Democracy and Access Control
In a recent article for Union Democracy Review, Herman Benson and I reported on the struggle by Operating Engineers union members to maintain open access to their independent websites. (Operating Engineers defend their internet rights). -- Richard Dorrough posted about this case before.
The International executive board of the Operating Engineers (IUOE) has instituted a new policy that would force all members who run websites that engage in campaigning for a candidate for union office to restrict access to those sites to IUOE members only. Members have challenged the policy, filing suit in federal court. There's a lot at stake -- should unions be able to control the access to their members' independent websites?
The article explains the situation, so I won't repeat that here. It also touches on the legal questions involved. The LMRDA (Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act) protects the free speech rights of unionists even when that speech takes place "outside" the union. This right is well established offline: to take one example, members and officers of TWU Local 100 in New York City have been engaged in a vigorous debate via the pages of The Chief-Leader (one of the best labor papers that, sadly, restricts online access to subscribers; non-subscribers can see articles four weeks after publication). Now it is being tested in cyberspace.
It is not surprising that union officials feel threatened by the power of the internet (see the Operating Engineers' staff attorney's remarks about this), nor that their response is to try and stifle it. The IUOE policy is another example of officials trying to win back in cyberspace autocratic powers they have lost in the offline world. Lamentable, and worth fighting, but nothing new.
Unfortunately, the IUOE officials have not thought of making their own official websites more democratic -- with member blogs, or candidate forums, or campaign videos from all candidates.
For me the article raises an interesting side issue: not only are would be autocrats turning to access control, some reformers are doing it too. I think the adoption of blogs and content management systems is facilitating the restriction of access, not just on official union websites -- where it often makes sense (think of an online bargaining committee chat) -- but on independent member websites as well.
Many such websites are now using access controls; some require users to register for an account before being able to post comments or participate in forums. Some restrict all access to registered users. (E.g. www.ibewtravelers.net) Of course, website operators have every right to restrict access, but before we click the button to make content available to registered users only, we should ask ourselves why.
I think one of the best contributions of the internet to the movement(s) for democracy and reform is the creation of a common space in which the many local discussions can be found and from which a common discussion may be able to emerge. The fact that we can survey the discussions among rank-and-filers across the movement is a powerful new tool for communication and potential organizing that didn't exist before.
Let's keep the discussion open. First, by preventing union officials from undercutting it, second by inhibiting the urge to restrict access to members only (go easy on the access control), and third by embracing the culture of openness and transparency, using the tools to make it easier to share and communicate across the lines rather than harder.
A practical suggestion. All independent websites should have and share RSS feeds, and we should build some kind of uber feed to incorporate them so that the many conversations can be pooled and distributed.
- Matt Noyes's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1352 reads
culture of secrecy
There is a big culture of secrecy in unions and
this is one of the many places it is evident. I'm not saying
they're completely wrong necessarily; I'm just saying I found it to be a signature property.
For example once I was secretary of a local and the paid staff representative hired by the state level organization would not tolerate me having a laptop in the meeting because he felt I could "reveal secret strategy". It was absolute pure arrogance on his part, and nonsensical
as I could write down strategy too. (Or have a secret microphone straight to management :-) Certainly the constitution did not bar the secretary from keeping minutes; it in fact demanded it. Similarly this staff person was extremely concerned as to what someone could say in a newsletter. In fact he wanted all newsletters to be reviewed by him before publishing and he was extremely picky about the layout "looking professional" besides checking every word for acceptability. Micromanagement of any newsletter articles cured everyone from writing for it except for the vague chirpy boilerplate coming from the international press releases about some campaigns 2000 miles away that our audience cared little about.
If a member were to talk to a legislator they should check with the staffer for "intelligent talking points" before they could possibly say some free-ranging thing that was not approved. All testimony at hearings was pre-discussed and critiqued and rehearsed by pre-approved speakers. They couldn't prevent but they certainly didn't want people just showing up out of the blue and speaking their mind unscripted and unrehearsed. So a way to do that was to not
advertise hearings to the membership and certainly not to the public.
Where this stuff mostly comes from (albeit we definitely did have a PhD in Labor studies know-it-all 3-piece-suiter staffer who made much more money than many people in the union paying dues) I think is a long long tradition of keeping things secret that is deeply imbedded in the union culture so you can get the effect that you're dealing with the CIA or some covert group like that. It may not be what one expects or finds appealing. I think it's good for people to realize that that's the mindset their dealing with.
I think there are really 3 basic factors at work here:
1. The corporate branding product advertisement mindset
(everything that comes out of unions has to be consistent
with the brand and sold via the preordained strategy concocted by consultants (It's just like selling paper towels only it's a union; if we spend enough money on good enough branding and advertising this will fly.)
2. the real possibility of enemy agents in the union and
past bad incidents where someone used some information against the union. Maybe they happened in 1988 but their specter may still haunt communications.
3. union members complaining about stuff coming from the union. If you don't communicate what you're doing; they can't complain. Everyone in a union is not necessarily of the same mind. When all else fails people will attack based on quantity or other superficial issues. Too much email; too
many newsletters; web site "doesn't look professional", "web site is "too busy". Don't like the grammar in the newsletter. A couple perfectionists and/or
'I must have a tidy mailbox' types can really frost communications. One concept that needs to get across to
unions is that there are penalties for not communicating to the membership and even the public. They have to know that
there are members who are teed off they didn't hear about something; couldn't participate in a meeting.
Access Control
The move to restrict rank and file content is nothing more than a clear and blatant attack on free speech. You can turn it. Polish it and make excuses for it but the the underlying truth is there. The truth is arrogance and desperation.
Union officials such as Giblin and Hanley of the Operating Engineers and Puffy Hill from the Electricians International are a fine example of the arrogance factor. These little piss ants actually believe that they have the right to regulate free speech. I would hope that all good Union men can see the absurdity in this. This attitude is not unique to these clowns but appears to be the norm in most trade Unions. I call it the booga booga factor. Members have become so brainwashed as to the imagined power of these insignificant little piss ants that these Union Officials have placed themselves in the same league as the Pope and the President. It has become obvious they believe their own propaganda. Have we forgotten that these fools are nothing more than simple human beings like you or I. They do not hold sway over life and death. They have no special powers and are certainly not the boogie men. If they exercise what little authority they do have and attempt to abuse you as a member it is quite easy to exercise your rights to teach them a lesson. Most Union Officers reached their positions not based on IQ,hard work or talent but by the buddy system. Most are so stupid it is almost like shooting fish in a barrel when bringing actions against them. If they did not have legal council and spell check they would not be able to function at all. I have asked our Union President to have his legal team proof read his letters BEFORE he sends them to me so that he can pretend he is NOT ignorant. If Rank and File members would stop and look past the booga booga factor they would be amazed how ignorant these people really are.
Which brings us to the desperation factor. The thing these Union officials fear the most is the truth. They do not want the average member to know it. They do not want them to spread it. They do not want them to post it on the internet. The Internet has made them desperate men. Now that Rank and File members have a medium to gather the truth and present it to the world on the internet these clowns are scared to desperation. The average member can now show the world abuse of Union funds. Ridiculous and outrageous salaries. Paid golf days. Multiple Pensions. Trips to Florida resorts and Vegas Casinos and in general verification of what the General Public and the Non Union sector have thought all along. The Non Union sector and General Public has always argued that the Unions are rampant with bloated fat cat officials who line their pockets while robbing the rank and file member. Now the proof of this is online and being brought to the attention of the Public and other members. Do these fat cat Union officials take action to clean up their own house? No. They take action to cover it up by restricting the content of Rank and File sites and sanctioning free speech. Will they stop abusing Union funds? No. Will they stop robbing members? No. Will they stop spending member’s money on trips to Vegas, Atlantic City and Florida Resorts? No. Instead they will spend millions trying to hide it better. They are desperate men who are not going to stop stealing from the Unions but make every attempt to cover it up. Like rats afraid of the light they want the illumination of the internet shut off so they can go back to business as usual.
What shall we do as Rank and File men?? We shall see to it that if the banner falls than another tradesman shall pick it up and move forward. Not as a separate Union tradesmen but united in solidarity fighting a common enemy. I pledge to provide support to any fellow tradesman who is shut down from telling the truth by unscrupulous and desperate Union Officials. I will host web sites as well as provide software and training needed to build a web presence. I will help to post any factual information a brother is trying to put out in the fight to take back our Unions and return them to the Rank and File member. I pledge to lend support to any legal action taken to stop corrupt and arrogant Union Officials who try to silence our free speech rights. I pledge not to be silenced. I pledge to work with anyone who sees the benefit of creating a centralized web site where all tradesmen can come to present their information without fear of reprisal. I pledge NOT to be coerced into restricting access to my web sites The Internet is a tool which we must use to expose these officials and return our Unions to the members. By exposing them and making it difficult for them to continue abusing Union funds and power we are indeed doing our duty as Union members. We cannot let them gain a foothold in their attempt to silence this medium
access control
Oh good for you!
Now if we could just get in touch with the pro-union, pro-collective bargaining sides of our personalities, get them to come out of the woodwork too. Not a bunch of finely tuned mealy mouthed marketing consultants in the Internationals, but genuine pro-union testimonials from real people. The problems being of course as the anti-reformers ceaselessly put out, criticism of unions can and will be used by anti-union people.
I found personally having gotten driven out of my local for not showing the proper regard for top-down leadership, that it is not easy to be a cheerleader for those particular people :-) However I still retain belief in unionism and the belief that management of the workplace could be improved by unionism.
Promoting unions is *not* a matter of getting everyone to wear the right color of tshirt and emblazoning the official logo and the official saying on everything. I don't think promoting unions is, as many unions would have it, abject approval of anything "union leadership" could come up with.
There is a crying need in my view for getting back to the roots of unionism, what are unions trying to accomplish, and recent examples of them accomplishing such goals. No famous strikes of the 1930's. We need NOW. The labor history contingent is burying unions under the veneer that they are long extinct. Let's say no to history and develop a platform for unions now! When our local was trying to organize to overthrow union-preventive legislation in our state it was nearly impossible to find any "proof" of the value of collective bargaining or other positive material regarding unions. One reason for this is that research about unions has been exclusively relegated to the ever-shrinking pool of university labor relations departments who publish their research in utterly inaccessible venues. An article published in a hugely expensive academic journal subscribed to by only a few universities in the US is basically completely worthless. No one can access it. Research solely presented at conferences is similarly nearly useless. If it costs $2000 plus a week of personal vacation for someone to go to that east coast conference, which will just be preaching to the converted big wheels anyway, that is not going to do anything for organizing. Those labor academics just sail from conference to conference speaking to their same old collegues. It's not doing a bit of good toward organizing.
Unions have to say no the legacy expert culture of labor relations departments. We need to stop waiting for some PhD's to tell us what to think. This does not mean however that no one needs convincing about unions. We do need research reports that show the benefits of unionism on
wages,benefits, working conditions, job security, etc.
But they need to be accessible to people who are actually trying to organize. The best place for this material would be on a freely accessible web site.