United Steel Workers Made Me Feel Cheap Today…

Morgan, you are a bit too quick to come to conclusions here I think. I never said we OWN anything- however, it is undeniable that CUPE was chanting Occupy memes like ‘we are the 99%’.And this is not what I was talking about regardless.

The camp was our’s though, and we were not told that the union members were coming, and were herded off to another action at the same time. Curiously, this was arranged by an occupier who also belonged to CUPE. It was underhanded and broke the trust of many people. So, that in itself was worth discussing. Equally, none of us were told the who/what/why of the Steelworker’s action before it happened- despite the fact it was discussed in the Action committee meeting. I understand withholding the where and the when for security reasons- but, the political intention should have been discussed beforehand. Transparency is important…

My parents were active in unions, and both took leadership roles at their workplaces- and I owe much of my privilege to this. So, I’m not anti-union one bit. That said, it is undeniable that unions are special interest groups, is it not?

My concern is that by taking the majority of our support and funding we inevitably become clients to the unions. I learned this while bringing my primary issue to Occupy- “Take Corporate Money out of Politics.” Most people agreed with this statement, but some insisted we expand that to unions and other special interest groups. After listening to them I now agree entirely. But then came the issue of of being careful not to offend the hand that feeds us…

I’m gravitating to the belief that we should only take donations when they are 100% anonymous. This way we are less subject to restricting ourselves to their interests. Does that sound reasonable? Additionally, we probably shouldn’t work for their specific causes unless there is consensus inside occupy- fair?

Hi Donna,

I really wish people would refrain from making assumptions before getting all angry and accusative. Our world would be much happier this way. As I don’t know you, I’ll refrain from making judgement- but, your assumptions and ad-hominem attacks disappoint me.

If you believe that this video shows the union encouraging members to join occupy, perhaps we are watching a different version- because, I cannot see one part of it that does. In fact, I see quite the opposite- that the union may have decided to minimise mentions of Occupy because it may have negative connotations. Perhaps a good analogy would be that it is like a guy who dates someone, but refuses to be seen outside in public with her. But, I won’t make this assumption that’s true until someone can confirm,

My parents were both union workers who took leadership positions in their offices. A lot of my personal privilege is reliant on the security and quality of life they received from their unions. So, I am most certainly not anti-union. Your assumption is not only wrong, but it is obsurd.

Equally obsurd are the accusations of my being a neocon and/or a person who joined the movement to subvert it. A professor who specialises in studying activist movements once told me that if you want to find the saboteurs, simply look for those who rely on ad-hominem attacks to shut down people’s point of view.

Outside of rhetoric, you’d have to give me examples of how unions support the 99% in cases where it does nothing to help their membership – because their primary function is to support their members. They are, by definition, special interest groups. I have no issues with this, the only intention I have in making this statement is to be sure we are understanding each other.

I’m glad you brought up the Solidarity movement, because theirs is a vision I wholeheartedly agree with. Solidarity is a union/social movement that breaks the mold of traditional models-this is precisely why they were so successful. They are the opposite of a trade union, meaning that they don’t discriminate by the place where one works. The only requirement was that you lived in Poland, and you were still breathing. And, I believe they waived fees for those who couldn’t afford.

In fact, I brought this idea to Occupy Vancouver- that we organise ourselves into a union for the 99%. It was quite well received by many- and, offered us a way to officiate ourselves as well as bringing legal protections we are so sorely missing. But, there was one major objection from some- that it would cause tension in our relationships with the trade unions. I discussed this idea with someone at Occupy Toronto today who is deeply involved in their union- they confirmed that union leaders would not be amused- they’d see it as a threat.

We faced a similar issue with the concept of cleaning up government through campaign financing reform. If you to take corporate money out of politics, you’d also have to remove money from unions and all other special interest groups. Do you see where I’m going with this? What other issues do you imagine could cause tension with unions? I’m sure there are many…

Now this has been cleared-up, do you have any opinions on the question I asked? What does our movement have to do to ensure we stay independent from those who support us?

My main thought on this matter is that we should have anonymity when taking donations. This way we can be sure they come without expectations- ensuring we make objective decisions.

Additionally, I’d propose we have greater transparency in our communications too- restrict 1-on-1 meetings with all 3rd parties, full disclosure on conflict of interest (you’d have to explain your connection to the Pipefitter’s union), and to document minutes of all communications and immediately publish them on our websites. By doing this we will protect ourselves from the many incidents of mistrust and misunderstandings that have hindered most every occupation.

What do you think? Is this a fair proposal? What else could we do to improve?