Open World Conference of Workers

In Defense of Trade Union Independence & Democratic Rights

THE TRADE UNIONS AND THE FIGHT FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS:
Why the SEIU's "Partnership" Agenda Is So Disastrous

By ALAN BENJAMIN

Over the past six weeks, huge mass demonstrations have erupted in Chicago, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Milwaukee, Denver, Atlanta, Dallas and Atlanta -- to mention only some of the major actions -- in opposition to HR-4477, the anti-immigrant bill submitted by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) that would criminalize all undocumented immigrants.

The protests were organized largely by immigrants' rights groups, local Latino DJs, churches, the Latino press, and trade unions (mainly SEIU, UFW, UNITE HERE, and AFSCME) -- with the support of local Democratic Party groups and even sectors of the employers' associations. Of all the unions, SEIU mobilized its members most energetically, with hundreds of thousands of SEIU members taking to the streets across the country against the Sensenbrenner bill.

The positions taken by the trade unions have differed significantly between the Change to Win unions, on the one hand, and the AFL-CIO unions, on the other.

Beginning in April 2004, SEIU, HERE, Laborers, UFCW, and UNITE -- all of which later split from the AFL-CIO to form Change to Win -- but also AFSCME, which did not split from the AFL-CIO, signed a paid advertisement in common with the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (EWIC) in which they appealed to George W. Bush to enact a "comprehensive immigration reform" plan.

On the list of the board of directors of EWIC one can find the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Walmart, Tyson Foods, and a dozen other corporate giants.

EWIC, on its website, describes itself as "a broad-based coalition of national businesses and trade associations from across the industry spectrum concerned with the shortage of both semi-skilled and unskilled ('essential worker') labor. EWIC supports policies that facilitate the employment of essential workers by U.S. companies that are unable to find American workers."

This is a significant wing of the U.S. ruling class concerned about having a pool of steady, cheap labor for U.S. corporations.

The orientation toward creating "partnerships," or "strategic alliances," with the employers has been a constant for SEIU President Andy Stern and the SEIU leadership in the recent period.

"Parternship Between Corporations and Labor"

In an interview with Lenny Mendonca published by the global think-tank McKinsey & Co. and reprinted in the Feb. 27, 2006 issue of Epoch Times, for instance, Stern explained his view on such partnerships:

"SEIU's goal for 2006 is to go global and to bring unions and corporations together as 'partners, not enemies,' Stern told Mendonca. 'I think that what we're going to see happen within ten years, if not sooner, is a convergence of a global labor movement, a global corporate responsibility movement, and nongovernmental organizations'."

This, of course, is the language of the "New World Governance," which is a deadly orientation aimed at liquidating the trade union movement as an independent instrument to defend the interests of working people. [See past issues of The Organizer newspaper for a fuller explanation on this "New World Governance" plan promoted by the main institutions of international finance capital.]

Stern continued: "Employers need to recognize that the world has changed and there are people who would like to help them provide solutions in ways that are new, modern and that add value to companies. ... A partnership between labor and corporations would be a step towards the intended goal."

And Stern concluded: "On the other side of the coin, union members have to understand that companies are not their enemy, but must think about increasing shareholders' wealth. ... Labor should ask itself, 'how can I contribute to meeting those [shareholders'] expectations in a way that also meets mine'?"

In keeping with this orientation, Stern lashed out at John Sweeney during the Martin Luther King celebrations this year, explaining that Sweeney and the AFL-CIO were still wedded to outdated concepts of "class conflict."

And Stern moved from words to deeds. SEIU and UNITE HERE collaborated closely with the bosses in EWIC to fashion a "comprehensive immigration reform" bill that was introduced last year in the Senate in the form of the McCain-Kennedy bill. According to the EWIC's website, this bill had to be based on the following central objectives:

"- Providing a temporary worker program by creating an efficient program that allows employers to recruit immigrant workers when U.S. workers can not be found;

"- Providing qualified undocumented immigrants now in the country a way to earn legal status;

"- Providing for increased national security and control of our nation's borders; and

"- Creating a workable interior enforcement program that imposes fair penalties for bad actor employers."

There you have it: a guestworker program for the employers (a plank that Bush has been pushing), stricter border "security," tougher employer sanctions, and a "path to legalization" for the 12 million immigrants living in the United States.

The AFL-CIO and the Debate on Immigration Reform

In relation to the current Congressional debate on immigration reform, the AFL-CIO leadership has been painfully late in urging its affiliates to mobilize against the anti-immigrant bills in the Congress. While the CTW unions were out in the streets in huge numbers, only one AFL-CIO union -- AFSCME -- had large contingents in the mass demonstrations.

In recent weeks, this absence by the AFL-CIO unions from what many are calling the "New Civil Rights Movement" has begun to be addressed. The AFL-CIO urged all its national affiliates to participate with large contingents in the April 10 National Day of Action for Immigrant Workers, which mobilized more than 2 million people in the streets nationwide. In the Washington, D.C., April 10 action, AFL-CIO union banners could be seen everywhere.

Despite this major failure to mobilize its members, the AFL-CIO leadership has stuck to its guns, by and large, in opposition to guestworker programs and employer sanctions -- and in support of legalization, or amnesty. [See side article on the AFL-CIO's embrace of the amnesty position in February 2000.]

On Feb. 29, 2006, the AFL-CIO Executive Council adopted a resolution titled, "Responsible Reform of Immigration Laws Must Protect Working Conditions For All Workers in the U.S." Linda Chavez-Thompson, executive vice president of the AFL-CIO, summarized some of the main points of the resolution as follows:

"The basic AFL-CIO position in this debate is clear and unchanged. We're fighting for citizenship for all undocumented workers and their families who have been working hard, paying their taxes and contributing to their communities, no matter where they were born or whether they are documented or undocumented. They deserve the right to a minimum wage, a safe workplace and the freedom to form unions. ...

"This week AFL-CIO unions have voted on a landmark resolution that breaks away from this oppressive guestworker mold and offers a more just and viable solution that will benefit all workers. To be effective, comprehensive immigration reform must include three key, interdependent goals: 1) reform proposals MUST provide a clear and well-defined path to permanent residency for those workers already here and contributing to their communities; 2) our laws must include uniform enforcement of workplace standards to ensure a more just and level playing field; and 3) to achieve a blanket standard of workplace right, we must reject outdated guestworker constructs that by their very nature harm the interests of foreign and U.S.-born workers alike.

"To embrace the expansion of temporary guestworker programs is to embrace the creation of an undemocratic, two-tiered society."

Three weeks later, in an op-ed piece published March 26, 2006 in the New York Daily News, Linda Chavez-Thompson further noted:

"Tragically, all immigration reform proposals currently circulating in the halls of Congress fail to protect even the most basic rights of immigrant workers and their families. Just last week, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) put forth his own makeshift proposal -- topping the list of legislative failures. He wants to criminalize immigrant workers, deepening the potential for abuse and exploitation while undermining wages and labor protections for all. ...

"Criminalizing undocumented workers makes them easy prey for unscrupulous employers. That in turn drives down working standards for all Americans and creates an undemocratic, two-tiered society.

"We need an immigration policy that provides a real path to citizenship for those workers already here and that helps meet the future needs of workers in a fair way. We should recognize immigrant workers as full members of society -- permanent residents with full rights that employers may not exploit."

Chavez-Thompson correctly took issue with the McCain-Kennedy bill and reiterated the AFL-CIO's position for amnesty, which in the current debate goes under the name of "legalization for permanent residency" -- as the term "amnesty," it appears, is considered too controversial a term in the Washington beltway.

Stern Lashes Out At AFL-CIO

Andy Stern, predictably, lashed out against the AFL-CIO's Executive Council resolution in a speech he delivered on March 15, 2006 to an American Bar Association conference in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. An Associated Press dispatch dated March 15 reports:

"Service Employees International Union President Andrew L. Stern took aim at the AFL-CIO's stand on immigration by saying that SEIU has taken a realistic political position by backing the guestworker plan included in an immigration bill (S. 1033) sponsored by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), instead of looking 'morally pure' by being opposed to guestworker programs.

"Stern said it was important to deal with proposals that are 'on-the-table' when it comes to immigration instead of backing a position that was not politically realistic.

"'We support McCain-Kennedy because we want to be a player,' Stern said, adding that while SEIU and the AFL-CIO have similar goals, SEIU 'reached common cause" with McCain and Kennedy by supporting a guestworker program that provides for undocumented workers opportunity to earn citizenship, but is not amnesty.

"In January, Stern joined Thomas J. Donohue, head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Laborers' International Union President Terence M. O'Sullivan in criticizing an immigration bill passed by the House in December (HR 4437) that primarily focused on increasing enforcement, instead of encouraging a guestworker program that allowed for a steady stream of immigrant workers. ...

"The AFL-CIO Executive Council adopted March 1 [note: actually it was Feb. 29] a comprehensive framework for immigration reform that does not include a guestworker provision, but instead calls for permanent residency for those immigrants already in the United States as well as future immigrants."

Following the March 27 adoption by the Senate Judiciary Committee of the "compromise bill," Andy Stern and the SEIU issued an appeal to all union members and immigrant rights supporters urging them to contact their Senators to support this bill.

What Way Forward?

Today, it is vital that the entire trade union movement -- all AFL-CIO and CTW unions -- keep up and deepen the mobilizations in defense of immigrants' rights.

Though a first blow was dealt to HR 4437 by the Senate Judiciary Committee, all the heinous provisions in that bill could still come back in subsequent Senate and Joint Congress Conference Committee bills. Moreover, all the anti-immigrant provisions in the "compromise bill" also must be fought tooth and nail.

Trade union activists and immigrant rights supporters must join together in urging all AFL-CIO unions and labor councils to mobilize in the streets in support of the platform they adopted in February 2000: Amnesty, No Employer Sanctions, No Exploitative Guestworker Programs, No Walls in Any Form!

The AFL-CIO leaders and unions took a stand against HR 4437 early on, but they were caught off guard by the mass protests in the streets, contenting themselves with issuing statements outlining their positions.

The AFL-CIO unions should have been in the streets against HR 4437. And if they wanted to be a player in the current debate in Congress, they could have urged support to the bill introduced in the House of Representatives last year by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), which calls for amnesty for people already here and for outlawing all forms of discrimination based on migrant status (meaning no discriminatory guestworker programs). Her legislation also calls for job training and creation in communities with high employment rates.

This vacuum allowed the Change to Win unions to fill the void and be the only unions playing a leadership role in the mass protests.

The AFL-CIO leadership responded to this tidal wave of protest and called on all affiliates to mobilize in the streets on April 10. Though belated, this was a positive development. But more, much more, needs to be done.

CTW Unions Must Break With "Partnerships"!

While the political orientation of the top CTW leadership represents an unprincipled partnership with the bosses, the rank and file (and very likely large numbers of the leaders) of SEIU, UFW and UNITE HERE who mobilized in the streets by the hundreds of thousands were there to express their outrage at the criminalization provisions in HR 4437 and to support basic immigrant rights, including the call for legalization of immigrants living in the United States.

It is unlikely any of the workers in CTW unions support the anti-immigrant measures in the McCain-Kennedy bill.

SEIU, UNITE HERE, and UFW unionists were the ones who, back in 1999-2000, forced the AFL-CIO to change its retrograde positions in favor of amnesty and opposition to employer sanctions. Certainly thousands upon thousands of these unionists must be deeply uncomfortable with the positions their union leaders are asking them to support.

It's a very good thing the CTW unions have been out in front of these mobilizations. The entire labor movement should have been out in the streets alongside the CTW unions.

But, it is wrong -- dead wrong -- to forge an alliance with the EWIC employers and ruling class politicians that forces workers to accept more deaths on the border, a virtual wall, more employer sanctions, and two-tiered guestworker programs. This is not acceptable. Such policies will only result in more deaths and heightened exploitation of immigrant workers.

Unions should not bend to this so-called "realism" of the bosses, this so-called "realism" of the "proposals on the table."

Together, the AFL-CIO and CTW unions must mobilize their members in the manner they deem most appropriate on May 1st -- the day of strike, boycott and mass protest action called by the March 25 Coalition and other major immigrant rights groups across the country. [See article about the May 1st protest elsewhere in this issue.]

Amnesty and Equal Rights for All Undocumented Immigrants!

---------

SEIU BREAKS WITH AFL-CIO'S PROGRESSIVE POLICIES ON IMMIGRANT RIGHTS

By forging a "partnership" with the employers' Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (EWIC) and supporting the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill, Andy Stern and the SEIU leadership broke sharply with the policies of the AFL-CIO that were adopted in February 2000 by all wings of the trade union movement, which were united at the time.

Indeed, on Feb. 16, 2000, the AFL-CIO adopted a historic resolution that for the first time came out for amnesty for undocumented immigrants and for the repeal of employer sanctions. In the past, the AFL-CIO had been a strong advocate of employer sanctions. The AFL-CIO also took a strong stand against guestworker programs, calling them "an abusive and exploitative means to keep immigrant workers relegated to a second-class legal status."

David Bacon posted an article on the PNS website on June 21, 2000 that gives a sense of the significance of this change of position by the AFL-CIO.

This is what Bacon wrote:

"In February [2000] the AFL-CIO passed an historic resolution calling for an amnesty, and for repeal of employer sanctions -- laws that make it illegal for undocumented immigrants to work.

"This 'has made a whole new discussion possible,' says Victor Narro, a staff attorney at the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights in Los Angeles. 'Now we have a labor movement that's on the side of immigrants, rather than one bent on trying to stop immigration, as we had in 1986.'

"The unions held hearings to gather testimony about how immigration law undermines workers' rights, and to forge a new labor/community/religious coalition to change the law. They started in March [1999] and moved from New York to Atlanta, Chicago, Silicon Valley, Portland, Salinas and Fresno.

"The immense support for amnesty among immigrants was clear at the last hearing in Los Angeles in mid-June [1999]. More than 16,000 people poured into the L.A. Sports Arena, chanting 'Que queremos? Amnistia, sin condiciones!' -- 'What do we want? Unconditional amnesty!' Thousands more, unable to get in, gathered outside.

"The L.A. hearing was cosponsored by 60 churches and community organizations.

"Speakers told the panel of union and community leaders how immigration laws were used -- sometimes successfully -- to defeat organizing drives. Ofelia Parra, who works in Washington state's apple-packing sheds, described how a Teamsters Union drive was broken when 700 undocumented workers were fired at the demand of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

"'We contribute to this society just like the people who have papers,' she said. 'We need an amnesty so we can work in peace and organize to improve conditions.' ...

"Sending the National Guard to the border, stepping up immigration raids, passing anti-immigrant legislation -- none of these have halted the flow of people across the border. In changing its position, the AFL-CIO recognizes that continued immigration reflects a new reality. More than 80 million people today live outside their countries of origin. Growing economic inequality pushes more and more people to seek survival elsewhere.

"Miguel Contreras, head of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, emphasizes that 'Amnesty is a means to an end -- the elimination of poverty and a better redistribution of wealth. L.A. is a county in crisis,' he continues. 'Fifty wealthy families have assets of $60 billion, more than the wages of 2 million of the city's lowest-paid workers, mostly immigrants.'

The irony is that SEIU, UNITE and HERE (they were two separate unions at the time) were the main unions -- spurred by their own increasing numbers of Latino workers -- pushing for the AFL-CIO to reverse its retrograde policies. -- A.B.

Back to Home                       Back to Trade Union Independence