Another Union Leaves the AFL-CIO

[legion]

Laborers break ties to AFL-CIO

By Chris Anderson
canderson@pantagraph.com

BLOOMINGTON - Members of six labor unions Tuesday ended their affiliation with the AFL-CIO by forming the National Construction Alliance.

David Penn, of Bloomington-based Laborers International Union Local 362, said buildings and trade members will officially sever the ties March 1. Leaders of the laborers, carpenters, operators, bricklayers, iron workers and teamsters made the decision while attending a Laborers Tri Fund meeting regarding benefit packages in Los Angeles.

"We were at the door. We had to decide whether to walk in the door or out of it. We've got a whole new house of labor," said Penn of Bloomington. "It will be unionism like it was a long time ago."

Tuesday's action grew out of a movement last October by teamsters, laborers, food and commercial workers, food workers, service employees and UNITE HERE to form a new labor federation called Change to Win Coalition. All groups except the laborers ended their AFL-CIO affiliation at that time.

Penn said the new labor group will mean increased market share for laborers, increased training and added membership. National Construction Alliance members decided to dump "antiquated" union guidelines used by the AFL-CIO and adopt a per capita weighted voting system.

Job limitations to change

Jurisdiction issues that dictate which jobs laborers can perform also will change. Penn said the move will allow contractors more freedom in which workers they use.

"We've been talking with the contractors association since last July. They need to make a profit. They don't need to worry about jurisdictional issues," said Penn. "We will continue to gain market share. We will recruit more people and put more people to work. If we meet contractors' needs of building faster and more efficiently, they will continue to bid and invest in our training."

Additional training will be available to laborers through partnerships among smaller groups of union members who have lacked financing in the past for training, Penn said. Members also may be cross-trained to serve on composite job crews, he added.

"Our political agendas remain the same (as AFL-CIO). We have a wonderful relationship with the local and state AFL-CIO. We want to continue that. We just believe we can do some things better. Within a short time, we will be as big as the AFL-CIO," said Penn, who expects to meet with Twin City laborers early next week. By April 1, the new unions will apply for federal, sanctioned charters.

Did I misread, but it seems one of the major sticking points here was that current union rules prevent workers from taking on a variety of jobs? Seems the unions themselves want more flexibility with their workers.

[Superman]

You heard right. This is an internal family squabble/shakeout that probably needs to happen. It's not so much about exiting the AFL-CIO as it is about exiting the Building Trades Department. Carpenters have been gone for a while and this latest move has been anticipated. Those major crafts (Laborers, Carpenters and Operators especially) are now positioned to disregard long-established jurisdictional guidelines in the interest of serving the contractors that employ their membership.

This is appropriate, at least in some ways. Union membership has fallen, and rolls do not justify separate leadership and overhead for two or three dozen crafts. In the end, some unions will be swallowed up by others. Contractors will benefit, at least in some ways.

Many of the skills that justified those second and third tier crafts are no longer used. Plasterers who know how to make rozettes on ceilings are 80+ years old. Today, rosettes come in a box and are glued on if necessary.

It's been an interesting squabble and will continue to be interesting. It's a "land grab." that's the internal view.

Externally, there will be better "one stop shopping" for contractors, but be careful what you wish for. These major crafts, after swallowing the smaller ones, will be organizations that large contractors will have to deal with. For everything from tying rebar to roofing to concrete finishing to steel erection to taping/mudding/painting to ..... Construction labor is not exactly unskilled. Not even close. One worker is not going to have all these skills. So, the Carpenter and Laborer unions will be like Labor Ready. Labor brokers. This is why there is such mention of training in the article.

[legion]

Thanks for the clarification, Supe. Most of my issues with unions center on their frequent refusal to streamline or insistence on sticking to outdated rules. I read this article and thought to myself if this union pulls this off successfully, they've ensured their survival and relevance for a few years (until the next paradigm shift). This kind of thing must be done continually. I see this as a very positive development.

[Eric 951]

The biggest problem now is that unions are no longer bound by "traditional" AFl-CIO rules regarding jurisdictional work claims. So, for instance at a job-assignment meeting, you could see the Laborers laying claim to everything on a project from concrete to wiring to ironwork. Same can be said of the other trades--this is going to create real headaches when you are installing something like an electric wall box exhaust fan --under current rules, depedning upon the area, the following can lay a legit claim on that type of work--tinknockers, electricians, ironworkers, and mechanical. Now laborers, carpenters, operators, masons, etc. CAN lay claim--of these groups the laborers seem the most likely to make a 'work grab" and expand their presence to all kinds of work--which sucks.

I see this honeymoon ending very, very, badly as soon as trades start getting their "traditional" work claims tramped upon.

Why pay a tinknocker 25/hr when the laborer journeyman rate is 18?

It will be interesting to see what happens and who allys with whom.

[Superman]

Yep, you guys understand. Yes Legion, in a way this is a good thing. It is necessary. And logical.

But it's logical in the same way that Spock's fiance chose the young local stud at the wedding ceremony and had Spock and Kirk fighting to the death (I wonder how many people are going to have any idea what I just said). The Laborer and Carpenter unions stand to win the land grab game. Unfortunately yes, this is largely because they are the lowest common denominator.

And once they are done, the will have some significant control over the construction industry. At a time when the nation is likely to wake up, smell some coffee and notice that there is a TON of infrastructure work that is needed, and there is a shortage of skills out there to service that work. These unions will be the only game in town. Be careful what you wish for.

[legion]

I see what you are saying Eric. However, this also frees a contractor to hire who does the best work, not who was assigned jurisdiction for that work. I'm not saying that contractors will do that, just that it gives that freedom.

[Eric 951]

Originally posted by legion
I see what you are saying Eric. However, this also frees a contractor to hire who does the best work, not who was assigned jurisdiction for that work. I'm not saying that contractors will do that, just that it gives that freedom.

True, but it also means "skilled" craftsmen are going to feel the crunch. Generally, Laborers are the "lowest common denominator" on a jobsite--not much skill/training involved in becoming a laborer--can you sweep a broom, can you dig a hole, can you carry things....when contractors start bidding work, they are generally going to go with the cheapest labor source--to get the low number. For the most part, right now that is the laborers union--. (obviously this won't occur with things like wiring a building or welding)
Hopefully what this will lead to is increased efficency in the skilled trade unions. They should begin to realize that a contractor is more likely to hire a laborer to tie rebar, shovel concrete, or even drive a machine rather than an ironworker, mason, or operator.
However, what it also may lead to is fighting amongst the trades--especially if on a large jobsite, there is one contractor who is using all masons for his scope, while another contractor on the same site is using a composite crew of masons/laborers--while there are masons sitiing in the bench in the hall.
Right now I am keeping an open mind, but I am very interested to see how this will all play-out when the honeymoon period is over.

[alf]

Why do we still have Unions?
What purpose do they serve the economy and society today?

[Superman]

Me too, Eric. I'd only point out that the lowest common denominator is not what every contractor chooses. Plenty of research indicating that the wage paid is one of the least relevant considerations. Many contractors understand that if you want to be efficient and on time, you use workers who know the job. The last thing you want is to pay a crew of six folks for a day to tie rebar, find out they did it wrong, then have a crew of three folks for two days, one to undo the bad work and one day to do it right. You've lost two days and nine days' worth of pay.

Let's not forget that direct wages, including benefits, are usually somewhere around 20% of the cost of a project. Never more than 30%. The real trick is to get the right people on the job. Construction labor is simply NOT unskilled. Brooming and carrying, sure. But laborers also perform some functions that are neither simple or easy.

Alf, you can look this up. If you don't understand why workers pool their clout by forming labor unions, then you probably need to do some reading.

[Rick Lee]

Originally posted by alf
Why do we still have Unions?
What purpose do they serve the economy and society today?

They provide a legal means by which Dems can extort money from people. Their compulsory dues go overwhelmingly to Dems, regardless of their members' personal political views.

[alf]

Originally posted by Superman


Alf, you can look this up. If you don't understand why workers pool their clout by forming labor unions, then you probably need to do some reading.

Actually i have, but i am wondering if Unions have outlived their usefulness in our economy. Many of the original goals of the unions have already been legislated into law. Child labor, min wages, worker's rights etc. Now it seems to be a drag on a capitalist economy like ours.

[WaA420]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by alf
[B]Why do we still have Unions?

Thats simple, so the union guy can pay out $hit loads in union dues and the BA can drive around in a new suv and not answer his cell phone when you need him.

[alf]

You know come to think of it, the Unions should start setting up shop in India and China. Improve working conditions and at the same time increase their labor costs to parity with ours.

Waw, what is a BA?

[WaA420]

BA = business agent.
When you have a problem you call the hall and tell your BA. Then they mosey on down to the job and tell you to quit doing what ever it was you were doing to get in the situation you're in.

I'm just kidding, I've been a dues paying member of SMWIA local 66 for nine years and would NOT ever go rat for any reason.

Anyone that has to ask what the benefits of being union are just go back to sleep and let you employer keep taking advantage of you.

Thats why it is called a UNION and not A SCARED LITTLE SHEEP IN THE CORNER.

[Superman]

Thanks, WaA420. The rest of these guys who think unions are just a hindrence to corporate profits are probably also the guys who think WMD were found and that we will soon have scared the terrorists into not being angry any more. Employers would like to simply dictate wages, benefits and working conditions. Trouble is, in America we have freedom. ....for those who understand what that is.

Frankly, I regard Local 66 as one of the very fine locals. The last BM was simply awesome. KA. Done right, union leadership improves the entire industry and is a huge boon to employers. The current guy, CM, is good too.

[yellowline]

Originally posted by Superman
Done right, union leadership improves the entire industry and is a huge boon to employers.

Done right. That's the qualifier. Do you think the UAW president is doing all he can to ensure that GM and Ford stabilize and have jobs to offer, while maintaining a living wage standard for the workers? I don't. I think they should look for compromise, regardless of whose fault it is for the company's woes. The union is the body that needs jobs, NOT the employer. If the union gave management breathing room, maybe they could fire the incompetent ones in management, redesign vehicles, and get their act together. We'll probably never find out until it's too late, though.

The "us-against-them" mentality that I've seen (as a union household member) encourages class warfare. That's entirely unproductive. Unions are there to mediate: to provide better conditions and high wages, while ensuring that there ARE jobs to be had; not sending them to other countries by being notoriously difficult to deal with or demanding too much.

I also like how union members strike out against dissidence or anything contrary to the party line. But yet they're "fighting to take America back." If members in my dad's local knew who who we were and how I'm speaking out against his union, I'm sure he and I would suffer consequences for it. He buys the party line, though. Some of it is good, too much of it isn't.

[Superman]

Agreed. It looks as if there are humans on both sides of the Labor/Management table. And politics and greed. That's expected. What is surprising and disturbing are the folks who suggest that since we have greed and irresponsibility on both sides of the table, the solution would be to get one of the parties out of the way.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Superman
Agreed. It looks as if there are humans on both sides of the Labor/Management table. And politics and greed. That's expected. What is surprising and disturbing are the folks who suggest that since we have greed and irresponsibility on both sides of the table, the solution would be to get one of the parties out of the way.

Ya, get the union thugs and their mob-like bosses out of the picture...That way we may get less outsourcing, more American jobs, greater accountability of lazy employees, and better products for a cheaper price.

[NICKG]

be glad you don't have to deal with the UAW or the CAW. they make stuff so diffucult and complicated that they will be luck if they have jobs in the next few years. A non member(engineer) cannot go in our plant and get a part from a bin to look at for any reason, to accomplish this, he has to go to the union foreman in HIS office, fill out some forms and then wait for him to assign a union member the task. the union member must then accompany and APPROVE anything that is said or written in regard to that particular sample, copies have to be given to all union hierarchy and approved before he (the engineer) can call me back on something...avareage time to do this? 3-5 days. I can do the same thing here in the pdc in 5 minutes....

[Rick Lee]

Nick, that reminds me of some of my dad's stories from when he worked at Tex. Inst. He's a pretty mechanically inclined chem. engineer and more than once was warned not to attempt to repair things of his that broke, even those he had a hand in designing.