The strikers organized their own independent union, but the national union was able to create a split and give the authorities an opening to isolate the strikers. The Hormel strikers have not, however, given up, and a broad network of solidarity has been built up around their fight. The following article, from the November issue of Bulletin in Defense of Marxism, assesses the impact and lessons of this exemplary strike.
FRANK LOVELL
Last July, after losing control of their local union, P.9 of the United
(UFCW), to the International officialthe strikers plant in Austin, Minnesota, formed a new union -
Meatpackers Union (NAMPU). They petitioned the National Labor Relations Board for a certification elec-
The NLRB received their petitions, but they are still waiting for the election. No date is yet set.
On. August 28, officials of the UFCW announced that they had reached a settlement with
Hormel, covering workers in eight of company's plants. The contract company dictated and conforms wages to the industry reaching 10.70 dollars per
September 1988. (In
1980, workers at the Austin, Minnesota, plant were making 10.69 dollars.)
the wake of the settlement, the debate about the merits of the
P-9 strike built up steam. This debate is not limited to the various groups the radical movement or the left wing in the unions that initially supported the strike. The employing class continues to take a keen interest in the strategy and tactics of the
Labor Day
September 1, the New York Times
"Organized labor is in deep trouble on Labor Day 1986.
For most unions, however, it's still has been remade by deregulation,
8 automation and imports.
facing such realities, unions lunge for protectionist laws to hold back the tide or circle the wagons and battle it out to the end, as happened with the suicidal strike
Hormel meatpackers in Minnesota."
What the Times fears is the end which might come about if the union movement as a whole embarked on a course similar to that of P-9. It advises labor to take the route of the
GM/Saturn concessions pact with the
United Auto Workers; to endorse the School Reform Program which eliminates teachers' jobs and introduces incentive pay, following the example of Albert Shanker and the "No less is required .. if labor is once again to lead," says the Times. What they are talking about is the leadership of the Judas goat that leads the sheep to slaughter. That pretty well sums up the attitude of the employers today - at least those who are to sign contracts with the unions at all.
A senior vice-president and lawyer for Hormel, Charles Nybert,
Hormel was more willing to negotiate with the UFCW than with Jim Guyette, president of P-9, because the International had a more reasonable approach to the talks.
was not an all-or-nothing proposition," Nyberg said. "But they are hard bargainers. This is no sweetheart contract."
The labor bureaucrats themselves
It also says that the settlement carries with it "a guarantee that
Local P-9 members who remained on strike after the plant reopened earlier this year will have senioritybased preference as jobs become available at the plant." This is made up, a lie. There is nothing like this in the contract.
The same story reports that the
UFCW has filed a suit in Alameda,
California, to block a buy-out of
Safeway Stores there. Safeway owes its employees 750 million dollars in wages, vacation pay, and severance pay - according to the UFCW. They hope Safeway can become profitable again and pay the back wages. This deep concern for the financial future of the employers was expressed by
Anderson, the UFCW president who negotiated the settlement at Hormel. He just so much you can do. We believe that as business expands, [the P-9 will get their jobs back.
That Austin plant has the capacity for 2,000 to 2,500 jobs."
This is one issue in the debate the radical movement as well: Can the union movement protect its members if the system cannot provide jobs? And if it can and should, how will it get started?
### AFL-CIO bureaucrats as Lane Kirkland argue that concession-bargaining is, and must be, labor's basic strategic approach at this juncture. It is labor's duty to resolve the problems of the capitalist system.
But Kirkland hasn't a clue as to system: "Today we suffer from the consequences of one-way foreign trade the steadfast refusal of the Reagan administration to speak up for the interests of the American working people." That's what he told the Steelworkers' convention on August 25. He went on: "Unions understand need for cooperation where it is essential. We only ask that employers cooperate with us. Unfor"we find too few examples of the latter form of
This is true. Kirkland has been unable to find any segment of the employing class that will endorse
protective tariffs.
his demands
He pretends not to know that the
There are country are the product - in large
- of US capitalist investment
The so-called radicals - including that the well-being of the working class depends on the economic prosperity of the bosses, the ways to get this is through labormanagement cooperation.
union by their is that the Stalinists and the self-styled "labor left" argue, against entrenched bureaucrats, that an marched in head]
CIO if backs, employing the proper strategy,
(Perhaps will in the long run show the employpresent, the ers the evil of their ways and have them (once again) to collaborate with file movements
In the case of the CP, they have carried this approach to the extreme so that they now find themselves in the camp of the UFCW against the
P-9 strikers. The CP's line is "labor unity at all cost." A People's Daily staff writer, Bill Dennison, got so carried away with this that he wrote the following about the P-9 in
It has exposed the of 'phoney left' organizations centered around a group called Rank and
File Against Concessions, " he said.
Union.
The
"They used the legitimate struggle of the Hormel workers to launch a to split and undermine and how it is last few years:
Unionist, put that far from ment"
shattering, the the atomization, the disorganization of the union movegeois variety).
ment. This certainly does not mean that the new meatpackers' union seeks from the bosses.
the present union moveto replace ment, either. It is not a "dual" union.
The program of this new union, if and when it is finally and properly formulated, can serve as an essen-
International Viewpoint 24 November 1986 memberships. In
Kirkland spoke.
important that the
Its future and consultation main points
In this ship was the most important and farto fight Hormel and not appeal to its goodwill; to organize the struggle and carry it through to its conclusion; to win back rights as workers.
(Of course, they had to conduct this struggle according to the rules prescribed by the labor laws of this country, in particular by Taft-Hartley, the established the union movement. But in advanced the ness of themselves and their supporters point where they challenge some of the unjust laws and the self-defeating union Mass unemployment dictates the demand for jobs. It is the responsibility of the union movement to present a program to create jobs, to put the unemployed to work at union wages. This can be done through a public works program to provide the many social necessities which are now sacrificed to the war budget, as well as through a reduction of the workweek with no loss in weekly pay so the available work is divided equitably among those who need jobs.
Defend the union movement. This means organizing legal defence committees to launch a major public campaign to defend workers and union leaders victimized in the courts and on the picket lines. But it also means the beginning of a campaign to educate - both the general public and the union movement - about the necessity for workers' self-defence against police and national guard attacks.
* Working class political action.
The unions must begin to prepare the way for the organization of a labor party as the result of the struggle for jobs through running union-sponsored can- - a political struggle - didates as independents in elections.
Again, a major campaign to educate and explain the need for a new political party, one which would advocate a government run by and in the interests of working people, government which would not call out the national guard to protect scabs or break up picket lines, must be begun by the left wing of the labor movement.
This modest five-point program is a place to begin our discussion. Other points will have to be added as we go along. The militants who have today formed the NAMPU, who exist in a less well organized form in many other unions across the country, need to adopt and begin to advocate this program, or one like it, in order meet the goals which they are setting for themselves and in order to to live up to the promise which the wave of militancy in the current
US labor movement holds out.
9
overwhelming mixture of introductory to see how a broad majority of the
International Viewpoint 24 November 1986
DENMARK could march with congress delegates their eyes open straight into a trap.
The congress was a "special"
one.
It was supposed to make some clarifications of VS policy that the regular congress in the spring could not handle.
The starting point for the entire debate was two hypotheses. One was that the workers' parties (the Social Democrats, Socialist People's Party and the VS) would get a parliamentary majority in the next elections. The other was that the VS would hold the balance of power and therefore be able to sit in the driver's seat.
IN SCANDINAVIA, as in the Netherlands, there is a long experience of parties standing to the left of social democracy and yet exercising a certain parliamentary influence. This experience is most extensive in Denmark, where the social democracy was seriously discredited by where the Communist Party suffered a wartime collaboration and major split in the 1950s. Led by Aksel Larsen, a historic CP and trade-union personality, the Socialist People's Party that came out of this split absorbed some other left currents and became a significant minority force in parliament, which it remains.
the 1966 parliamentary elections, the