Copley News Service, October 31, 2006, Tuesday

Copyright 2006 Copley News Service
All Rights Reserved
Copley News Service

October 31, 2006 Tuesday 12:43 PM EST

SECTION: DAILY NEWS


HEADLINE: Labor unions push aside grudges to win key battles later

BYLINE: Finlay Lewis

DATELINE: PLYMOUTH MEETING, Pa.

BODY:
Eight men and women were huddled over a bank of phones one night last week, calling well past the supper hour in hopes of mobilizing an army of union members to vote next month.
Overseeing the operation were Alicia Smith and Dan McGrogan, allies despite being on opposite sides of a civil war among America's unions that once seemed to threaten organized labor's political clout. Their partnership helps explain why labor remains a potent force in the Democratic Party's drive to seize control of one or both houses of Congress when voters go to the polls Nov. 7.
As unions seek to capitalize on an election that could produce a Congress more sympathetic to their agenda, they have set aside their grudges in hopes of winning future legislative battles over the minimum wage, health care, pensions and Social Security.
In part, the effort may be simple opportunism. But the alliances also are testimony to the durability of long-standing partnerships among local unions that predate the rupture of the AFL-CIO labor coalition.
"We have relationships at the street and shop level that go back many, many years," said McGrogan, a strategic programs coordinator, 48, for Local 1776 of the United Food and Commercial Workers. "It isn't whether we agree or disagree with the split. It's simply that in this election, we're going to work together."
Smith, 26, an AFL-CIO operative, said: "At this level and this point in the election cycle, it's all about solidarity. We're all a part of the same labor movement, and that really resonates with all of our members."
The schism, the result of long-standing policy differences and personal rivalries, became a reality a year ago when the UFCW and six other major unions, including the Service Employees International Union, left the AFL-CIO and set up the rival Change to Win coalition. As a result, the AFL-CIO saw its membership drop from 13 million to 9 million workers.
At the heart of the dispute was the complaint by the Change to Win unions that the giant federation was investing too heavily in politics and not enough in expanding organized labor's ranks.
The split triggered speculation within union and political circles that organized labor's ability to mobilize its members on Election Day. The loser would be the Democratic Party, which over the years has grown reliant on the union movement to get blue-collar supporters to the polls.
The result seems to be the opposite, said Richard Hurd, a labor expert at Cornell University. In the industrial states of Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania, scene of some of the nation's most hotly contested races, labor's political activism may actually be at a new high, Hurd said.
"You have an increased overall effort because Change to Win is there also, pushing their members in a coordinated way - and with more coordination and involvement of the different unions than historically has been the case," he said.
Helping to bridge the gap at the local levels has been the "solidarity charter program," launched by the AFL-CIO in the months after the split. The charters offered Change to Win unions a way to re-establish ties with the federation at the state and local level.
The unions will be trying to blunt a Republican turnout effort that in the 2002 congressional election and in the presidential race two years later played a key role in keeping President Bush in the White House and his GOP allies in charge of Congress. The GOP effort will be augmented by Republican-leaning business groups, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has spent millions to mobilize its network.
Backed by a $40 million war chest, the AFL-CIO says it is targeting 13.4 million voters, counting retirees, family members and participants in an affiliated program known as Working America.
"We have a huge universe we're talking to," said Karen Ackerman, the political director of the AFL-CIO. "Where we can work with the CTW unions, we want to do that. But we feel (this) is the biggest, most substantial turnout program of anyone in this election."
CTW officials declined to discuss the organization's voter-mobilization budget. Gregory Tarpinian, CTW's executive director, described the coalition's affiliates as being among the most politically active in the labor movement and said they would be "as or more active than they have been in elections past."
In some areas, the two sides appear to be pooling their resources and membership lists, while in other instances local unions are concentrating on rallying their members.
In Pennsylvania, with 1.4 million union voters, the process of integrating the AFL-CIO and Change to Win programs appears to have been smoother than in other states, such as Michigan, where over half the CTW unions have not used the solidarity charter process to reconnect with the AFL-CIO.
"We tend to be more parallel than merged," said Mark Gaffney, head of the Michigan AFL-CIO.
A cooperative effort has also emerged in Minnesota's urban centers. But Kristin Beckmann, executive director of the SEIU State Council, a major CTW unit, said, "It has been a little logistically challenging to figure out all the details."
The complexities posed by the Election Day effort have caused some labor officials to worry that their ability to influence the 2008 presidential election may be in jeopardy.
"If there is any message that comes out of Minnesota, it's that we should all be in the same house," said Ray Waldron, head of the Minnesota AFL-CIO. "We should do it together."
Organized labor's importance as a political bloc is much diminished from what it was 50 years ago, when unions represented 35 percent of the work force. The figure now is 12.5 percent if government workers are included and 7.9 percent if they are not.
But political experts say that the unions can still be formidable, particularly when united.
"If the intensity of their leaders translates into anything, they are really into this race," said Terry Madonna, a Pennsylvania pollster. "Their organizations aren't what they were 30 to 40 years ago, but that's not to say they can't mobilize if given a chance. And given this environment, they are pretty mobilized."