Reply #16: If it were my union, I'd be pissed. [View All]

Not On My Shift
by izarradar, Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 10:00:25 PM EST

I'm a card carrying union gal, a proud member of the striking WGA ("We write. You wrong"). I learned about
respecting the power of the rank and file from my father who taught me never to cross a picket line, and from my own days of walking a line I learned to love the rank and file as brothers and sisters. So every time a union endorses a candidate I pay special attention because I value the voices of union members.

Senator Obama received an important endorsement the day after he lost the New Hamphire primary. The Culinary Workers Local 226 in Nevada announced that he was their candidate of choice. I was impressed by the endorsement, and respectful of the 60,000 hard-working men and women who voted for it. The rank and file had spoken, and Obama was their man, I thought.

Turns out I was wrong.



Unions use various ways to decide upon an endorsement. Sometimes it's a questionnaire, or maybe a ballot. Other times it evolves out of meetings. In most unions, the leadership will have the final say, but not before consulting with the rank and file. This isn't the process the Culinary Workers Local 226 used to make its endorsement of Senator Obama. The rank and file wasn't involved in the decision at all.

And now members are pissed.

Channel 8, Eyewitness Now reported from Las Vegas, NV (1/11/08):

http://www.lasvegasnow.com:80/...

Eve Berkstresser is one of more than 60,000 culinary union members statewide. She and a handful of others picketing said they disagree with how the union leaders chose to endorse Senator Barack Obama for president.

"They shouldn't be endorsing anyone unless the members have a chance to speak. But they haven't done that. They did it on their own," said Berkstresser.

The statement from Culinary Staff Director Ted Pappageorge was this:

"Our members have always had their favorites -- we all do. But in the end our members understand about division and weakness and unity and strength," said Pappageorge.

I'm not sure exactly what that means, are you? More importantly, I'm not sure the rank and file understands what that means. But did Pappageorge include the membership in this decision by taking a vote?

While the union leadership says they believe their members are unified in the decision, they told us they did not poll their membership.

So excuse me, I don't want to jump to conclusions (unlike Pappageorge jumping to conclusions about his rank and file), but are they basing this endorsement on what? Some crystal ball? Tea leaves perhaps? Tossing a coin? Call me old-fashioned, but when you want to know what your membership is thinking on something as important as who should be President, shouldn't you simply print up ballots and let EVERYONE have a voice?

What's the big deal, you might ask? The union leadership can't force a member to honor the endorsement of Senator Obama. If a member wants to vote for John Edwards, or Senator Clinton, they're free to do so. This is a democracy, right? The secret ballot protects our identity and our choice.

Well, that's a problem.

This is an open caucus. Union members will be standing in the same room with other union members. Or maybe even their shop steward. Or their foreman. Or possibly even a union official. Everyone will know which candidate you're backing. And if you're a member of Culinary Workers Local 226, and you don't caucus for Senator Obama???

That could make for a long shift on Monday.

If it were my union, I'd be pissed. And I'd use my voice to let the union officials know it. You don't pay union dues for this kind of forced intimidation. I'd let my brothers and sisters of the rank and file know this: I won't tolerate political bullying.

Not on my shift.