be revamped to me these new times? As I have said a number of times, this is not a personal criticism of presiden Carr. Any criticism of her presidenc must be shared with the big eight unio that dominate the CLC. Without thei say nothing can be done. It seems to me that in light of ne developments in democracy world-wid the CLC can well afford to have mo open elections. Canadian trade unionis are as pragmatic as any other workers i the world and would be able to make the | appropriate choices. The important outcome of this would” be an elected leadership that knew it hai the support of delegates. This in its would greatly aid the mobilization for. the fight against the Tories and big busi- ness.