Socialists (ISO) Who Negotiate Take-Aways
Submitted on Wed, 10/26/2005 - 12:33am
The following letter is by IWW Member "x337969". They are directly involved in the struggle described below and they have direct experience working with the International Socialist Organization members and chapter described in this letter.
Many party groups on the left in the US are seen at political allies, and often they have something interesting to say about global and domestic US policy. It is unfortunate that some of them do not organize as well as they speak.
The Socialist Worker, the weekly lefty tabloid heartily distributed by members of the International Socialist Organization (US) published an article about the contract negotiations at Madison Market Coop in Seattle, with UFCW local 21. Based upon their track record for the past 10 years in activist circles, it is not surprising that the ISO would go out of their way to take credit for the work of others, but in this case, they are talking about things that didn't happen at all. The reason this issue is of concern to us is because the IWW has a shop with the same employer.
The article, entitled "Activism Wins Gains at Madison Market" (Socialist Worker, Oct. 14th, by Darrin Hoop), doesn't mention that the negotiating committee missed being recalled by one vote of about 80 employees. Nor does it mention the serious curtailment of free speech rights and the right to honor other's picket lines-picketing is barred at all times, a strike cannot be honored unless UFCW #21 approves first and has given the coop 24 hours notice, and the union is now obligated to force employees from engaging in these important hard won rights-who in turn would be fired under the contract. This kind of language is what creates the conditions for union leaders to force members to scab on other unions, through the threat of job loss. There is no mention that the writer of the article was a member of the negotiating committee.
The committee also bargained away the right of the union to negotiate on past practice issues and other benefits not explicit in the contract, by accepting a restrictive management rights clause. This was replaced by a "staff council" of elected employees. This council's recommendations are not binding, as management can simply declare a policy "Operational" and implement it without input from the council or negotiating with the union, creating a false sense of input. The council previously had binding power to formulate operational policies under the past practice. The loss of this right is a large concession in exercising worker power under a contract.
The raises were not generous. For those making around $9.00 per hour, the next yearly COLA adjustment is .27% (not 2.7%) or 25 cents, and for those making around $15.00 an hour, the next yearly raise is .16% (again, not 1.6%), or 15 cents an hour. When accounting for inflation and rising fuel prices, this was a major takeaway and a wage cut. Employees who received any sort of merit raise saw their retro pay being signed away. Retro pay was a big issue, because it took over a year for the committee to get a vote on a first proposal. The contract expired in August of 2004, and the committee formed in March of that year-18 months ago. Even at 25 cents an hour, that's $500 for a year.
The previous contract in 2002 got workers 5% raises, increased health care benefits including new benefits for partners and children, shift bidding based on seniority, and several hundred dollars in retro pay for everyone. This contract was approved by 95% of the workers, under the threat of a strike, which over 90% of the workers authorized the committee to call. Negotiations were well attended, and worker meetings were frequent. The employer was hostile and had hired a bona fide union buster (www.braunconsulting.com). The negotiators and the shop steward were all dual card IWW members.
Why the contrast? Because the ISO clique in the shop, after being unsuccessful at controlling the previous outcome, campaigned to have their "opponents" fired, used physical intimidation, verbal harassment and rumors to intimidate them, and alienated senior employees from union activism in general. When the contract expired last year, there was a void due to this and employee turnover for them to step into and hand pick their committee (there was no election due to lack of interest). They pitted new workers against senior workers in order to obfuscate their role as wreckers, and harassed people who showed interest in joining the IWW as dual carders. They made appeals to the activist left and the press to support them (and went public without consulting the rest of the staff), but never organized their co-workers. A worker who was not in the circle had to go to a former steward to help win their job back. The ISO dominated the process, while a small handful of workers desperately tried to make the process work, and the majority of employees sat out. Management had a field day.
As a result, workers who "won" these "gains" had to go to the union officials to get copies of the proposals, because the committee refused to furnish them. Workers had to initiate a recall ballot, which lost by one vote, because those who didn't vote no were not required to even cast a ballot (all ballots cast were "no" votes)-hardly a vote of confidence. Many employees, especially current employees who had been active in the previous negotiations expressed dismay at the negotiations being hijacked by a small group of people, and felt that the negotiations were only a tool to force an agenda on their co-workers. The shop steward even quit the store with no notice, out of frustration, and now there is no steward to enforce what little rights are left.
Struggles are won by the organization of fellow workers on the job, when the struggle becomes their struggle. This kind of organization relies on trust, communication, competency in negotiations, and self-criticism. The ISO hasn't figured this out, and they will even misinform us about the result of this ignorance in their newspaper, and blame the union, anyone but themselves. Add this to the stack of stories on how the left eats itself.