Mon, 27 Jul 1998 14:08:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 14:08:11 -0700 (PDT) To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu, Labor Research and Action Project From: David Moberg Subject: Re: Bensinger dismissal Dan raises a perfectly reasonable alternative interpretation of Bensinger's dismissal, and if there had been a huge wave of successes, it would have been harder to get rid of him. Also, without more commitment from member unions and more development of organizers (both staff and members), it's hard to undertake the vast projects that everyone, including Bensinger, wanted. Some projects that were started--such as poultry organizing--fell apart because of disagreements and lack of commitment from member unions. There are limits to what the AFL-CIO can do on its own, and it doesn't seem inclined towards--nor are there the troops to put to work on--a project like launching new independent organizing projects that could develop into unions on their own. The evidence I have is that the AFL-CIO will continue to emphasize organizing; the new director of organizing has a lot of good qualifications and wants to continue Bensinger's work. But Bensinger lost out mainly to internal AFL-CIO politics, and it was partly because he was pushing as hard as he was to make organizing not only central but more of a militant crusade. The new director may be more inclined to be a team player. However, the AFL-CIO will lose a very talented leader; many organizing directors and higher officials (off the record) are upset; and very few people--though there are a few--within the labor movement seem to interpret this move as sacking somebody who failed to do his job well enough. David Moberg At 10:59 AM 7/27/98 -0400, Dan Clawson wrote: >David Croteau's question about Richard Bensinger's dismissal as director of >organizing for the AFL-CIO hits at a key issue. I have no inside knowledge. >David Moberg has an article in the latest IN THESE TIMES that is highly >critical of the dismissal, and quotes two progressive Organizing Directors >(Larry Cohen and Duane Stillwell) who oppose the action, while implying >others felt the same way. Moberg believes the dismissal is because >Bensinger was critical of labor's insularity and unwillingness to commit to >organizing. > >Maybe. I personally love Bensinger; he's extremely smart, has good >politics, and said many of the things that need to be said. But at the same >time, inside the labor movement it is my impression that the staff who are >most likely to be dismissed are organizers. If organizers don't deliver, >they get fired; in many places, it's that simple. And organizers are one of >the few places where there is a clear scorecard. > >Bensinger and the Organizing Department did a simply SPECTACULAR job of >raising the issue, generating publicity and excitement, persuading unions to >make organizing more of a priority. That was perhaps the most important >part of their job, and they were fantastic at it. > >But the other part of the job was to actually successfully organize workers, >and especially to do so through new and innovative approaches. Unless >unions see some successes, they won't continue to work on this. And here >it's not clear that the new AFL-CIO organizing department did deliver; and >it's not clear to what degree that is because of the inherent difficulties >of the situation, and to what degree it is because the department didn't >make good decisions or run effective campaigns. But it is unquestionably >the case that a number of the campaigns that were, at one point or another, >priorities ended up with nothing -- the poultry processing campaigns, >strawberry workers, apple harvesting, etc. > >So: this dismissal could be a sign that the AFL-CIO isn't willing to shake >things up. But it is also possible that the dismissal is a sign precisely >that Sweeney and company ARE committed to making organizing work, and if one >person isn't getting the job done, someone else will be put in to do so. >And if that were the case, the kindest and most supportive thing Sweeney >could do for Bensinger is to say nothing. So the dismissal can reasonably >be interpreted in two very different ways. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >---------- > >Dan Clawson clawson@sadri.umass.edu >work 413-545-5974 home 413-586-6235 >fax 413-545-0746 >Dept. of Sociology, Machmer W-36, Univ. of >Massachusetts, Amherst MA 01003 >-----Original Message----- >From: david croteau >To: Labor Research and Action Project >Date: Monday, July 27, 1998 9:35 AM >Subject: Bensinger dismissal > > >> As an outsider to AFL affairs, I've been impressed with the refreshing >>tone and emphases of Richard Bensinger's public statements. (His >>appearance at the American Sociological Association's meetings in NY, for >>example, was an encouraging sign.) That's why his dismissal as the AFL's >>organizing director in June was perplexing to me. >> Does anyone with more information about this situation have any insight >>into what's happening? Is this another troubling sign about the AFL's >>committment to organizing or is there more here? >>||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| >>David Croteau * Sociology * PO Box 842040 * Virginia Commonwealth >>University * Richmond, VA 23284 * E-mail: dcroteau@saturn.vcu.edu >> > >