“What I’m interested in is giving the union back to all of the members. It doesn’t belong to me. It didn’t belong to the last president. It belongs to the members.” --William Smith

Three years ago, a group of six rank and file activists in the New York Metro Postal Union, APWU, came to the Association for Union Democracy for help. They had been disqualified by local president Josie MacMillian when they tried to run for office, because they had not announced their social security numbers at the nomination meeting. Two years later, in a rerun election ordered by the Department of Labor, the six, running as the “Candidates for Change,” won the top spots in the largest APWU local, unseating an entrenched leadership that been in office for over 20 years. William (Smitty) Smith, at the head of the opposition ticket, was elected president.

But after this interim election, the old administration forces still controlled a majority on the executive board. The following months were marked by constant struggle between the new officers and the board majority. The new officers won support by taking their proposals to membership meetings. But the battle would not be resolved until the next regular election.

In that campaign, the slate headed by the former VP Anthony Caniano boasted of its expertise and experience; but that “experience” turned into a liability when the Smith slate reminded the membership of suspect spending by the old regime, and the fact that the Department of Justice had launched a formal investigation.

However, their “experience” of spending money on themselves may not have been their biggest campaign flaw. Attorney Louis Nikolaidis, who represented the Candidates for Change, noted, “The investigation had some effect, but the old guard’s weakness was that they had become too close to management. We heard from members: ‘These guys are experienced at what? Sucking up to management!” In contrast, the new officers aggressively challenged postal management on shop floor problems like wash-up time and intolerable workplace temperatures; members now felt free to file grievances.

The election on April 6 settled the question of who would run the local. Four slates competed, including one from the old administration. With about 40% of the union’s 10,000 members voting, the Candidates for Change, running for reelection now with a full slate, swept the field, winning all 32 positions, defeating their closest opponents by close to two to one. Smith, was reelected by 2,511 votes to Anthony Caniano’s 920 with 612, 178, and 114 votes cast for the three other candidates respectively.

The election could have repercussions in the national union. Metro is the home local of retiring national president Moe Biller and a strong power in the APWU, which elects officers by direct membership vote. Ajamu Dillahunt, president of the Raleigh Area [VA] APWU commented, “The strength of those 10,000 potential votes is very important.”

William Smith bluntly declares his independence. During the election, his rival boasted of a close relationship with the national officers. “When I make a call to Moe Biller in Washington,” he said, “he takes my call.” In contrast, Smith replied, “I’m not one of the good old boys. I don’t go along with that

foolishness.” At his first national APWU gathering, Smith challenged the national over delays in arbitration. Members “are sick and tired of the Postal Service playing games with our cases,” he declared, demanding that the APWU go to court over the delays. Six months later, according to Metro’s newspaper, the APWU brought unfair labor practice charges against the Postal Service for stalling on arbitration. “It is obvious,” the paper reported, “that the APWU officers are feeling the heat from the largest and increasingly organized APWU local--NY Metro.”

APWU, Brooklyn: Howard Prusack (Howie the Ax) ran for local president at the head of a full insurgent slate. They didn’t make it, but their vigorous campaign and ambitious program, with more than a third of the votes, let in some fresh air. Prusack’s 15-point program proposed a two-term limit on officers, copies of the local constitution and financial reports to the membership, and advocacy of the legal right to strike for postal workers.

Letter Carriers Branch 283, Houston TX: After 25 years, there was a big upset in this local. John Forney reports the facts in the Watchdog, the independent newsletter he has been circulating in the local for years. Winston Johnson and his entire opposition slate defeated the longtime incumbents in February by a substantial majority. He received 1,406 votes to his defeated rival’s 801. The election was a rerun ordered by the national union. Forney writes that Johnson becomes the first black president of one of the largest NALC chapters in the South. The victory, he says, means that union democracy returns to the branch. “We sincerely thank you and your Association for Union Democracy for your considerate services and moral support through our long ordeal.” +

by Matt Noyes

A guide to law on internal union affairs

An oveiview and assessment of the law regulating internal union affairs by Michael Goldberg

This 22-page survey in the Journal of Labor Research (Winter, 2000) is not, definitely not, written in the forbidding academic jargon that often makes law review articles im penetrable to normal readers. It quickly presents the historical factors that led to laws subjecting internal union affairs to control; it summarizes the main provisions of the Taft- Hartley Act, the LMRDA, and major decisions of the courts and the NLRB, concluding with this opinion from an Ohio state court decision some 50 years ago:

“Viewing the important role of the labor unions in this era, a court may well determine in a particular case that protection of their democratic processes is essential to the maintenance of our democratic government.”

This article, helpful to unionists, lawyers, and students of

labor, is a kind of crash course in union democracy law. The

references alone make a handy reading list. The author is a

professor at Widener School of Law and an AUD Advisor. A

limited number of copies are available from AUD @ $3.00

each, which includes mailing charges.

June 2000

4

Union Democracy Review