As promised…

…a periodic look at the musings of Tim Nesbitt, Oregon Labor Federation Prez, on the impending AFL-CIO Convention. He sets the stage...

As the convention approaches, it is clear that Sweeney has the votes for re-election. He controls the franchise in the form of the AFL-CIO name, assets and subsidiaries, which are our state federations and local labor councils. But he risks losing a critical portion of the AFL-CIO’s resources (close to 40%) if the “Change to Win” unions walk. And the “Change to Win” unions won’t just walk, because what they’ve been building as they prepare for their “strike” is beginning to look like a whole new labor federation.

…and the cast of characters. While the 400-plus delegates representing individual unions have taken up pretty clearly defined sides in either the Solidarity or the Change To Win camp, Nesbitt contrasts them with...

...the 400 or so union members who are here representing state federations and local labor councils. Few of these delegates were wearing any union’s tee-shirts at the pre-convention conferences today. And many, including me, are still deciding what amendments and resolutions we’ll support.

Maybe it's because the issues hit a little closer to home for the federation folks...

Should these unions leave the AFL-CIO, our state federations and labor councils will have to find a way to reorganize themselves to maintain the participation of all unions at the local level. Stern says that his union is willing to continue to participate in the AFL-CIO’s labor councils and state federations even if they disaffiliate at the national level. But Sweeney calls that approach “pick and choose solidarity.” So, if our unions divide into two separate federations at the national level, can they agree to work together at the local level?

My personal fear is that the advocates for division in the Change To Win coalition fancy a revival of the glory days of the CIO. Certainly the 20 years between the CIO's break from the AFL and their subsequent reunion saw dramatic changes in the labor climate and dramatic gains for workers, but when 1935 is your benchmark, it's not at all clear that we could repeat those achievements. We might as likely recreate the original conditions that made them possible.

It's good to get some perspective from an well informed, open-minded, intimately involved source. If you're interested at all in labor issues, Nesbitt's blog is essential reading for at least the next few days.