|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Andrew Sterns Getting America Back on Track
More right-wing proposals from the American labor bureaucracy
By Shannon Jones
12 February 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Getting America Back on Track: A Country that Works,
Andy Stern, Free Press, New York, New York: 2006, 224 pp.
Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International
Union (SEIU), recently conducted a nationwide tour to promote
his new book, Getting America Back on Track: A Country that
Works, which advances his plans to revive the US trade unions
on the basis of even closer collaboration with corporate America.
In 2005 Stern led the SEIU out of the AFL-CIO labor federation
along with five other unionsthe United Food and Commercial
Workers, the Teamsters, UNITE/HERE, the Laborers International
Union and the carpenters.
The split reflected the deep fissures within the trade union
bureaucracy growing from the isolation and alienation of the privileged
apparatuses of the unions from the great mass of the working class.
Despite the growing anger and frustration within the working class,
union membership continues to decline year after year and the
rate of private sector unionization has fallen to its lowest level
since 1900.
In his book, Stern expresses concern about the decline of the
US trade union movement within the context of mounting economic
inequality. He notes, for example, the statements of former
Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan, who warned
in a 2005 address to Congress, that inequality threatens
democratic capitalism (p. 7).
Elsewhere he speaks about the mass protests of immigrant workers
in the United States last year as well as the strikes and protests
in France against attempts to cut employment protections for young
workers.
But Sterns book is not directed to workers, nor does
it advance any serious strategy to fight the corporate assault
on jobs and living standards. On the contrary, the book is a warning
to the ruling elite that if the unionswhich have served
corporate America for so longare allowed to collapse then
dangerous social upheavals, outside the control of the labor bureaucracy,
will erupt.
There is no analysis in the book of the disastrous policies
of the American trade unions: its undying defense of the profit
system and anticommunism, its rabid nationalism or its alliance
with the big business Democratic Party. The SEIU chief rejects
out of hand any suggestion that workers should challenge the existing
economic setup, let alone replace it with a socialist alternative.
Instead, he repeats the worn-out nationalist plea of the labor
bureaucracy for the employers to join together with the unions
to increase competitiveness so as to ensure Americas
continued economic leadership.
Seeks new role for unions
In order to pursue this corporatist strategy Stern insists
the unions redefine their role in order to win the confidence
of big business. In the first place, this means renouncing any
residual connection to the class struggle.
Stern spells out bluntly the dilemma facing the American trade
union bureaucracy. He recalls nostalgically: Once, free
democratic unions were seen in contrast to the government dominated
unions of communist dictatorships, and were a battering ram to
knock down the Iron Curtain. However, following the collapse
of the Soviet Union, he complains, the unions were viewed by those
in power as impediments to economic progress.
The challenge, he asserts, is for the unions to find a twenty-first
century role in the American economy (pp. 38-39). In other
words, the union bureaucracy must find a way to convince the powers
that be of its continued usefulness.
Stern boasts that the SEIU is on the right path by insisting
on the importance of beginning at all times with the needs of
the employers.
He writes, for example, on page 58: our priority should
be to contribute to our employers success... On page
105 he declares: Employees and employers need organizations
that solve problems, not create them. In a fast-paced competitive
world, unions need to facilitate competition by leveling the playing
field for all employers, not by simply raising the cost of doing
business for unionized ones.
Along this line of thought he advances the idea that unions
become outsourcers, taking over from employers hiring,
training and benefits administration and the setting of industry
standards (p. 109).
In an interview with the business journal McKinsey Quarterly
(2006 Issue I), he is even more explicit, calling for the unions
to become labor contractors that supply skilled
workers to employers.
This rather blunt statement more or less describes the role
of the unions today. These organizations do not express the interests
of the working class, but serve as vehicles for the labor bureaucracy,
which siphons off a share of the profits extracted by big business.
In return they promise a steady supply of docile labor.
It is absurd, therefore, when at one point in his book Stern
suggests that many union leaders suffer from a lingering class
struggle mentality (p. 70). In fact, all sections of the
AFL-CIO are wedded to the policy of corporatist union-management
collaboration. Strike activity has fallen steadily over the past
25 years and is now at close to its lowest level in modern times.
The only way for it to fall any lower would be for strikes to
cease altogether.
If Sterns words have any serious meaning they intend
to imply that the response of the working class to widening social
inequality, increasing lack of access to healthcare and the dumping
of pensions should be to stop all struggle.
For this to happen would mean the utter crushing of the working
class and the suppression of all democratic rights. However, instead
of this being done by means of a police-state dictatorship, Stern
proposes that essentially the same thing be carried out by means
of a corporatist union-employer alliance.
If anyone considers this an exaggeration, consider the fact
that Stern praises the official state-sponsored unions in China.
In a visit to China, he was impressed by the ACFTU (All-China
Federation of Trade Unions), an organ of the repressive Stalinist
regime, causing him to assert that he was awestruck by its
dynamism (p. 28).
Globalization
Stern includes a subsection in his book entitled global
unions. In introducing the subject, he writes: National
unions by their very nature are not built to have the strength
to successfully address their members issues when they operate
in only one country of a global employer (p. 111).
It is impossible for even the most obtuse union leader not
to recognize the shattering impact that the rise of the transnational
corporation and globalized production has had on the old labor
organizations. However, acknowledging this fact and being able
to advance a progressive response are two different things.
Taken by itself the globalization of production is a progressive
development, containing the seeds of a higher standard of living
for those all over the globe. Under capitalist private ownership
and the nation-state system, however, globalization is turned
against the interests of the working class and society as a whole,
leading to bitter inter-imperialist conflicts and pitting worker
against worker in a drive to lower wages and living standards.
However, it is impossible for unions, which are wedded to the
defense of their own national ruling class, to forge
a genuine alliance with workers in other countries because the
first rule of internationalism, demonstrated time and time again
by history, is that the main enemy is the capitalist class in
your own country.
As Stern makes clear, he defends American imperialism and is
a supporter of its global crimes. The brief reference Stern makes
to the Iraq war indicates his support for the goal, if not the
execution, of this bloody imperialist project. Time has
revealed that our political leaders rushed to war in Iraq without
a plan and enough troops to secure peace, he writes (p.
101).
The above passage comes in the midst of a lengthy section where
Stern expresses his admiration for none other than former Republican
House leader Newt Gingrich, who offered him advice on the inter-bureaucratic
struggle within the AFL-CIO. He notes approvingly that Gingrich
cited his respect for the United States Army as an institution
that consciously and continuously conforms itself to changing
times(pp. 100-101).
Given Sterns embrace of American militarism, it is no
surprise that the global unionism he advocates has
nothing in common with genuine working class internationalism.
In the first place he gives it passing reference. Insofar as he
does propose measures for global cooperation, they evince an outlook
that sees unions in other countries serving as little more than
an appendage to the maneuvers of the US labor bureaucracy.
He proposes on page 113, for example, the outsourcing
of strikes, e.g., the US labor bureaucracy could pay
strike benefits to workers in low wage countries as an alternative
to calling out its own members on strike.
In the above-cited interview with the McKinsey Quarterly
he spells out the logic of this line of thought even more
explicitly: If workers are ready to go on strike in the
United States, and we are ready to pay them to strike, it would
be very costly. But paying workers in Indonesia or India or other
places to go on strike against the same global employer isnt
particularly expensive.
This passage is striking for its bluntness and arrogance. An
international working class movement must be based on a program
of mutual solidarity in a struggle for the liberation of all,
not one which views workers in other countries as pawns in the
pursuit of narrow national interests.
In the final analysis there is little difference between the
global unionism that Stern proposes and the notorious alliance
of the AFL-CIO with the US State Department in the creation of
stooge, CIA-run unions in Latin America and other regions to serve
US foreign policy interests.
Sterns plan
Sterns proposals for social reordering are contained in the
final chapter of his book, entitled, A Plan for a Country
that Works. None of his proposals go beyond the milk toast
reforms advanced by sections of the Democratic Party, which all
concerned know have no chance of being adopted due to the resistance
of big business to any infringement on its profits.
Stern proposes that the capitalists and their political representatives
be persuaded that these measures are in their own best interest.
He writes, My hope is that future history books will write
about this time and say, Americas leaders came forward,
Americans lifted their voices and became the wind that sailed
America to a new future(p. 183).
It is not clear to what degree this expresses self-deception
or conscious duplicity and cynicism, though long experience leads
one to suspect the latter predominates.
This view is supported by the fact that Stern bluntly admits
the worthlessness of the labor bureaucracys alliance with
the Democratic Party. He writes, Despite four Democratic
presidents since the AFL-CIOs inception, and decades of
a Democratic controlled Congress, the union movement had steadily
lost members. Hitching our fate to politics and Democratic politicians
had proved a losing strategy for American workers (p. 93).
This statement is basically correct, if one understands by
politics, capitalist politicsnot political struggle in general.
But, as in other places in the book, from a correct observation
Stern draws reactionary conclusions. He proposes to address the
failure of the unions alliance with the Democratic Partyby
seeking closer ties to the Republicans!
In a chapter titled, Pushing past partisan roadblocks,
he boasts: In 2004, SEIU was actually the largest contributor
to both the Democratic and the Republican Governors Associations
(p. 121).
While expressing dissatisfaction with the Democrats, Stern
is not seriously considering severing links to the partywhich
has long been used to block the development of an independent
political movement of the working class. In 2004 the SEIU spent
a record $65 million in the Democratic presidential campaign.
Sterns overtures to the Republicans are part of an effort
to shift the Democratic Party even further to the right. The main
mistake the Democrats have made, as far as Stern is concerned,
is that they continue to defend to a limited extent, at least
verbally, the reforms of the New Deal period.
A privileged bureaucracy
Nowhere in his book does Stern speak of the militant mobilization
of the working class. Instead he advocates toothless protests,
corporate campaigns, etc., aimed at awakening the conscience
of big business. Meanwhile behind the scenes the real meat and
potatoes business is carried out involving bartering the workers
interests to secure the needs of the bureaucracy. At times this
takes extremely cynical and unprincipled forms.
For example, in Houston the SEIU waged a year-long
campaign to convince corporate tenants and office building owners
to sign a contract for 5,300 janitors. Last November the union
hailed as a victory a deal that raises hourly wages
from $5.15 to $7.75 over three yearsroughly the amount the
employers would have to have paid anyway because of the planned
hike in the minimum wage. The workers will now have to pay union
dues out of a paycheck that guarantees wages that would leave
a family of four well below the poverty line.
Stern is aware of the dangers to the capitalist system as well
as the trade union bureaucracy posed by the growth of class polarization.
In expressing these concerns, he speaks as a representative of
the privileged, not the oppressed. Social polarization has grown
in the unions hand in hand with the rise in CEO pay and stock
prices. For example, according to financial reports filed with
the US government Stern received $249,599 in salary and expenses
in 2005. His associate, James P. Hoffa of the Teamsters, received
$297,772. Another Stern ally, Joseph T. Hansen of the United Food
and Commercial Workers, took in $336,776.
Stern apparently isnt conscious of the irony when on
page 67 he remarks about workers involved in the SEIU campaign
to organize Los Angeles home care workers, These minimum
wage earners paid union dues for ten years for the dream of having
their own organization.
The gall of such a statement hardly requires additional comment.
Sterns book demonstrates that workers cannot look to
any faction of the trade union bureaucracy to offer leadership
in the struggle against social inequality, war and class oppression.
Instead, it shows the determination of the union apparatus to
shore up the capitalist structure and stifle any independent manifestation
of the interests of the broad masses of people.
New organizations are needed based on a new leadership and
perspective. No serious struggle against social inequality can
be conducted without striking at the roots of the problem, the
capitalist profit system and its nation-state setup. This requires
the building of an independent political and socialist movement
of the working class.
See Also:
The split in the AFL-CIO
and the organization of the unorganized
[28 July 2005]
A falling out within
the US labor bureaucracy
Service workers, Teamsters split from AFL-CIO
[26 July 2005]
The split in the AFL-CIO
[12 July 2005]
Marxism and the
trade unions
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |