Don Beachler
Reading the mail these past months, I would like to say we owe a vote of thanks to the organizations, unions, Marge Kees etc. that have offered their help and support. But I do resent the criticism I’ve seen from some of the so called Socialist newspapers, websites, plumbers, carpenters, and others of OUR officals. If there is any criticism called for it will and should come from OUR rank and file. The way I see it if these people could vote on OUR contract and the employers had given us 98 percent of our demands they would vote “no” liking to see nothing better than a world wide strike.
I worked my first day as an I. D. in 1949 and I met and listened close to everything Harry Bridges had to say. When he and Goldblatt and others passed on. I thought at the time this is probably the beginning of the end of this union. I WAS WRONG. Over the years we have had and still have good strong leadership still a lot of good union out there. These past months they have given up a lot of family life and other things for this union I say THANK YOU.
Patrick Kapfhammer
I coulnd’t have said it better. Thank you Mr. Bleachler.
Tim Milligan
With all due respect Mr. Beachler, and as a member of the union for these many years you certainly deserve our respect, yet I have to disagree with you on this. Criticism is a necessary part of democracy. From within and from without. Unions both here and abroad look to the ILWU as we are the benchmark for many Unions in many ways. Their lives depend on our ability to negotiate with strength. They have large stake in the outcome of these negotiations.
In another light if it wasn’t for criticism from abroad put on the Bush administration we would be at war right now in Iraq. Other governments have a right to criticize what the Bush administration is doing when so many lives, both American and Iraqi, are at stake. If you don’t have those from all points of view critiquing the process and the tactics of those negotiating then you snuff out the vital democratic aspects of Unionism. Our contract and negotiations literally affect millions. They have a right to be critical if they want.
I have been critical of these negotiations and have at times questioned the path those in office have put us on. Criticism is healthy and criticism is democracy at it’s best. I right now am viewing all of this “celebration” over a 6 year contract with suspicion. No one has seen it, the caucus has not ratified it, and if is such a good deal for us why aren’t we seeing the PMA members bitching about it in the press?? This has always been the case in the past. Especially SSA. They, as everyone knows, are behind the suit by their employees that will lose their jobs over the implementation of this agreement. They brought in the National Right to Work crowd from Virginia. Yet now with the advent of an agreement the only ones you here touting it’s virtues are Union officials urging the membership to vote up this as yet unseen agreement. PMA members, the WCWC, IMRA are strangely silent don’t you think.
Seeing Richard Trumka on the news giving his dog and pony show (literally) reminds me of Groucho Marx in the movie “Duck Soup”. Groucho is trying to woo over his audience that are really starting to doubt him, so he says “Who are you going to believe?? Me, or your own eyes??”.
I’ll wait to celebrate until after I read it for myself thank you. A 6 year deal bargained from an admittingly weak hand does not bode well for the membership. This criticism does NOT imply any disrespect to those that negotiated this agreement. Just the opposite. Criticism adds to validity of the process. Without it we are just a company Union.
We also should not forget all of the Union leaders in the past year that have openly sided with our enemies. The presidents of the Teamsters and Carpenters come immediately to mind. One was the guest of honor at the State of the Union speech last January and the other campaigned for Bush and republicans in the East and Mid-West this fall. Is the friend of my enemy my friend?? I guess the proof will be in the pudding hey??
Tim35181
Ken Morgan
Others outside the ILWU had a right to follow this struggle. To put it in simple terms, if Longshore Division of the ILWU goes down, the whole union does, and if the most militant union can be seriously weakened if not destroyed, what fate awaits the rest of the labor movement? I became a Socialist after I became a union member. In the interest of brevity, let’s just say that I saw unionism, that is workers rights as inconsistent with capitalism. You and Brother Bleacher would be well advised to hit the books and study some labor history, and you might be surprised to learn who built the labor movement in this country. People like Bridges, Goldblatt, Hall, Debs, Heywood, Dobbs, and too many others to mention - all socialists, communists, and syndicalists. When some of our union brothers have their lives destroyed as a result of the so-called Port Security Act, are you both going to be too busy “pledging allegience” to the flag, or singing “god bless amurika”, to stand and fight in their defense? - If I come across as a bit unpatriotic, the last time I was patriotic, I ended up in an unpleasant place called Vietnam.
Ken Morgan, Local 6
John Riemann
I assume this was aimed at least in part at me. My main criticisms have been of the leadership of the AFL-CIO whose role over the years has been abysmal. I remember when the striking miners in W. Virginia occupied a mine, and the AFL-CIO leadership convinced the UMW leadership to get the occupation ended. The result, predictably, was that in the end the strike was defeated.
I note that Rich Trumka, in his role as a V. P. of the AFL-CIO, has played an influential role in the ILWU negotiations. I assume nobody has a problem with his seeking to influence, and in fact influencing, the course and outcome of the negotiations. Yet he is not in the ILWU.
I have not directly criticized any of the officials of the ILWU, because I don’t know them, and am not intimately familiar with the internal workings of your union. However, I have directly criticized certain policies of the labor movement as a whole. I think these criticism are valid. Anybody who disagrees should simply consider the results; the labor movement has been slipping backwards for 20 years or more now. This applies to wages and working conditions, percent of workers who are unionized, and the labor movement’s influence in society in general. The AFL-CIO policies are simply not working. Brothers and sisters of this list should decide for themselves whether these apply to the ILWU or not.
Since Brother Beachler gives a little of his history, I’ll just respond by saying that I have been a union member since 1970. I dedicated my life to making my union stronger and trying to make it better represent its members as well as all working people. Although I was expelled a couple of years ago by a corporate-minded clique that has hijacked our union, I still work union and consider myself a union member and would do anything effective I could to strengthen my union and unionism in general in this or any other country.
And yes, I do believe that a “world-wide strike” would be the best thing that’s happened to the entire labor movement in many, many decades!
John Reimann
