A deceptive appearance is given of treating things seriously without actually doing so. In the process a plug is gotten in for a basic norm of the capitalist rat race. People are taught that only one thing counts in all situations: What’s in it for Number One?

With this approach the hucksters quickly get to the nub of the dispute between Walter Reuther and George Meany in the top bureaucracy of the AFL-CIO. When the two labor federations merged in 1955, Meany headed the AFL and Reuther, the CIO. Meany got the top spot in the merger, while Reuther had to play second fiddle. So--Reuther wants Meany’s job.

Only Reuther and Meany themselves can be fully aware of their personal aspirations in the current dispute and, for others, such aims are of no importance. It is the larger aspects of developments within the AFL-CIO that count. Clues to really important matters in the dispute can be found by probing into various key questions, for example: the present situation and needs of the AFL-CIO membership; Meany’s policy and what Reuther has to offer in its place. Before examining these questions in particular, a few generalizations seem in order.

The overall picture indicates that a palace revolt is developing within the AFL-CIO bureaucracy, one similar to the Abel-McDonald dispute in the steel union. As was the case with McDonald, Meany’s policies have gotten dangerously out of gear with the needs of the union membership. Among other bureaucrats, such as Reuther, a feeling is growing that something must be done about it or the whole bureaucracy will face a rank-and-file uprising. When examined from this viewpoint, Reuther’s present line--although failing to meet the workers’ needs--reflects at least a distorted image of significant new labor trends.

Working people are showing increased concern and resentment over losses in buying power because of [Vietnam] War-inflated prices. They are worried about the growing gap between earnings and take-home pay due to tax gouging, imposed mainly to finance an unpopular war. As a result they tend to brush aside [President] Johnson’s "guideposts" and press demands for "catch-up" pay increases. There is also growing pressure for an escalator clause in union contracts to keep wages abreast of rising living costs.

Other key issues impelling workers toward struggle are speedup and bad working conditions, and in some industries they are rapidly being automated out of jobs. Grievances arising over these general issues continue to mount, clogging the present defective apparatus for handling them. Under the impact of these frustrations workers have shown growing militancy across the last year, and the trend is spreading throughout the class....  
 
Demagogic stand
Like a Democrat running for office, Reuther seeks to divert political attention from basic class issues by stressing reform aims that lend themselves to tokenism and gradualism. He does so through demagogic stress on important social needs such as improved education, social security, and health care; also on problems like urban renewal, air and water pollution, etc. This in turn gives him a bridge toward collaboration with liberal capitalist politicians, a subject he has failed to mention in criticizing Meany’s policies.

The fact is that Reuther has no important differences with Meany on the question of keeping labor enslaved in capitalist politics. At the 1966 UAW convention he denounced any attempt to break away from the Democratic Party, asserting that he was "not going to flirt with that kind of reckless, dangerous idea of forming labor’s own political party." He said, "Labor must seek a basic realignment of the two major political parties, which would get all the reactionaries in the Republican Party where they belong and make the Democratic Party a truly liberal people’s party." This "realignment" fantasy is simply a demagogic device to keep labor tied to a party run by a gang of strikebreakers, racists, and warlords.

On every major count Reuther’s policies show that AFL-CIO members would have nothing going for them in any "democratic" debate he might have with Meany inside the Executive Council. What the workers need is a genuine left wing in the unions based upon rank-and-file militants. To be effective the left wing should be constructed around a program of concrete demands. These should include:

Full and unfettered membership discussion of all problems confronting the workers, and rank-and-file control over all union affairs.

A cost-of-living escalator in union contracts to offset rising prices.

A reduced workweek with no cut in pay. Unemployment compensation at union wages for all jobless persons eighteen or over, whether or not they have been previously employed.

Equal rights in the unions and on the job for Black workers and for members of other minorities. Full union support to the civil rights struggle as a whole.

Bring the troops home now. Use the money spent for war to meet social needs here at home.

Build an independent labor party based on the unions.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home