Previous Article Refomers win majority in harbor workers Local 333, ILA  

Next Article A Draft Bill of Rights for Building Trades Unionists

Get all the news: SUBSCRIBE to Union Democracy Review! Call 718-564-1114 .

© By Matt Noyes (adapted from "Matters of Human Debate" a chapter in THE CYBERUNION HANDBOOK: TRANSFORMING LABOR THROUGH COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY, ed. Arthur B. Shostak, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, January 2002.)

In the spring of 2000, workers from across the US and Canada met in Boston for a National Rank-and-File Carpenters Conference organized by the Association for Union Democracy and the Carpenters for a Democratic Union. At the end of the day, as they hammered out their next steps in forming a national reform group, one carpenter called out to his brothers and sisters, "how many of you are on-line?" Out of a hundred working carpenters, most of them middle-aged men, all but two raised their hands.

Across the US and North America (and, of course, internationally) more and more rank-and-file workers are using the "new technology" -- e-mail, list serves, web sites -- to make their unions more democratic and powerful. The Internet provides workers a way to do much of their organizing work more quickly, more easily, with greater reach and at a lower cost. The Internet capitalizes on two of the fundamental aspects of union democracy -- freedom of speech and freedom of association -- freeing them from limitations of cost, time, and geography, and brings workers into contact with a host of tools and resources they can use to build democracy in all its aspects.

Through the Internet workers have dramatically enlarged the existing democratic space in unions and created new forums for cross-industry, cross-union, international reform discussion and activism. This new arena of rank-and-file activism is being built by workers in nearly every industry: flight attendants, factory workers, pipefitters, stationary engineers, carpenters, clerical workers and more. There are important limits: relatively few workers are using the internet for pro-democracy activism, the internet can become a distraction from organizing, and the new high tech. tools can be used just as unproductively as their low tech counterparts. Still, while the internet alone does not win union elections, get better contracts, or back down abusive supervisors, in the world of union politics and activism, it is a great equalizer.

Connecting to Resources and Information

The typical union democracy activist struggles on several fronts. To begin with, s/he needs information. Information about legal rights, about grievances, elections, unfair labor practices, etc.; information about the contract and the union constitution and the procedures to follow, about the local and national union, about what other workers have done in the past or are doing now, and more.

Think of what workers have to do to get all of this information without using the Internet: repeated visits to the library, calls and visits to local (or regional) government offices, government agencies, and other organizations. That's after they get over one of the biggest obstacles: Simply knowing what to look for. They also need to track down and consult other union activists and supporters who know the history, and have experience in this type of organizing.

Now consider the resources available on-line, on a web site like that of the New Directions caucus in Transport Workers Union Local 100. This is just some of the information available to transit workers, via links from the home page:
… the complete text of the contract "including the hidden agreements,"
… the full text of the "freedom degrading" Taylor Law (covering New York State public employees),
… a full list of union officers,
… Civil Service Exam Applications,
… the "letter that brought in the Department of Labor on Credit Card scam in Local 100,"
… a "news update on the Pension Reform Bill."
There are links to government agencies, pro-labor groups, and information on various laws. In addition, there is contact information for New Directions, for workers who want to get in contact with other activists. (Note: the ND site has changed since the caucus won local office in 2000, and there are now other reform sites in the local, see our AUDLinks page.)

A good rank-and-file Web site offers workers a kind of specialized library tailored to their interests and needs, that also serves to connect activists in one location with workers in any part of the union, including their own local.

Facilitating a Democratic Culture

The Web makes it vastly easier to find and distribute information and resources that help workers address the structural side of unionism, but it also serves in the cultivation of a democratic culture. The most obvious example of culture in a union is the official union magazine and its rank-and-file rivals.

The typical official union magazine comes to workers' homes in the mail. It is forty pages or so, with glossy, full color printing, and the kind of professional design you see in commercial magazines. The content is carefully selected and edited to put the union's (for most union publications, the union = the current leadership and its supporters) best foot forward. The magazine comes out regularly and is distributed to all members, internationally. It reflects the officers' control of resources, their domination of union affairs, and their ability to put their message in the members' hands.

Union reformers, operating with bare bones resources and even more limited time are simply never in a position to put out a print publication that rivals the official union magazine in format, design, quantity of content, and distribution. The standard best practice among activists continues to be the four to ten-page black on white newsletter, printed on a computer, reproduced at a copy shop, distributed locally, and mailed to a few supporters or contacts. In a few cases, well-organized rank-and-file groups have managed to publish regular newspapers, for example Convoy Dispatch and Adelante, published by Teamsters for a Democratic Union.

Now, look at the rank-and-file web site. Unlike print newsletters, web pages are full-color, with photos and other features, often well-designed and employing the best technology, rivaling in every way the production quality of the official union web site (if there is one). The content of rank-and-file sites is also generally superior to the official union sites. Many official union web sites are born as on-line billboards for the union, then grow to be the equivalent of the union newspaper, operating within the same political and cultural constraints. Rank-and-file sites, on the other hand, tend to sprout up as expressions of rank-and-file dissent, and grow into vehicles for free give and take of ideas, challenges to authority, wide dissemination of information, and an orientation to action. This makes for lively content.

Because web sites are constantly on-line, and can be frequently updated, they can provide up to the minute information on union events to a degree unmatched by any other medium, save television or radio. As one IOUE Local 30 web master told me, "before the officers can get from the union meeting back to their desks, we've posted our minutes of the meeting!"
The circulation of important and time-sensitive union information about negotiations, spending, bylaws changes, and elections has been expanded dramatically. During a strike or a union election campaign, workers can get the latest news from the web site, and spread the news directly at work or on the picket line, rather than waiting for word to come down the chain of command. Rank-and-file web masters are usually not great respecters of protocol.

With the Internet, it's as if every rank and file member were given equal access to the means to produce and distribute a regular full-color, glossy magazine, and the license to put their free speech to use for a mass audience.

Linking to activism.

However much activists master the union structures, promote the ideas and principles, and practice a democratic culture, their project will run aground if they can not find ways to make their activism into a vehicle for increasing the participation of other workers. The purpose of union democracy is to organize the collective power of members in the union, in a way that ensures accountability and member control. The kind of participation we are taking about here differs from mere mobilization of members in what are essentially top-down actions, and it goes beyond "consultation" or "input," to include participation in setting goals, assessing risks and opportunities -- all the elements of strategic planning. The distinguishing feature of democratic participation is the power to make informed decisions.

The experience of collective action, the security of knowing the truth about your rights and how to defend them, the ability to find information and secure resources all contribute to a worker's confidence and willingness to participate in more activity. The best rank-and-file activists look for every opportunity to involve their coworkers in discussion, decision-making, and action. They do this in one-on-one discussions, in meetings and job actions, in union elections and contract campaigns.

The Internet is not simply the on-line equivalent of magazines, newsletters, or reference libraries. It also offers spaces in which workers participate in discussion, debate, and planning, analogous to a union or caucus meeting. Again, the contrast with off-line activities is instructive. Many union meetings are wooden, tedious exercises in disempowerment, which members quite rationally avoid. They are effectively anti-participatory, and reinforce the top-down culture of the union power structure, down to the way people are seated. In the worst cases, they are hostile or even dangerous places for dissenting unionists.

Most rank-and-file activists organize their own meetings, discussions, and workshops, providing an alternative venue for workers to gather to share information and ideas, exchange resources and contact information, learn skills, and plan activities. These unofficial meetings provide an important forum in which members can begin to participate and develop the skills of democratic activism.

The official union meeting, though, has a crucial status in the politics of the union and in the eyes of the law. Membership meetings are the highest body of the local union (between union conventions), and are the terrain on which some part of the struggle for union democracy must inevitably be waged. So, activists organize with their coworkers to participate in the official meetings, trying to pursue their agenda by asking questions, making motions, offering proposals, and demonstrating by their actions that democracy is possible, even if unpopular.

When it comes to meetings, like newsletters, rank-and-file activists work in an often hostile environment with meager resources of time and even space. As working conditions are eroded and unions restructure into larger units, conflicts of shifts and work locations become even bigger obstacles. Imagine trying to hold a regular independent meeting in a local that covers three states and has members in hundreds (or more) of workplaces, on all manner of shifts and schedules.

Here again, the Internet has a valuable, if limited, contribution to make. Rank-and-file web sites provide a common space -- across shift and work location -- for workers to share information and ideas, exchange resources and contact information, and (to a lesser extent) plan activities. By submitting articles or reports on meetings or other events, writing "letters to the editor," and posting notes on message boards and bulletin boards, workers can be active participants in the content of the web site, and can bring their point to view to a broader audience. Websites often serve as a kind of the jumping off point for members to get involved in activism. The web masters and other activists respond promptly to inquiries and work to connect workers to resources and other activists.

This is where e-mail comes in. Workers use e-mail for one-on-one communication, for broadcasting information or questions, for communication in or with a group. To manage this form of communication, activists have developed several techniques and tools. To begin with, activists have their own address books and lists of other activists and contacts with whom they correspond for various purposes. This can be used to notify people of events or the latest news, new features on web sites or lists, or to ask questions or seek advice. It can be used to organize job actions, like sick outs or other protests. The interchange of messages and responses, the flow of information to and from mailboxes forms a kind of continuous on-line discussion.

One way to organize e-mail discussion is by creating list serves, in which participants send messages to a central hub, which then distributes them to everyone on the list. Lists like IBEW Listserve and Carpenters Discussion List are examples from the building trades. The lists can be moderated or un-moderated, and can be password protected or open to all. Workers often take messages they receive on one list and forward them to other lists, creating a cross-list dialogue. Again, the nature of the medium is to cross boundaries. Much of the e-mail correspondence is cross-local and cross-union. It's as if there were hundreds of ongoing rank-and-file labor council meetings.

E-mail lists can also take the form of message boards, bulletin boards, or guest books, located on web sites. (See IBEW Local 25.) Many activists have added on-line polls to their repertoire. These polls present a question or series of questions on which workers can vote, and then immediately tabulate the results, which the voter can then see.

All of this activity contributes to a culture of unionism that is based on dissent, debate, and exchange of ideas, opinions and information on every topic of concern to union democracy activists. It is not channeled into the top-down structures of the union meeting or official magazine, but rises up wherever a member figures out how to set up a site or list serve, send an e-mail message, or surf the net. The experience of doing all this "from the safety of your own home" makes a worker's entry into activity easier and less threatening. Once in dialogue with activists, there is room to develop trust and confidence that can lead to increased participation on and, hopefully, off line.

Some Limits…
As valuable as it is, the Internet should be labeled like a car's side mirror, "objects may be closer/farther, larger/smaller, faster/slower, more accurate/less accurate, more representative/less representative than they appear." For all the virtues of the internet -- access to and dissemination of information, networking with activists, cheap high-quality publishing -- it is unclear just how big a phenomenon union democracy internet activism is, and what impact it is having in the daily life of unions.

Is there anybody out there? The first major limit to the Internet as an organizing tool is simply that very few workers probably use it for this purpose. The proportion of rank-and-file activists (e.g., caucus members who attend meetings, write leaflets and newsletters, edit the web site, etc.) in a union with a lot of rank-and-file activity is usually under 1%, with a much larger layer of passive reform supporters (e.g., members whose activism is chiefly voting), at times surpassing 50% of the membership, but more typically around 20%.

The number of activists who actively use the Internet in their organizing is, optimistically, on the order of 30% to 50%. It is difficult to estimate the number of reform supporters and general members who use the Internet. But, if the proportions are similar to off-line activism, we can guess that the proportion of union members involved in rank-and-file activism on-line - via web sites, lists, and e-mail exchanges - is probably no greater than 10% of the total union membership, at best. At times of great turmoil and debate, the number may leap much higher, but the norm is probably fairly low.

This means that in a union of 50,000 members, with 60 reform activists with 5,000 to 10,000 supporters, something like 2,000 workers may occasionally visit a rank-and-file web site. Hundreds may subscribe to a list serve on which probably one third of the subscribers regularly post messages. Thirty or forty activists would use the Internet intensively for their activism. (Note that these numbers would describe a union with a very active internal political life.)

According to one Canadian carpenters union webmaster, out of a target audience of 7,000 members in his region, he corresponds regularly via e-mail with about a dozen in his local and another dozen provincially. His site gets about 1,000 hits a month (not a clear statistic, a hit may be the same person more than once). Interestingly, most of the traffic to his site is from the US.

Another problem is that employers also can surf rank-and-file web sites and infiltrate discussion lists, in an effort to learn what workers are up to, and put a stop to it. Rank-and-file webmasters are often criticized for letting the employer gain access to information it can use against the union and its members. This is a longer discussion, but it should be sufficient to point out that the same objections have been raised in the past about rank-and-file newsletters, meetings, and other activities. As advantageous as they may be to power-hungry officials, secrecy and unquestioning loyalty to authority are not paths to democracy or member control. Workers who want to limit access to their sites can use passwords and oblige the user to agree to certain conditions in order to enter the site.

Workers enjoy strong legal protection in their on-line activity, from overlapping sources. In addition to the union member bill of rights in the LMRDA, there is an emerging body of Internet free speech law based on the 1968 Wiretap Act and the Clinton-era Communications Decency Act. If the employer or union take legal action against a website or its owner, editor or contributors, the First Amendment also applies. The boundaries of speech and association on-line are still being drawn, but rank-and-file workers are staking out some valuable terrain, by asserting their rights and defending them against employers and union officials. Note: it is not wise to use computers or resources belonging to the employer or the union. (Public Citizen's Internet free speech project is a valuable resource in this area.)

Are we organizing? The same basic dynamics of organizing and personal relations that apply in the "real world" also apply in cyber-space. People bring their vices with them when they go on-line, not just their virtues, and find new tools for both. There is another essay in this subject, but it is important to touch on some of the basic problems that impede effective use of the Internet for union democracy.

The first problem is posed by the one-man (usually a man) band, the activist with lots of answers and few collaborators, the Lone Ranger. This courageous soul is unsatisfied with half-steps and decides to go it alone, drawing up a particular list of reforms and complaints -- often quite legitimate, often quite long -- that he has cobbled together over the years. The Web provides a perfect hothouse for the cultivation of this type of solo activism, starting with the fact that the user can spend hours alone, unchallenged, in front of the computer, apart from his coworkers.

On the Web, the Lone Ranger activist creates a website that reflects in its content and presentation the interests, ideas, pet peeves, grand solutions, and extended analyses of its creator, with little or no reference to who the audience is or what they may want, need, care about, think, etc.

On such a site you find hundreds of links, and links to more links, countless articles, documents, pages and pages of testimony from court cases, animated chimpanzees, banners, music, waving flags, blinking beacons, pop-up windows. You have to appreciate the unique contributions of these sites, and take from them what you can, but is this a model for organizing? The point is obvious, but, like many truths of organizing, worth emphasizing: if you let the Internet -- or any other tool -- become a diversion that results in withdrawal from day to day collective action in the workplace and in the union hall, you are missing the point.

There is a second vice that plagues organizing which has thrived on-line: flaming. Free speech is an unruly thing. Like off-line rank-and-file meetings, rank-and-file lists and message boards are often the site of reckless accusations, baseless slanders, and even fighting words.

It should be no surprise if people who have been denied a voice, treated with disdain and condescension, and had their rights violated and interests harmed, come out swearing and cursing when they finally get space for free expression. E-mail exacerbates this effect by providing a medium that allows for easy expression, but hides the body language and intonation on which we all depend to show irony, sympathy, modesty, etc. The result can be a maelstrom of blistering attacks and counterattacks.

It is a more serious problem when the person doing the "flaming" knows better, but chooses to indulge. This kind of behavior is terrible for organizing; it sidetracks serious discussions, or prevents them from getting started, and repels new participants.

Some Web masters address the problem by having a moderator who will convert four letter words to comic book symbols, or even edit messages to lower the heat. Those who choose to weather the storm of un-moderated speech should provide disclaimers and, better yet, participate frequently in the discussion to keep it focused on real issues. Swearing is not the only way to drag down a discussion. Rhetorical posturing, misinformation, bluffing, all serve to disrupt and distract.

Some possibilities.

There is another, more fundamental, way in which free speech poses a problem and an opportunity. The struggle that union members sometimes wage to create democratic structures and a democratic culture blends into a struggle in which workers use democracy to defend their rights and advance their interests. Activists often neglect this difference between confuse the two, as if every struggle were a life and death question of union democracy, or as if union democracy were just another way of describing their particular agenda for change, their own set of goals.

As Herman Benson has noted, there is a difference between fighting for union democracy and using union democracy to fight. Democracy is a clear goal when basic rights are being violated, and it provides a framework of broad principles. But union reform also involves much discussion and action where the choice is not simply democracy versus autocracy.

The objective of union democracy is for union members to define their own goals and pursue their interests, using democratic means. To create and cultivate a culture of democracy, activists need to model democracy in the way they organize; it is not just what they stand for that matters, but how they handle debate and discussion in their own groups. It bears repeating that committed, honest advocates of union democracy can, and will, have serious disagreements over the most important questions of union policy and strategy that nonetheless fall within the boundaries of democratic unionism.

Most discussion on rank-and-file sites reflects this kind of seriousness of purpose and willingness to debate. While web sites and list serves are prone to Lone Ranger isolation, flame wars, and sectarian disputes, they are facilitating the creation of a model of multi-party democracy in the old one-party system that defines the typical union.

The independent clerical workers union CUE (Coalition of University Employees) provides a model of this kind of functioning, with more virtues than vices. In a state-wide election, the CUE web site provided members information on their rights and union activities, and links to the two rival caucuses CUE Power and CUE2000. CUE activists also make extensive use of e-mail and the union web site and e-mail list are open to all candidates during election campaigns. There is a fair share of flaming, and accusations of flaming, but there is also a culture of debate and discussion that puts most unions to shame.

Unions should both open official publications and meetings to different points of view and encourage members to develop independent web sites, newsletters, and even caucuses, and provide links to them on the official union page. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology recently launched a project to put all course materials on-line, free of charge. Rank-and-file activists are already working in this spirit of openness and cross-fertilization; their unions should follow.

Through the Internet workers are dramatically enlarging the existing democratic space in unions and creating new forums for cross-industry, cross-union, international reform discussion and activism. They are setting up list serves, meeting in on-line chats, publishing web pages and on-line newsletters, running debates and polls, and more. They are setting up web sites of higher quality and sophistication than the official union sites, and charting new terrain for union reform, for workers rights, and for the labor movement.

Union democracy has always depended on embattled reformers laboring in relative obscurity against the depredations of institutionalized power. The new technology is bringing the reformers together and shedding light on their daily struggle for democracy and power, on the job and in the union. The Internet provides new tools and new spaces that workers are using to deepen and spread union democracy. Let's hope they keep at it.

For links to the sites described here, and for a comprehensive list of links to rank-and-file websites and other resources, see AUDLinks.
-------
Matt Noyes is the Education Coordinator and Webmaster for the Association for Union Democracy, and a Lecturer at Queens College Worker Education Extension Center. Feedback on this article is welcome; contact Matt at info@uniondemocracy.org.

Articles on the internet and union democracy:
Surrendering to the internet: Democrats in spite of themselves?
IBEW president Hill upholds Canadian member's rights
Union officials "condone and endorse" attack on member's internet free speech rights
Round 2 in the internet battle in AFSCME DC37
In AFSCME DC37 - A round in the internet battle
Danger of democracy on the Internet? Kill it!
Whose "IBEW" is it? An Electrician on the Internet.
Results of the 2005 AUD Best Rank-and-File Website Contest
Union democracy online survives two lawsuits
Online Guide: build an effective rank-and-file website
SEIU Pulls plug on "Labor's Future" discussion
52 Playing cards = fearsome "Local 52"
Using the Internet for Union Democracy
AUD's Best Rank-and-File Websites of 2004
Matt Noyes on AUD and the Internet
2KB of free speech? ACLU & Public Citizen sue in IBEW Local 46 election
Making a splash: SEIU's Unite to Win and the "free and open debate" on Labor's future
SAG officers unnerved by actors' internet free speech
Free speech irritates UFCW
Free speech in NWU
IATSE 600: Internet democracy triumphs over super centralization
Cyber-democracy: your legal rights online.(handout)

See also:
AUD's 50 Guidelines for building an effective rank-and-file website, and the sample homepage.
The labortech tag on del.icio.us.

back to top

Previous Article Refomers win majority in harbor workers Local 333, ILA      

Next Article A Draft Bill of Rights for Building Trades Unionists

AUDHome; Legal Rights; Education; Union Democracy Review; Books; AUDLinks

Page designed by Matt Noyes, National Writers Union/UAW, and Rachel Szekely
The Association for Union Democracy. www.uniondemocracy.org
104 Montgomery Street, Brooklyn, New York, 11225; USA; 718-564-1114; info@uniondemocracy.org

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Use the following credit line on the materials you use:
"From the website of the Association for Union Democracy. www.uniondemocracy.org. Email: info@uniondemocracy.org. 104 Montgomery Street, Brooklyn, New York, 11225; USA; 718-564-1114"

Please notify us at websteward@uniondemocracy.org when you use material from the site.

Send comments or suggestions on the website to websteward@uniondemocracy.org.