Union Democracy Should Not Be An Oxymoron

Yet for the Labourers' International Union of North America, (LIUNA) that quickly seems to be emerging as the reality. I have written previously about some of the problems besetting that organization, not the least of which appears to be a decidedly dictatorial penchant on the part of its executive.

The latest evidence of this lack of respect for its membership is reflected in a story carried in today's Star, detailing how LIUNA has denied thousands of workers the right to elect leaders in one of its biggest locals for 15 years. According to Joe Mancinelli, Canadian manager and a vice-president of the union, the problem resides with the Ontario Federation of Health Care Workers Local 1110, which, even after 15 years, still has what is known as provisional status.

Mancinelli, who has supervised Local 1110 and appointed most of the top officials over the years, says the local has problems of instability and poor management, accusing its long-time former business manager Paula Randazzo of “ineffective, sloppy management” and lack of servicing to members.

Hmm ... I suspect such accusations could be hurled at LIUNA executive members themselves, given their sometimes heavy-handed practices in Local 183.

Is Liuna Local 183 Trying To Stifle Dissent?

As I have indicated in past posts, Liuna local 183 seems to be the poster boy for bad union behaviour. Not only has it made some very questionable decisions that work to the detriment of the union movement as a whole, but now, it seems it may using the strongest measures possible to stifle discussion and dissent.

As revealed in a Star story today, the union leadership is seeking the expulsion of 13 workers who disrupted a meeting while asking questions but getting no satisfactory answers over the employment of John Manadarino, a disgraced union employee who still retains employment through his management of the Canadian Tri-fund.

If the members are expelled, they will lose their livelihoods as they will no longer be able to work on unionized construction projects.

The question people have to ask themselves is if this sanction is justified, given the physical disruption that occurred at the Mandarino meeting, or whether this is the union equivalent of corporate libel chill.

Liuna Fails Its Members

The Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 seems to be playing right into the hands of neoconservative forces that would like nothing better than to see right-to-work legislation that would make union membership optional.

The problems at the union, which I wrote about previously, escalated into violence yesterday at a meeting in which members demanded answers about John Mandarino, the training centre executive who showed his contempt for the members' dues in a variety of ways, including misappropriating funds.

In addition to physically removing those who wanted full disclosure about the Mandarino debacle, the union executive threatened legal action against the questioners:

Local 183 business manager Jack Oliveira told the meeting that members who asked questions about Mandarino are linked to the union’s previous leadership and are “politically motivated.” Those leaders lost a close, bitter election fight last summer.

“If there is any undermining of this organization, steps will be taken to stop this once and for all. . . . I will bring charges against you,” Oliveira warned.

At a time when union membership is at an all-time low, Liuna Local 183 seems primarily concerned with concealing cronyism and possible corruption, hardly inducements for workers to surrender hard-earned dues to an organization that seems to have lost sight of its very reason for existence.

Unions and Organizational Decay

As indicated in a post written last Sptember, I wholehearted support unions as the best path of resistance to the depredations inflicted by practitioners of unfettered capitalism. That support, however, doesn't mean that I ignore or accept the malfeasance and lack of true representative democracy frequently found in mature union organizations.

The latest incidence of such malfeasance was recently uncovered by The Star, in yet another example of the fine investigative work the paper does. On January 16, the newspaper reported how John Mandarino, a top Liuna executive, was rehired 13 months after having been terminated for misuse of union funds much to the consternation of many:

In a controversial comeback, trustees rehired John Mandarino last summer as the administrator for the training centre of the continent’s largest construction local, Toronto-based Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183.

The centre’s board had unanimously dismissed him in June 2010 for breaching contract tendering rules, losing valuable government grants, regularly breaking cheque-signing policy and charging unauthorized personal expenses without proper accounting.

A few days later, The Star revealed that not only had Mandarino regained his former post, but was 'rewarded' with a second post:

The Labourers International Union of North America (LIUNA) appointed John Mandarino as director of its Canadian Tri-Fund after rehiring him to head a major training centre.

Fortunately, this sordid tale has a somewhat happy ending, in that today The Star reports that Manadarino has resigned from one of those positions, that of administrator of the Liuna Local 183 training centre, as a result of Star investigation. No word, however, about his position as director of the Tri-Fund.

While the kinds of incestuous relationships suggested by these developments are relatively common within organizations, rarely do they reek of such egregious wrongdoing and contempt for rank and file union members, who surely deserve better use of their hard-earned dues, and should not have to rely on explosive exposes by crusading journalists.

Unions' Self-Inflicted Problems

Allow me to be unequivocal from the start: I am a strong believer in unions as virtually the only effective means of countering the depredations that employers would inflict upon their workers if given the opportunity. However, I also believe that in some ways, unions are their own worst enemies, an opinion I formed as a member of the Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation during my teaching career.

Like many if not most institutions, unions have become highly political in both their structure and their treatment of members. My own experience with my former union was that they had little time or respect for those, like me, who expressed opinions that challenged their positions, especially if they were not a member of the executive. I suspect it is this refusal to both respect and to cultivate the 'ordinary' union member that poses a threat to the union movement's future greater than any that might emerge from so-called 'right-to-work' legislation that is becoming increasingly popular in the United States.

I was prompted to reflect on the topic this morning during breakfast as I read The Toronto Star. A story entitled Construction union pays $10 million to buy off employees reveals a curious kind of union-busting tactic within a union framework that has been employed by the Labourers’ International Union of North America in Toronto.

The first four paragraphs of the story read as follows:

The continent’s biggest construction local is spending more than $10 million to muscle out its own staff and their new union.

In a twist to the explosive political infighting that occasionally flares up in the labour movement, the Toronto-based Labourers’ International Union of North America Local 183 is buying out about 80 employees with lucrative financial packages after they joined another union.

Several insiders say the move will effectively snuff out the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 2, which represents Local 183 staff, because replacement members won’t have any allegiances and will eventually decertify it.

“It’s disgusting what Local 183 has done to get rid of them and the union,” one insider said Tuesday. “It’s a good example for non-union companies. If you don’t want a union, just buy off the employees.”

The rest of the story describes the political machinations within the local and how the staff joined a rival union to try to circumvent revenge firings that regularly ensue when staff has backed the wrong candidates for union elections. Indeed, there is even a tactic discussed in the story reminiscent of the show-trials popularized by Joseph Stalin during the 1930's.

I hope you will read the entire article to get the full flavor of union politics.

Please sign this petition urging Prime Minister Harper to stop threatening Michaela Keyserlingk and to stop exporting asbestos.