Black - Community Unionism

Black - Community Unionism - ITTAKES A COMMUNITY:...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–9. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 6
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 8
Background image of page 9
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ITTAKES A COMMUNITY: RETHINKING TRADE UNIONISM This material Copyright law may be mote Simon J. Black (Title 17 U.S.c(t3%%§il COMMUNITY UNIONISM A Strategy for Organizing in the New Economy ' THE LABOR MOVEMENT HAS BEGUN TO THINK BIG. SINCE THE NEOLIBERAL TURN OF THE 19705, organized labor has been losing power, influence, and members. Big problems have prompted debates over big solutions. Today, trade unionists talk of social movement, global justice, and transnational unionisms as strategies to rejuvenate labor’s power in the era of globalization. Within the AFL-CIO, re— cent debates have focused on proposals to consolidate labor’s power through mergers and bold organizing initiatives. While the movement’s current focus on “the global,” and on large—scale efforts to reverse the decline are a welcome turn from the business—as-usual unionism of old, a number of unique organi- zations and activists are already reshaping the labor movement from below. Community unionism is a particularly ‘local’ response to the global processes that challengeworking people today. In these times of renewal, community unionism demands the labor movement’s at- tention.1 Since the 19705, urban labor markets in North America have undergone profound re— structuring. Immigration, deindustrialization, ~ and the expansion of service sector employment have significantly altered the urban landscape. For working people, the urban labor market is , now characterized by insecurity. The growth of contingent work and forms of nonstandard New Labor Forum 14(3): 24732, Fall 2005 Copyright © Center for Labor, Community, and Policy Studies ISSN: 1095-7960/03 print DOLIO.1080/1095760500245383 WW employment combi welfare state has har working poor and l neoliberal globaliza the capacity of trat unorganized. The 1 precarious employr forms of trade unir way for new initiat unionism. THE ORIGIN: Uh SE or THE r stretches b article in . O’Connor predicte long-run unempIOj work, “the social b nizations will lie n munity commu the appropriate mc zation and struggl “since the poor lac] munity rather than cal place to organ relevant today as f employment in wh “flexible” labor In community union: on improving hous vices, and predict< working-class orga deindustrialized tc The idea of co} developed by a nu: ganizers in the 196 Union Departme Conway spoke of a was built on the ex ySimon J. Black gin ERAL TURN OF THE td members. Big ,de unionists talk is as strategies to 1e AFL-CIO, re— ; power through abor movement’s at- an labor markets in ergone profound re— , deindustrialization, :e sector employment the urban landscape. rban labor market is ecurity. The growth >rms of nonstandard «(a 3 , .Wcfi, g employment combined with the decline of the welfare state has had a deleterious effect on the working poor and unemployed. Furthermore, neoliberal globalization has negatively affected the capacity of trade unions to organize the unorganized. The rise of contingent work, or precarious employment, challenges traditional forms of trade unionism, and has opened the way for new initiatives, including community unionism. THE ORIGINS OF COMMUNITY UNIONISM SE or THE TERM “COMMUNITY UNIONISM” stretches back to the 19605. In a 1964 article in Studies on the Left, Iames O’Connor predicted that in the future, due to long—run unemployment and the deskilling of work, “the social base for working class orga— nizations will lie more and more in the com- munity community unions clearly will be the appropriate mode of working class organi- zation and struggle.”2 O’Connor argued that “since the poor lacked steady jobs ... the com— munity rather than the workplace was the logi- cal place to organize them.”3 This analysis is relevant today as fewer workers find “steady” employment in what neoliberals like to call the “flexible” labor market. O’Connor believed community unions would focus their energies on improving housing, welfare, and public ser- vices, and predicted that these new forms of working-class organization would spring up in deindustrialized towns and urban slums.4 The idea of community unionism was also developed by a number of visionary UAW or- ganizers in the 19605.5 In the UAW’s Industrial Union Department organizers like Jack T. Conway spoke of a new form of unionism that was built on the example of Cesar Chavez and ItTakes a Community ..___________r,_,i.‘______________________________ the Farm Workers Union (FWU). Conway ob- served that the FWU was developing a new organizational model because “the problems that face farm workers and their families go far beyond the workplace and work relationship, and for an organization to be effective in deal- ing with these problems it has to deal with the totality of the situation.”6 Conway realized that the “structure of the labor movement” was not designed to “reach” the urban poor or other sections of the working class, such as migra- tory farm laborers.7 Like O’Connor, Conway believed the labor movement must come to see the community as if it were a factory or work— place.8 Community unions could use the tech- niques and tactics of traditional trade unions to organize members of the community and defend their interests.9 For Conway, these new organizations would address grievances, carry out political education, and engage community members in, other practices that trade unions had effectively used to represent workers at their place of employment.10 If, for example, a member had a ‘grievance’ against a landlord or the police, the community union would repre- sent that person in an effort to have the griev— ance resolved. Yet, recent discussion of community unionism has given the term a new connota— tion. It is important to distinguish between community unionism as a process and com— munity unionism as an organizational model that stands independent of traditional trade unionism. The first definition entails the co— operation between a trade union and a com— munity group in the struggle for a common ob— jective. Community-union alliances may be forged in the fight to keep a factory open or to have a city council adopt a living wage ordi- nance. This type of community unionism var— New Labor Forum - 25 ies depending on the structure of the alliance between the community group and the union. A community group may play a supporting role in a union’s organizing drive, perhaps facilitat— ing the dialogue between the union and a group of non-English speaking workers. In other in— stances, unions may provide resources to aid the efforts of a community—based campaign. The other model of community unionism, which is the focus of this article, is that of an autonomous community—based labor group11 and is more faithful to the vision of commu- nity unionism developed by Conway and O’Connor. These community unions can also differ in a number of areas. They may vary by tactics (legalistic, direct-action such as civil dis- obedience, or lobbying); membership structure (dues collecting or not); sources of funding (union support, individual donations, or foun— dations); and their organizing geography (fo— cus on an ethnic group within a community, or on a community defined solely by geographi— cal boundaries). Many of these commu— nity unions use workers centers as the hub of their organizational activity. Unlike trade unions, most commu- nity unions seek to organize the em- ployed, unemployed, and underem— ployed; they press for change in the work— place and beyond, organizing around is- sues such as welfare reform, health care, jobs, housing, and immigration. Mem— bership is based on community not workplace. In short, these community unions bridge the home-workplace divide”: whereas trade unions’ primary concerns are typically workplace-related, these organizations take a holistic approach to the lives of working people. The members of a community union often face a nexus of low-wage insecure employment, a 26 - New Labor Forum punitive welfare bureaucracy, and neighbor- hood issues ranging from landlord-tenant re- lations to exploitative pay-day loan companies. The community union’s adversary may be an employer, but could also be the immigration department, a development agency, city coun- cil, the welfare bureaucracy, a landlord or the police. The development of this model of com- munity unionism is a response to two related socioeconomic trends: first, to conditions cre— ated by neoliberal globalization, and second, to the failure of the labor movement to adequately address these conditions. The deregulation or “flexiblization” of the labor market is an im— portant feature of the neoliberal project. Paired with the decline of long-term employment and governments’ abandonment of full—employ— ment policy, “flexibilization” has left many work- ers resigned to insecure, temporary, or contin- gent work of which the rapid growth of temp agencies is a symptom. Unions have had little Unlike trade unions, most community unions seek to organize the employed, unemployed, and underemployed. .. success confronting the challenge of these new work relations. Relatedly, the alarming expan- sion of the informal sector,13 especially in ur— ban centers, has put many workers outside the legal framework of unionization and collective bargaining, as work in this sector is typically not recognized or protected by law, or regu- S. Black ‘ lated by public auth workers in the infor self—employed or “e collective bargainin; Due to limiter unions have ignorer sider unorganizable workers, workers in workers in "flight" 5 industry or call cen and people of color ately affected by tl working conditions portant initiatives UNITE HERE, thr mained outside of t tegic focus. Many c feel that trade unio: ing impetus and ha The comn adversary employer, be the imr departmez developme council, tl bureaucra or the poli their members thro thereby isolating th its members, and d the process. It is in nity unionism has 1 7"” racy, and neighbor- landlord-tenant re- day loan companies. dversary may be an be the immigration it agency, city coun- :y, a landlord or the this model of com— »onse to two related t, to conditions cre— ition, and second, to ement to adequately Fhe deregulation or )r market is an im- aeral project. Paired ‘rn employment and :nt of full-employ— ’ has left many work— mporary, or contin- pid growth of temp [ions have had little ons, most ns seek to iloyed, i illenge of these new he alarming expan- ‘,” especially in ur— Norkers outside the ation and collective s sector is typically :d by law, or regu— g. l 1 I E” lated by public authorities. In addition, many workers in the informal sector are considered self-employed or “entrepreneurs,” for whom collective bargaining legislation is of little use. Due to limited resources, many trade unions have ignored those workers they con— sider unorganizable, including undocumented workers, workers in the informal economy, or workers in “flight” sectors such as the garment industry or call centers. Immigrants, women, and people of color have been disproportion- ately affected by the growth of exploitative working conditions and apart from some im— portant initiatives undertaken by SEIU and UNITE HERE, the working poor have re— mained outside of the labor movement’s stra— tegic focus. Many community union activists feel that trade unions have lost their organiz— ing impetus and have focused on “servicing” The community union’s adversary may be an employer, but could also be the immigration department, a development agency, city council, the welfare bureaucracy, a landlord or the police. their members through collective bargaining, thereby isolating the union bureaucracy from its members, and disempowering workers in the process. It is in this context that commu- nity unionism has reemerged as an organiza- It Takes a Community _______.._._L~__________________________________ tional model that seeks to empower some of the most vulnerable workers in the neoliberal economy. REDEFINING SOLIDARITY OMMUNITY UNIONS POSE A VITAL QUESTION: What happens to the sense of solidar- ity fostered by union membership when a unionized worker loses his or her job? Upon losing a union job workers can experience po- litical isolation as they also lose their identifi- cation with a collective whose combined strength is superior to that of the individual worker. At times, unions can continue their relationship with a recently unemployed mem— ber through retraining programs, or they may attempt to place the worker in other union shops. But beyond these initiatives, solidarity is lost. As community unions do not base membership on employment, they foster a sense of solidarity that goes beyond the workplace. In doing so, community unions allow working people to organize around common class interests regardless of their employment status. In terms of political empowerment, this is an important fea- ture of community unionism. Commu- nity unions can cultivate political partici- pation and engagement, moving their members to challenge power structures with a collective strength that is not reli- ant on an employment relationship. US. labor history is all too full ofex- amples of worker pitted against worker undermining the very notion of “solidar— ity.” Immigrants have been pitted against the native born, the welfare poor against the work— ing poor, and black workers against white work- ers. Community unionism is an effort to move New Labor Forum - 27 beyond this self—destructive history. Commu- nity unions may count trade unionists amongst their members along with home workers, stu- dents, welfare recipients, or injured workers. Many contemporary community unions have argued for a more inclusive definition of work recognizing that the collective power of a union must be extended to those without waged work. For example, community unions can acknowl- edge the emotional and physical labor of a pri- mary caregiver; the work of homeless persons who recycle the waste and scrap created in large urban centers; or the la— bor of sex workers. They may be “redefining solidarity,” but community unions are not immune from the inherent tensions that can char- acterize traditional trade unionism. Like trade unions, community unions can be territorial and may come into conflict with each other over attempts to orga- nize the same community. Community unions must also set agendas and orga— nizational visions. Conflicts may arise as to which struggles a community union should devote what are often limited resources. Inter- nal disputes may arise over what the long-term goals of the organization ought to be, ranging from the pragmatic (a living wage) to the am- bitious (abolition of the wage system). And of— ten there is conflict over the internal structure of a community union and its democratic prac— tice. COMMUNITY UNIONISM IN ACTION wo OF THE MOST EXCITING EXAMPLES OF community unionism today are the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty, in Toronto, and the National Mobilization Against 23 - New Labor Forum S. Black Sweatshops, in New York City.14 Founded in 1990, OCAP combines direct—action advocacy and grassroots mobilization in the struggle for decent work, housing, and social assistance. While OCAP may appear to be a conventional community action group, the organization sees itself as part of the broader working—class move— ment. Its efforts to build a mass organization that empowers the unemployed, precarious workers, and the working poor in a specific geo- Community unions pose a vital question: What happens to the sense of solidarity fostered by union membership when a unionized worker loses his or herjob? graphical area demand we rethink what a union’s function and capacities should be in the neoliberal economy. Organizing in the down- town Toronto area, OCAP counts several hun— dred members amongst its ranks, and is able to mobilize up to a thousand supporters for dem— onstrations. OCAP’s operating budget is de— rived from individual donations and the finan- cial support of a few progressive union locals. In Toronto, OCAP has led the fight against workfare, the city’s lack of affordable housing, and the criminalization of homelessness. What OCAP lacks in resources, it makes up for in creativity and political daring. The organiza— tions most recent campaign has put the prov- ince of Ontario’s welfare bureaucracy on the h. defensive, and won 1 ments for people ‘ province’s welfare p known $250 suppl have special dietary be confirmed by a There ma; commanii on the toe. labor. recipient to be elig. payment. When th attention, the orgar sive doctors across t: ics in which social : meet with health pl eligibility for the f Health practitioner supplement en mas: tion that the curren not enough money t: campaign has won tl gressive community crusade to raise we] regardless of their d ' Apart from swi this, OCAP engages for members of the c bers are mobilized t tions, immigration employer miscondu munity member is 1 ployer, temp agency, OCAP will usuallyi party demanding th diately. If there is n( rk City. 1“ Founded in irect-action advocacy ion in the struggle for 1nd social assistance. r to be a conventional , the organization sees r working—class move— . a mass organization mployed, precarious poor in a specific geo— i'ons pose What ‘ense of ad by hip when her loses we rethink what a :ities should be in the mizing in the down- ‘ counts several hun- : ranks, and is able to supporters for dem- ‘ating budget is de- lthflS and the finan- essive union locals. ;led the fight against affordable housing, homelessness. What it makes up for in ring. The organiza- ;n has put the prov— )ureaucracy on the defensive, and won thousands of dollars in pay- ments for people on social assistance. The province’s welfare package has a Virtually un- known $250 supplement for recipients who have special dietary needs. These needs must be confirmed by a health practitioner for the There may be times when community unions “step on the toes” of organized labor. recipient to be eligible for the extra monthly payment. When this was brought to OCAP’s attention, the organization met with progres— sive doctors across the city to set up health clin- ics in which social assistance recipients could meet with health practitioners and have their eligibility for the food supplement verified. Health practitioners have been approving the supplement en masse on the accurate assump— tion that the current monthly welfare check is not enough money to sustain a healthy diet. The campaign has won the broad support of the pro— gressive community in Toronto, and become a crusade to raise welfare rates for all recipients regardless of their dietary status. Apart from sweeping campaigns such as this, OCAP engages in direct-action advocacy for members of the community. OCAP’s mem— bers are mobilized to intervene in tenant evic— tions, immigration deportations, and cases of employer misconduct. For example, if a com— munity member is owed money from an em— ployer, temp agency, or the welfare department, OCAP will usually issue a letter to the relevant party demanding the payment be made imme- diately. If there is no response, OCAP will set ltTakes a Community up pickets at the place of business, or in the case of social assistance, members may occupy the local welfare office. OCAP has won Victories for many of its members and has enlarged its support base in the community as other resi- dents realize the power of collective action. There may be times when community unions “step on the toes” of organized la— bor. For instance, OCAP recently supported an independent workers committee estab- lished by unionized hotel workers who were not satisfied with the representation their union local had given them. Struggling to ensure that their collective agreement was enforced, both by their local and their employer, the workers committee took as its guiding Vi- sion the words of an old Scottish rank—and—filer who proclaimed, We will support the [union] officials just so long as they represent the work- ers but we will act independently if immedi- ately they misrepresent them.’ "5 OCAP has mo- bilized members in support of the workers committee, setting up pickets at the hotel, and accompanying the committee to confront the union local. OCAP has thus come in for criti- cism by some sections of organized labor in Toronto. This example points to the tensions that can exist between independent commu— nity unions and the traditional labor move— ment. Although dialogue can facilitate coop— eration and understanding between commu— nity unions and organized labor, inevitably there will be points of contention. COMMUNITY UNIONISM, NEW YORK STYLE STABLISHED IN 1996, THE NATIONAL MOBI— lization Against Sweatshops (NMASS) operates out of two workers centers in New York City. NMASS draws on the tradition New Labor Forum - 29 of such community unions as the Chinese Staff and Workers Association, a pioneer of commu- nity unionism. Whereas OCAP relies on indi— vidual donations and the financial support of a few progressive union locals, NMASS has a dues—paying structure. NMASS focuses on the struggle to abolish the sweatshop system. NMASS seeks to organize “injured work— ers, students, mothers and care- givers working in the home, retirees, unemployed persons, and people from all communities and walks of life.” The organization’s primary demands are “the right to a 40-hour workweek at a living wage for all...and the right to a 40-hour workweek for those currently unemployed.”16 In addition, NMASS demands “the recognition of care giv- ing work done in the home as part of that paid 40—hour workweek.”” These demands represent an expansion of the notion of solidarity, and NMASS stresses the inclusiveness of its orga— nizing strategy. The group sees itself as part of a new labor movement committed “to fighting for long—term changes that will enable workers to have genuine economic, political and social power.n18 Like OCAP, NMASS relies on a variety of tactics to press for change in a number of ar- eas. In 2000, NMASS successfully lobbied for the first minimum wage increase for New York State restaurant workers in over ten years. Through collective action, the group has won wage concessions and back payments from gar- ment manufacturers and helped launch a NAFTA lawsuit challenging New York’s work- ers compensation system. Under NAFTA’s la- bor side agreement (called the North Ameri- can Agreement for Labor Cooperation or NAALC) workers and their organizations can file a complaint alleging failure by any one of the three participating governments to enforce 30 - New Labor Forum 5. Black its labor standards. Although relatively tooth— less, the NAALC’s decisions can put the spot— light on a government’s labor relations. NMASS’s successful challenge led to a public shaming of the New York State government as Mexican officials in charge of investigating the complaint harshly criticized New York’s work— ers compensation system, and censured the government for failing to “protect workers from dangerous work conditions and to ensure that workers hurt on the job receive timely and ad- equate compensation and medical treatment for their injuries and illnesses?” One of NMASS’s most recent campaigns challenges the city of New York to deal with I the health issues that working people have faced in their neighborhoods since 9—11. Working with other community groups, NMASS has organized a medical clinic to document the health ailments many lower Manhattan resi- dents have developed due to the toxic fallout generated by the collapse of the Twin Towers. Poor air quality affected many working people in the post-9—11 period, and NMASS has or— ganized numerous marches and demonstra— tions demanding the government take action to address health conditions ranging from res— piratory problems to rashes.20 In a related cam— paign, NMASS helped organize a coalition of community organizations, churches, and small businesses to challenge the plans of real estate developers and the Lower Manhattan Devel- opment Corporation, whose mandate to rebuild lower Manhattan promises to gentrify the tra- ditionally working-class community. NMASS has also been at the forefront of the struggle for workers rights in New York City’s Chinatown. Immigrant workers face exploitative conditions in restaurant and gar- ment work. Through boycotts, picketing, and i letter writing campai; these workers comma ed officials and the p journer Truth’s famc NMASS’s “Ain’t I a W has framed the SW women in the New Y try, who are primari as a struggle for race Such a campaign hi; munity unions can av “identity politics” ag: debate that has cons cent years. PUTTING T BACK Il OMMUNITY U its. Skeptics claim that alt may provide politi largely unrepresentc make the type of ec01 bers that a trade uni bargaining. This c1 Community unions through lobbying, d tics. In other words political, not econor munity unions mu building strong coal nity organizations a order to push for p broader social Chang unions have to win voters to add moral their campaigns, m2 cult for elected off mands.22 Yet there is no d though relatively tooth- :isions can put the spot- ient’s labor relations. hallenge led to a public ork State government as arge of investigating the icized New York’s work- tem, and censured the to “protect workers from tions and to ensure that ) receive timely and ad— 1d medical treatment for :ses.”19 most recent campaigns \lew York to deal with rking people have faced 5 since 9-11. Working / groups, NMASS has linic to document the lower Manhattan resi— lue to the toxic fallout se of the Twin Towers. . many working people 1, and NMASS has or- ‘ches and demonstra- ivernment take action ions ranging from res- hes.20 In a related cam- >rganize a coalition of IS, churches, and small :he plans of real estate 'er Manhattan Devel- ose mandate to rebuild ;es to gentrify the tra- community. en at the forefront of ; rights in New York iigrant workers face [1 restaurant and gar- ycotts, picketing, and 4!. letter writing campaigns, NMASS has helped these workers command the attention of elect— ed officials and the public at large. Using So- journer Truth’s famous proclamation, NMASS’s “Ain’t I a Woman?” campaign has framed the struggle of working women in the New York garment indus— try, who are primarily women of color, as a struggle for race and gender justice. Such a campaign highlights how com- munity unions can avoid pitting so-called “identity politics” against class politics, a debate that has consumed the Left in re— cent years. PUTTING THE MOVEMENT BACK INTO LABOR OMMUNITY UNIONISM MAY HAVE ITS LIM- its. Skeptics in the labor movement claim that although community unions may provide political representation for a largely unrepresented population, they cannot make the type of economic gains for their mem— bers that a trade union can through collective bargaining. This critique has some validity. Community unions win economic concessions through lobbying, direct action, and other tac- tics. In other words, their power is primarily political, not economic.21 Consequently, com- munity unions must focus their efforts on building strong coalitions with other commu— nity organizations and the labor movement in order to push for progressive legislation and broader social change. In addition, community unions have to win the hearts and minds of voters to add moral and political legitimacy to their campaigns, making it increasingly diffi- cult for elected officials to ignore their de— mands.22 Yet there is no denying community union— ltTakes a Community ism is an emerging form of working class orga— nization that challenges the conditions work— ing people face in the neoliberal economy. In [The NMASS] campaign highlights how community anions can avoid pitting “identity politics” against class politics... many ways community unionism is putting the movement back into labor. The long-term re- lationship of community unionism to the la- bor movement is yet to be determined. The la- bor movement must not see community unions as necessarily pre-union formations, that is, neither as threats, nor as spaces to be colonized by the labor movement “proper.” Community unions have developed their own organizational structure and culture, ways of fostering leader- ship, and political agendas. Both community union activists and trade unionists would ben— efit from engaging in a dialogue based on their capabilities, limitations, and shared interests. If trade unions are to regain their power and build strong organizations capable of challenging capital’s agenda, they must learn from the tac— tics and organizing strategies of community unionism. Those workers community unions have been successful in organizing and empow- ering (specifically women, immigrants, and people of color) are vital to the rejuvenation of the labor movement. A movement that does not harness the power of all working people is des— tined to be weak and ineffective in the struggle for a socially just society. I New Labor Forum - 31 1.The article draws on the groundbreaking scholarship on community unionism by Janice Fine and Cynthia Cranford. 2. James O’Connor, "Towards a Theory of Community Unions, Part 1,” Studies on the Left, 2 (1964): 164. 3. Jessica Tait, Poor Workers’ Unions: Rebuild— ing Labor from Below, Cambridge Mass; South End Press, 2005. 4. James O’Connor, "Towards a Theory of Community Unions, Part II,” Studies on the Left, 3 (1964): 240-257. 5. Janice Fine, “Community Unions in Balti- more and Long Island: Beyond the Politics of Par— ticularism,” PhD dissertation, Massachusetts In— stitute of Technology, February 2003. 6. Ibid. 313. 7. Ibid. 8. Ibid. 9. lbid. 10. Ibid. 1 1. Cynthia Cranford, Mary Gellatly, Deena Ladd, and Leah F. Vosko, "Workers’ Centres and Community Unionism: Organizing for Fair Em— ployment in Toronto,” Paper Presented at the In— ternational Colloquium on Union Renewal, Montreal, November 18‘“—20"‘ 2004. 12. Janice Fine, “Community Unions and the Revival of the American Labor Movement,” Politics & Society, Vol. 33, No. 1 (2005): 153-199. 13. The informal sector is very heteroge- neous and it is thus difficult to define its bound— aries and characteristics. However, the Interna— tional Labour Organization (lLO) considers work~ ers to be in the informal sector if they are "not recognized or protected under the legal and regulatory frameworks.” Plus, informal workers 32 - New Labor Forum 5. Black “are characterized by a high degree ofvulnerabil— ity.”The ILO states that the "situation of those in the informal economy" should be defined "in terms of decent work deficits.” These deficits in— clude "poor-quality, unproductive and unremu— nerative jobs that are not recognized or pro— tected by law, the absence of rights at work, in— adequate social protection, and the lack of rep— resentation and voice are most pronounced in the informal economy, especially at the bottom end among women and young workers.” See page 3 of the ILO report Decent Work and the In— formal Economy at: www.i|o.org/pub|ic/eng|ish/ employment/infeco/download/report6.pdf. 14. Much of the information in this section is drawn from discussions I’ve had with activists in OCAP (including an interview I conducted with OCAP organizerJohn Clarke) and NMASS. 15. See the Metropolitan Hotel Workers’ Committee website at http://www.metropo|itan hotelsworkers.org/. 16. National Mobilization Against Sweat— shops, Introductory Pamphlet. 17. Ibid. 18. NMASS/Workers, Centers and the New Labor Movement,” NMASS Homepage, accessed at: http://www.nmass.org/nmass/articles/ workers%20centers.htm. 19. NMASS, "Pataki blamed for failed state Workers’ Comp system." NMASS Homepage, ac— cessed at: http://www.nmass.org/nmass/news/ 112404NAFTAPressConference.html 20. For information on NMASS’ Beyond Ground Zero Campaign, see http:// www.nmass.org/nmass/bgz/bgz.html. 21. Fine 2003 and 2005. 22. Ibid. .. 'm.__. M c , 0‘ Are t a c. WBBKER BElllEllS orpnm-g Communities at 25; Edge arm Dream JMIIEE FlllE mqur mm mmm MOVIMG ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/25/2011 for the course WOMEN CULT 101 taught by Professor Lee during the Fall '08 term at Rutgers.

Page1 / 9

Black - Community Unionism - ITTAKES A COMMUNITY:...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 9. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online