' Nat Hentoff
Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review March 13, 2000 / 6 Adar II, 5760

Nat Hentoff

JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
David Corn
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
David Horowitz
Arianna Huffington
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Debbie Schlussel
Sam Schulman
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports



Big labor, big China, spinning Gore

http://www.jewishworldreview.com -- LAST DECEMBER, as the World Trade Organization conference in Seattle collapsed like a demolished building, AFL-CIO president John Sweeney vowed to continue to insist that international trade agreements include protection for workers, including a ban on child labor. Some of the members of the WTO permit child labor.

Specifically referring to the current congressional debate over Clinton's proposed trade deal with China -- accelerating that nation's entrance into the World Trade Organization -- Sweeney said: "It is disgustingly hypocritical of the Clinton administration to pledge to put a human face on the global economy while prostrating itself in pursuit of a trade deal with a rogue nation." Despite restrictions on child labor in Chinese law, it exists in that authoritarian nation.

Actually, Clinton's promise to work for international worker and environmental protections is what old-time labor organizers would call "pie in the sky." But on Feb. 17, Al Gore pledged to the AFL-CIO that, as president, he would not sign any trade agreement that does not have the provisions that organized labor wants.

Gore's momentary independence so disturbed the White House and various corporate executives that the vice president rescinded his pledge. In a letter to the head of the National Association of Manufacturers, Gore said that he certainly supports the Clinton deal of normal, permanent trade relations with China -- which hardly meets AFL-CIO standards.

John Sweeney, disregarding the long record of Gore's unstable credibility, is continuing to pledge at least $40 million of AFL-CIO funds to put Gore in the White House and a majority of Democrats in the other House. More millions of dollars -- in staff and support services provided by unions affiliated with the AFL-CIO -- will be part of that mission.

Rank-and-file union members who do not want their dues to fuel the Gore campaign are ignored by the press as it covers labor's efforts for Gore. Some of them were demonstrating against the WTO in Seattle. Many more believe that thousands of factory workers' jobs were lost because of NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement), which Gore thunderously supported in his celebrated television debate with Ross Perot. And some are aware that union organizers in China are imprisoned.

Yet many union members do not know that a line of Supreme Court decisions makes clear that if they disapprove of part of their dues going to a political campaign they do not support, they have a right to a rebate of that portion of their dues.

According to a National Labor Relations Board rule, unions are supposed to inform members of that right once a year in a union publication. But that notice, written in legalese, is hardly emphasized, and many members don't read union newspapers carefully, if at all.

The reigning Supreme Court decision on this matter is Beck v. Communications Workers Union (1988), written by Justice William Brennan (who is hardly a conservative). It states that the "financial core" obligation of union membership -- union dues -- is limited to union expenditures "germane to collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment." And the court said that members are not compelled to have part of their money used for political purposes they reject.

However, this is not an easy way to exercise your conscience if you belong to a union. To take advantage of the Beck vs. Communication Workers Union decision, you first have to resign from the union. You then become an "agency fee payer." That means you still have to pay the equivalent of union dues, and you get the same benefits that the remaining members obtain from collective bargaining. But as a nonmember, you can't vote in internal elections; in many unions, you won't be able to vote on ratifying union contracts. And you may be ostracized at work. Other dissident union members choose to stay and seethe.

I belong to two unions: AFTRA (the American Federation of Radio and Television Artists) and, through the Village Voice, the United Auto Workers (our catch-all local union was absorbed by the UAW). I organized my first union at the age of 15. A month before Christmas, just as bulk orders from local businesses were coming in, I gave advance notice of a strike to the owners of the candy store at which I worked. We won. I've also helped organize other shops, and I will not resign my union membership. But I respect those workers who, in conscience, decide they will not be forced by John Sweeney to go against their principles. Many of the rest of us will elect to protest Sweeney's obdurate backing of Al Gore, whose word is no better than that of his mentor, Bill Clinton. Furthermore, Ralph Nader will be on the ballot in many states.

JWR contributor Nat Hentoff is a First Amendment authority and author of numerous books. Send your comments to him by clicking here.


03/03/00: The ACLU violates its principles --- yet again!
02/28/00: Still two nations?
02/11/00: You bet we should disbar Bubba
01/31/00: Where was Jesse?
01/24/00: Is suing church for sexual harassment an entanglement?
01/18/00: Will Miranda make it?
01/11/00: ACLU: Guilty until presumed innocent?
01/03/00: Liberty lion should be Man of Century
12/28/99: Drug tests that tear families apart
12/20/99: Get ready for decisive ruling on school vouchers for religious schools
12/13/99: Guess who is taking the lead in anti-slavery movement? Hint: It ain't Rev. Jesse
12/06/99: When we refuse to buy the 'otherly-challenged' excuse
11/29/99: Expelling 'Huck Finn'
11/22/99: Pleading the First
11/16/99: Goal of diversity needs rethinking?
11/08/99: Prosecution in darkness
11/02/99: The accuracy that's owed to readers
10/26/99: Disappeared Americans
10/18/99: The blue wall of silence
10/11/99: Bill Bradley's speech tax
10/04/99: 'Technicalities' that keep us free
09/27/99: Our 'Americanism'-ignorant generation
09/20/99: ACLU better clean up its act
09/13/99: A professor of infanticide at Princeton
09/07/99: The Big Apple's Rotten Policing
08/23/99: Lawyerly ethics
08/16/99: To Get a Supreme Court Seat
08/02/99: What are the poor people doing tonight?
07/26/99: Lady Hillary and the press

© 2000, NEA