Tag: #StagehandView

#StagehandView: First, We (Re)Organize Ourselves …

http://www.laborarts.org/about/
http://www.laborarts.org/about/

You’ve heard me talk about organizing. A lot. I’ve written about it here and elsewhere. But I can be a little stupid sometimes, so it only just dawned on me that all the local 205 members I’ve been talking organizing with probably assume I mean the external kind where a union targets a group of unorganized workers, brings them into the union, and negotiates a new CBA.

That type of organizing is a big part of the equation. We definitely need more of it.

But there’s a more fundamental, intra-union type of organizing that has to happen first because it serves as the foundation for the external kind. This kind of drive for primary, internal organizing has to grow out of the culture of a union local. Which is probably why it only seems to happen when the members actively run things instead of sitting back and relying on their e-board to handle all the work. It manifests in well-planned (and well-executed) bottom-up contract campaigns featuring strategic collective actions that back up the representatives at the bargaining table. Another sign that a union has embodied the organizing model is the presence of a lot of diverse, pro-active committees that accomplish assigned tasks on schedule. Internal union organizing boils down to the members making their local work for them by [You’ve figured out where I’m going with this, haven’t you?] working for their local.

Don’t sneer. Sure it’s trite, but that’s because it’s basically what JFK said.

You got a problem with JFK? I mean besides his pharmaceutical and sex dependence? … Or his refusal to push civil rights legislation. … But I’m http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2011/01/20/133083711/jfks-inaugural-speech-great-but-incomplete-on-racegetting off topic.

I kind of feel like our local might be starting to move toward embracing an organizing culture. At least a little. Maybe I’m just a starry eyed dreamer, but according to President Magee, we had over 70% voter turn-out in the last election, and that was despite all of the balloting silliness. We just need to figure out how to keep up this momentum and use it to our advantage.

Like the human body, if an organization sits still for too long it calcifies and starts to decay. Entropy affects collectives as much as it does individuals. And local 205 has been sitting still for a long, long time. So we need to keep figuring out ways to lube our squeaky joints and grind away at our shared rust.

I’m a writer and an editor. That means I’ve started writing and editing for the local. It helps the union and it helps me build my online platform. Everybody wins.

What are you when you’re not a stagehand? How can your unique skill set help?

Or, even more fun, what do you want to learn how to do? Our newsletter’s layout editor, Brother Ellinger, is a great example of how a lot of times you don’t have to be qualified to start volunteering, just interested and available. You can learn on the job. Years ago when we first started Stage Call, he volunteered to do the layout because he wanted to master the program he uses to put each issue together. I’d say we all benefited.

Because it’s not just about voting, though high election turn-outs are a good thing. It’s not just about paying dues either, though the money we amass can be a great weapon. It’s about the business union system – along with the thousands of passive, seemingly helpless members it continues to create – being just as much a part of the problem as Radical Right assholes like the Koch brothers and Grover Norquist.

Unlike America’s seemingly inexhaustible ability to spawn rich, Nazi-esque dickheads, which I don’t pretend to understand or know how to curtail, union members can control how we organize our reactions to those dickheads. We’ve cowed these guys before and we’ll do it again. If we we’re willing to work for it.

Unions have always been attacked from the far right, that’s a constant. Kind of like stagehands bitching about stuff, it’ll never stop. Unfortunately that means the union reaction to it can’t either. And, worse, we will never achieve any sort of ultimate victory. All we can do is choose to fight or choose to surrender.

I agree that the neverending class conflict caused by cannibal capitalism sucks. But how’s that relevant?

#StagehandView: Buying (sort of) American Made

Everybody got the run-off election results, right? Thanks again to Sister Miller for keeping on what’s seeming to be an endless process. Anyway, the results in case you haven’t heard: Treasure, Rita Kelso; BA, Lupe Perez; Convention Delegate, Rachel Magee (with one more to be determined at the April meeting). Congratulations to all and thank you for your continuing service to the local.

So I had to go buy new general use “tennis” shoes yesterday. I went to Academy and was surprised to notice they actually had some of New Balance’s (sort of) American made lines of walking and running shoes. I went ahead and paid the premium to wear shoes with the flag under their tongues.

The whole experience left me feeling wildly conflicted. On the one hand, I was happy to be able to buy a (sort of) American made product at a semi-big box store, even if that product was significantly more expensive than its Indonesian and Chinese made counterparts. But on the other hand, I kind of hated the fact that New Balance only keeps a token level of production in the U.S. (five factories) to take advantage of suckers like me.

The shoes actually came with a little micro-pamphlet highlighting the company’s so-called commitment to the American worker. It opened by congratulating me on buying “a pair of shoes that were made or assembled” in the U.S. Literally, the first word is “congratulations.”

I don’t exactly feel cheated. Just baldly and blatantly manipulated. After all, the vast majority of the New Balance shoes sold in the world are not made in the U.S., or anywhere in the Global North. Like most so-called American companies, for the most part, only their upper management remains on this continent. While its marginally better than nothing, what New Balance is doing with its (sort of) American made shoes is really just marketing. It’s kind of like a carnie showing the crowd ahead of time that the two headed cow isn’t actually alive, that none of the freaks or wonders inside the tent are real. And I’m the rube who smiled and handed over my money anyway.

And all of that might be okay if the damn shoes weren’t so hideous to look at. They’re mostly black with neon orange highlights. Even though I’ve been assured they’re quite fashionable, I find them downright distracting. They’re just so bright. But they sure are comfy. Again, major internal conflicts.

That’s it. Except to say that it’s not looking like there’s any need for me to write that story I had talked about doing on the Atlantic City casino stagehands and their fight for fair wages. But you can get involved by joining their Facebook group at IA917.

#StagehandView: The Hope of Chattanooga

So the representation election at VW didn’t go as I’d hoped. Oh well, live to fight another day and all that other crap we tell ourselves when we lose.

It sucks, sure. But maybe the U.S. labor movement isn’t as agonal as some are intimating. I’m a week behind, but I just read Steven Greenhouse’s NY Times article about the election in Chattanooga (Feb. 16, Section A-19). He paints a pretty bleak picture of a decidedly anti-union Tennessee and greater South. And maybe he’s right. I’m sure he’s studied the problem more than me.

But he left out the part about a certain, rather contentious clause that was allegedly in the neutrality agreement between the UAW and Volkswagen. It was the clause where the UAW and VW committed to “maintaining and where possible enhancing the cost advantages and other competitive advantages that [Volkswagen] enjoys relative to its competitors in the United States and North America.”

DISCLAIMER: The previous quote is from film maker Michael Moore’s website. The links to the source material for the quoted text are not working. Nor are any of the links I recently followed to the neutrality agreement. In the days right before the election, those links had led to what was presented as a legitimate copy of that document. All I get now is a “404 error” page. Read into that what you will.

But the legitimacy of the “sell-out” clause is ultimately irrelevant because the plant floor anti-union group, No2UAW, seems to have used it to successfully make the case that the Chattanooga VW workers would have been signing on to a permanent two-tier wage situation if they voted yes. They convinced enough of their fellow workers that “maintaining and where possible enhancing cost advantages” meant keeping VW’s wages lower than the Big Three’s. It’s not like there isn’t historical precedent. The UAW negotiated two tier wage structures for their members years ago.

By itself, the controversial neutrality agreement clause might not be bad enough. But when I place it in the context of the multiple intimidation and propaganda campaigns those Chattanooga folks were enduring, I can start to understand why some who might be undecided would vote no. It’s sad to think about how little effort it takes to convince people unions suck, or at least shouldn’t be fully trusted.

I suppose you’re wondering why I put the word hope in the title of this post.

It’s this: even with all of the millions spent by the likes of Carl Rove and the Koch brothers, even with the threats from the state and local governments, even with the alleged prearranged semi-sellout by the UAW, the election in Chattanooga was decided by less than a hundred votes, 712 to 626. Mr. Greenhouse of the Times buried a hopeful little nugget under his pile of pessimism that I think bears highlighting: if just forty-four people had voted yes instead of no, that plant would be a union shop.

The people of Tennessee aren’t all anti-union. Quite the contrary; they’re organizing themselves. Private sector union density is actually increasing there, as well as in Georgia. And North Carolinians are mobilizing, too.

So, let’s not give up quite yet.

#StagehandView: Chattanooga Volkswagon Workers Decide for Themselves

Another busy week for me, so I’m sharing a second article on what’s happening right now in Chattanooga. This time it’s an opinion piece from Reuters. I think it might be particularly relevant to Local 205, given that we are currently involved in our own NLRB representation election. So, happy reading. (By the way, all of the links are the original author’s and they connect to other interesting pieces on both sides of this issue.)

To me, the most interesting point Logan hits on is the hypocrisy of the anti-union billionaires who have inserted themselves into this fight. These same Radical Right activists who normally insist that corporations should never, under any circumstances, be told by the evil federal government how to run themselves seem to have changed their tunes. Apparently what they’ve actually been saying all this time is that corporations should only be free to make choices which are in line with the Radical Right’s medieval views on employer-employee relations.

One last thing from me: don’t forget about that other election tomorrow. It’s a couple of months late, but it looks like we’ll actually get to vote on new officers. Many thanks to Sister Joan Miller for serving as the elections judge this time around. As we saw during last year’s cluster f**k, screwing up a local election is a lot easier than getting it right. -BPW

 

Why the Far-Right Fears Change in Chattanooga
Posted By John Logan On February 11, 2014 (6:49 pm).

 

On Wednesday through Friday, 1500 autoworkers at Volkswagen’s plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee will vote on whether to join the United Auto Workers union in a landmark National Labor Relations Board election. Like other U.S. outposts of foreign auto companies, the facility, which opened in 2011, has never had a union.

 

A vote for unionization at Volkswagen would be a historic victory — not only for the UAW, but for the entire labor movement. It would provide unions with a key victory in the South, even in the face of a lavishly-funded external anti-union campaign, and may lead to transformative changes in labor-management relations, especially among European-owned firms.

 

If the Chattanooga workers vote to unionize, they will provide another example that when companies remain neutral in union elections, employees usually choose unions. Instead of pressuring the employees to vote against the UAW, Volkswagen management has let workers make the choice on their own. This is exactly what should happen in union elections, but rarely does. Volkswagen would probably have recognized the union on the basis of documented interest among workers, but Republican politicians and anti-union groups such as the National Right to Work Committee (NRTWC) demanded that the company hold an NLRB election. Ironically, the NRTWC has insisted that Volkswagen provide employees who oppose the UAW with an opportunity to make their case to the workforce, something that pro-union workers never enjoy during standard U.S. anti-union campaigns.

 

Unionized workers at the Chattanooga plant would almost certainly get the first works council in the United States — a type of organization that deals with issues of employee welfare and management, such as flexibility in work schedules. Works councils, which operate at the plant level, have long been a key aspect of employment relations in many European countries. Currently, every one of Volkswagen’s 61 major production facilities outside of China has both a union and a works council, except for the Tennessee plant. A successful works council at Volkswagen may lead to other corporations adopting this innovative (for the U.S.) form of worker representation.

 

A vote for unionization would provide the UAW with a key victory in the “foreign auto transplants” — the U.S. plants of European and Asian auto manufacturers, most of which are located in southern right-to-work states. The UAW has encountered robust opposition when it has attempted to organize in these facilities. Nissan is currently resisting efforts by autoworkers in Canton, Mississippi to form a union. The company is also fighting pro-union workers in Smyrna, Tennessee, where it defeated organizing campaigns in 1989 and 2001, after it allegedly threatened job losses, plant closings, relocation to Mexico, and a loss of wages and benefits if the union prevailed. The UAW has organized in several U.S.-Japanese joint auto ventures, but not in any wholly-owned foreign automakers.

 

This time around, domestic and international allies have supported the struggles of U.S. autoworkers. The fact that Volkswagen is allowing its workers a free and un-coerced choice on unionization is in part because of support from the two million-member IG Metall, Germany’s largest union. Nissan workers have received support from unions in Brazil, South Africa, Japan, England and Australia. Civil rights, faith and environmental organizations have also assisted their efforts. If Volkswagen goes union, Nissan, Mercedes and other foreign auto transplants may soon follow suit.

 

A victory at Volkswagen would signal that the anti-union South — where elected officials have frequently joined with the business community and right-wing organizations to stop workers from organizing — might not be so solid in future years. Unions have enjoyed some important recent victories, especially among predominantly Latino workforces, such as the Service Employees International Union’s janitors’ campaign in Houston, and the United Food and Commercial Workers Union’s historic victory at Smithfield Foods in North Carolina. Union membership in the South is well below the national average of 11.3 percent, but in 2012, Tennessee had the biggest percentage growth in union membership of any U.S. state, with Georgia and Alabama not far behind.

 

Most importantly, a UAW victory would show that even billionaire anti-union zealots can be beaten. Right-wing groups are furious that Volkswagen is not fighting the UAW, so they have chosen to do so on their own. National organizations funded by the billionaire Koch Brothers and other right-wing activists have taken to the airwaves to demonize the UAW. State politicians have attempted to blackmail autoworkers to vote no by stating that Volkswagen may lose state financial support if it becomes unionized. Unionization, one elected official explained, “was not part of the deal.”

 

In their effort to whip up anti-union fervor, UAW opponents have called it the “vilest of cancers,” “Ichneumon wasp larvae,” and “black shirted thugs.” If Volkswagen workers resist this blatant attempt at intimidation by anti-union organizations, they will make clear beyond a doubt that they want UAW representation. They will have rejected the insidious lies about “Big Labor” — and the depiction of unions as narrow and self-serving — that the Koch Brothers and others have been peddling for far too long. And they will have participated in a historic union victory.

 

PHOTO:

Labourers work on the assembly line of the Volkswagen Kombi at the Volkswagen plant in Sao Bernardo do Campo December 9, 2013. REUTERS/Paulo Whitaker 

 

Article taken from The Great Debate – http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate
URL to article: http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/02/11/why-the-far-right-fears-change-in-chattanooga/

#StagehandView: Makes Me Want to Buy a Volkswagon

 

 

This article was tweeted to me a couple of days ago from the UAW. It was published Tuesday, February 11th, 2014, in the Chattanooga Times Free Press. It’s a worker’s take on why he’ll be voting yes in what could be one of the most significant union elections in recent U.S. history. That, and I’m behind schedule with pretty much everything in my life. So here, learn some potentially good news. -BPW

King: Having a voice — VW worker supports UAW

 

Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.

#StagehandView: Labor Notes, It’s Not Just for Labor Geeks Like Me

First off, comments are enabled. So dig in.labornotes.org

That said, be aware that I am the moderator of your comments. And, while I encourage a lively debate, I won’t tolerate meanness. To quote myself in an earlier Stagehand View post, “don’t be a dick.” That’s my only rule and I am the only interpreter or enforcer of that rule.  I’m not saying you can’t tell me you think I’m wrong. Quite the opposite, I hope you give full voice to your dissent from or critique of my opinions. Anything I write on this blog is fair game. But this is not the forum for any personal vendettas; if you go after individuals (especially by name) there’s a good chance your comment will not see the light of day. Like I said, my blog, my rules. Start your own if you want something different.

Oh, I guess I lied. There is one more rule for commenting: you have to register as a user of this website and give an email address to take part in the discussion. Sure you can make up a fake name and use a burner email address … if you’re too big of a wuss to stand by what you say. But I hope you don’t because that’s just not as much fun.

Otherwise, I’ve gone back and enabled the comments for all of past Stagehand View blog posts. You’re welcome to comment on those, as well as this and all future posts.

I think that’s all the housekeeping I’ve got to do.

Moving on to this week’s blog. I’m not going to lie to you.  I’ve got nothing. I’ve been loading in and teching Austin Lyric Opera‘s Tosca this week, my bathroom remodeling project sits stalled at the halfway point because our original tile guy is a horse’s ass who bailed at the last minute, and a bunch of other crap you don’t care about has happened, as well. Put simply, I’m tired this morning.

Troublemaker's UnionSo here are some links to just a few of the great articles published by my one of my favorite news sources, Labor Notes.

My favorite article from last month’s issue debunks the myth of the so called skills gap in the U.S. Don’t believe the hype. The only gap that exists is between what employers are willing to pay for highly skilled workers and what those workers are willing to work for. Another good piece from that same issue talks about how Seattle has elected a socialist city council member who ran on a tax the rich/$15 minimum wage platform. Or, in case you still think organized labor should continue its unholy alliance with the Democratic Party, you should read the article about how the unions in Lorain County, Ohio successfully fielded about two dozen independent labor city council candidates. And my last recommendation is that you read Jenny Brown’s concise recap of 2013. All in all, last year had some glimmers of hope for the American labor movement. Mostly in places where union members decided to start acting like they’re part of a social movement again.

Not sure why every union local in the country (including Local 205) doesn’t subscribe to Labor Notes. They offer steeply discounted rates for union locals that want to get the print version in bulk. I think it might make a nice (and informative) attendance prize for our monthly meetings.

That’s it for this week. I’ll have slept more by next Monday, and I’ll try to do better.

#StagehandView: General Robert Rules Again!

I'm an idiotFirst off, huge correction to an old post. It’s, what, my fourth? And I’m already correcting and retracting. How’s that for establishing credibility? In the Stagehand View dated December 23, 2013, I missed a huge typo that changed the meaning of a very important sentence. Here’s what I wrote on the day I shamed myself:

“I get the sense they feel a union member who doesn’t come to meetings is sufficiently committed to the cause.”

Here’s what I meant to say:

“I get the sense they feel a union member who doesn’t come to meetings isn’t sufficiently committed to the cause.”

The latter sentence is how the post now reads. My apologies for what must have seemed liked, at best, a non-sequitur.

It’s funny how the human eye and brain conspire to show us what we expect to see of the world. I just checked the number of times I revised that December 23rd post: I saved twelve drafts. That means I read that sentence, with its huge mistake, at least a dozen times. And I’m a pretty decent editor! Except when it comes to my own writing.

Look at that! Already bumping up against two hundred words and not even a mention of Robert’s Rules of Order. I’m getting good at this, huh?

Today’s Lesson:Robert's Rules of Order 10th Ed.

I think I promised to start describing all the different motions. So that’s what you’re stuck with today.

Business is brought before an assembly by the motion of a member. A motion may itself bring its subject to the assembly’s attention, or the motion may follow upon the presentation of a report or other communication. (p. 26, lines 14-18)

The thing to keep in mind from this quote is that whoever wrote it had trouble expressing him or herself in a written medium. …

Seriously though, it doesn’t say anything about a motion “following upon” the protracted musings of one or more members. Motions start discussions at a meeting. And usually they take the form of “main motions.” To quote Robert, “The main motion sets a pattern from which all other motions are derived.” (p. 27, lines 1-2) Most of the motions anybody ever makes at a union meeting are main motions with the intention of getting the local to do something, anything. They didn’t get dubbed ‘motions’ because they’re intended to grind the meeting to a halt, despite what you may have personally witnessed.

All of this is not to say you can’t or shouldn’t ask questions. It’s every members’ responsibility to understand what the local’s doing. And when they don’t, they should ask questions until they do. There are even parliamentary guidelines dictating how this should be done. I’m not going to talk about a single one of them. You are more than welcome to learn them and let them be your guide. But I’ve never cared enough to bother learning them. I haven’t needed to. Local 205 is a pretty small deliberative assembly with a tradition of informality at its meetings that I think fits it well. Most of the time.

As my first quote of the day indicates, motions are often responses to reports “or other communication.” For example, the education committee could give a report at a meeting highlighting the fact that we have apprentices but no apprentice training program. They could present the case that this is, at the least, an unethical stance for a union local to maintain. In response to this, a member could make a motion to immediately promote all the local’s apprentices to journeymen because it’s unfair to sentence them to three year probations without offering them the means to attain full membership status. Or, even better, the committee itself could have ended its report with such a motion. This would have cut out the need for an individual member to make it or second it. (Since a committee  is made up of more than one person, it’s always assumed it seconds any motions it makes). Then folks could talk about it and hopefully vote on it.

After that enlightened motion passed, a member could follow up by making another one to amend our constitution to delete any mention of apprentices or apprenticeships. Of course, special rules would apply to this specialized motion. For example, it would have to be in writing and be read at three consecutive meetings before we could pass it. But we’d be well on the way to giving the new VP a blank canvass on which to paint the Local 205 education program.

How do you like my hypothetical example which I made up for purely educational purposes? No hidden agendas at work here, I assure you. Well, nothing hidden anyway.

But seriously, I hope this little exploration of the main motion has helped. Look for more on Robert’s Rules of Order next week. And who knows what else.

 

#StagehandView: General Robert in Motion

Broken NutcrackerHappy Monday! I hope your holiday season is going exactly according to plan. Mine’s been lovely, relaxing, and productive all at once. Another Ballet Austin Nutcracker has come and gone, and my bank account is deceptively full.

Robert's Rules of Order 10th Ed.But enough happiness and gratitude, let’s talk Robert’s Rules of Order. No more lollygagging.

Today we’re talking about the motion, the parliamentary engine that allows us to get stuff done in spite of ourselves. The use of motions to enact the wishes of the assembled membership keeps us from doing more than one thing at a time, which is a good thing. When we’ve got a motion on the floor we have to deal with it. Admittedly, there are times when it feels like we’re not working on one item at a time (or not working on anything at all), especially when we’re hip deep in the amendments and fine details of a main motion. That’s where a strong chairperson comes in. A good chair can not only navigate those intricacies, he or she can bring the membership along for the ride. Being a presiding officer is a tough job to do well. I remember spending crazy amounts of time reading Robert’s Rules when I was president. I wonder if it makes sense to send our next chief executive and VP to parliamentary procedure class? They offer them online.

But there I go lollygagging.

One Item at a TimeBack to motions. They help us by keeping us focused on only one item of business at a time. They’re hierarchical. Certain motions take precedent over others. Some motions are debatable, some require a second and some don’t. Their interactions can get complex. Though that depth of parliamentary knowledge rarely comes into play for organizations like Local 205. It’s important to keep something in mind when learning the basics of Robert’s Rules of Order: as Brother Charlie Haymes put it, “Everything you need to know about Robert’s Rules of Order is in the first quarter inch.” He had something pithy to say about the remaining inch and a half of the book as well. But I’m pretty sure I’ve already misquoted him so I’ll stop. Even Robert’s Rules, in its preface, councils the novice to concentrate on the first five chapters. For now, just remember this about motions: A motion begins discussion, not the other way around. Do not be fooled by the deplorable habits of this local. It’s bad form to stand up and blather on about some idea you might have. Use the motion forms that I applaud the E-board for supplying and make a motion. Assuming it’s seconded, then it’s open for discussion. Not before.

Getting back to the beginning of Robert’s Rules. It starts off by defining a “deliberative assembly,” then it goes on to define it some more. It gets very in-depth. But we know “deliberative assembly” means members in good standing at an official meeting, so we’ll skip that part. Up next Robert defines more terminology, this time it’s the “Rules of Order.” [I’m telling you this stuff is riveting. I can’t believe you haven’t read it already.] The Rules of Order are not the by-laws. Ours can be found appended to our by-laws. These are simply the rules we’ve all agreed to play by as members of Local 205. For example, did you know the following was one of rules we all swore to abide by when we joined:  “refreshment, other than cold water, shall not be allowed in the headquarters of this local while the meeting is in session?” I guess we ignore this one because we don’t have an HQ. Either way, I’m pretty sure I saw a couple of boxes of donuts at the last meeting.

Seems like it might be time to take a serious look at some of our standing rules and whether or not they really serve our interests. I, for one, am proudly pro-donut!Donuts

Again you’ve let me wander completely off topic. You’ve got to keep a tighter leash on me or we’ll never get through this.

Oh well, doesn’t matter. I just noticed I’m well over five hundred words, which means I can end this post. And since I’m really not feeling it today, I will.

I kind of want a donut.

#StagehandView: There Once Was a General Named Robert…who must have been seriously OCD

Notice the hashtag (#) in the title? I’ve been tweeting pictures of various “seldom seen” stagehand views. It’s at #StagehandView. Got cool backstage pics? Tweet them there. Just remember to respect everyone’s privacy and intellectual property. And, as always, don’t be a dick.

Enough personal promotion.

Robert's Rules of Order 10th Ed.Disclaimer: I’ll be referencing the 10th Edition of Robert’s Rules of Order for anything I write here about parliamentary procedure. That’s because I happen to own the 10th Edition of Robert’s Rules of Order. There’s an 11th edition that I chose not to go out and buy. My love for my local runs only so deep.

Second Disclaimer: You should never assume what I’m saying about Robert’s Rules is true. I won’t deliberately lie, but I’m no parliamentarian. I’m just a stagehand who bought a book. The little I know I picked up from high school student council. Since then I’ve just been looking stuff up because high school quickly got to be a very long time ago, and I forgot everything.

A Justification: For years now, I’ve been listening politely [no really, I have] to well intended unionists talk about the need to increase member participation. When they say this they mean more of us should go to meetings. And I agree with them that meetings are important. It’s just that I’ve also noticed a tiny bit of an implied critique in their righteous concerns. I get the sense they feel a union member who doesn’t come to meetings isn’t sufficiently committed to the cause. And you know what, maybe that’s true. But who cares? At this point, any level of commitment to the union cause – hell, even a benign mild interest will do – should be welcomed with uncritical gratitude. This is especially true for our local. We need the unorganized stagehands of Austin much more than they need us. But I digress.

A Conclusion: Even in the best case, local 205 meetings generally suck. When they’re not boring, they often turn nasty and mean. No wonder nobody comes.

Yeah, yeah, the president could do a much better job of actually running the meetings and making people stay on topic. But that’s only a small part of the equation. What often slows everything down is a much deeper and widespread ignorance of the rules we’re all supposed to follow make our little democracy work right. Most of the membership has no idea how to correctly make a motion, much less debate or vote on one. For a bunch of people who took oaths and continue to pay their money to be a part of this institution, we sure seem committed to hamstringing ourselves wherever we can.

TeachingI still hold out hope the next VP will rally our Education Committee and create a local 205 apprentice program. But the new Veep won’t take office until the end of February.  And even then, I’m not optimistic about the chances of a parliamentary procedure class being a top priority.

So I’m going to write about Robert’s Rules of Order here. Lucky you.

To quote Robert’s Principles Underlying Parliamentary Law,

“these rules are based on a regard for the rights

of the majority,

of the minority, especially a strong minority (greater than one third),

of individual members,

of absentees, and

of all these together.” (p XLVII)

Pay attention to the order of the above list. Look who’s on top: it’s the majority. See where individuals rank?

Here’s another way of thinking about why our predecessors chose to play by Robert’s Rules of Order:

“Parliamentary procedure enables the overall membership of an organization – expressing its general will through the assembly of its members – both to establish and empower an effective leadership as it wishes, and at the same time to retain exactly the degree of direct control over its affairs that it chooses to reserve to itself.” (p XLVII)

In other words, you’re part of a democracy. You exercise your power or you lose it. That’s just the way it works.

“Ultimately, it is the majority taking part in the assembly who decide the general will, but only following upon the opportunity for a deliberative process of full and free discussion.” (p XLVII)

At least local 205 gets that last part right. We always have a “full and free discussion.”People Talking

Here’s why I’m boring you with this: All three quotes make it clear that the ultimate power always has and always will reside in a majority of the membership at a meeting. Officers and committees are nothing more than the deputies of the assembled membership.

And how do we delegate our power as a democratic assembly? Mostly, we make motions.

Now, I guess we all know what I’ll be yammering on about next Monday.

Feel free to comment on/question any of this. Just remember, don’t be a dick.

And Happy Holidays!