Labor Fights Terrorism and Bush Simultaneously

AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney, a balding, pudgy, sixtyish man in suspenders, makes an unlikely revolutionary. But when he was elected in 1995, he vowed to revolutionize what was then a moribund 13-million member organization. Six years later, Sweeney can claim much credit. He has helped revitalize American labor by focusing on both old-fashioned organizing and new campaigns to build bridges with political, church, community and immigrant activist groups.

On the other hand, labor's challenges remain daunting. Union membership has stagnated, with only about 12 percent of American workers now represented by a union. Republicans, the traditional foe of organized labor, occupy the White House and a majority of the seats in the House of Representatives. Some 650 unionized workers died in the Sept. 11 attacks, and the economic recession following in its wake has resulted in the layoffs of hundreds of thousands. Post-attack emergency legislation -- from the airport-industry deal to the proposed economic stimulus program -- has not addressed labor concerns.

Against that crisis backdrop, the AFL-CIO held its biennial convention last week, where this interview with Sweeney took place.

QUESTION: How have the events of Sept. 11 and their aftermath affected the priorities and political focus of organized labor?

ANSWER: It's a national disgrace the way workers have been treated. We supported the president and his administration in the war on terrorism from the very first day. Many of our members are a part of the increased military activity. We saw the airline industry bailed out in Congress. We were assured that worker protection issues would be taken up as quickly as possible. Yet, despite all that's going on with things like moving to bail out the insurance industry and to enact airplane security legislation, the people who are suffering the most -- the hundreds of thousands of laid-off workers -- have not had their issues of unemployment insurance and health-care coverage addressed. It is insulting to workers who make this country run.

Q: You've noted that congressional Republicans like Dick Armey (R-Texas) and Tom DeLay (R-Texas) have failed to address the issues of workers. But what about your traditional Democratic allies? There have been reports that you were pretty angry with them as well. Why didn't Democrats put up any significant resistance to that original airline-bailout bill?

A: We thought it was wrong not to include worker protections in the airline bailout bill, and we still think that it's wrong that our issues haven't been addressed. We really have been trying to move both Democrats and Republicans on this issue. I think, though, that the Democrats, under the leadership of [Sen. Tom] Daschle and [Rep. Richard A.] Gephardt, have taken some strong initiatives and have been trying their damnedest to get worker protections. It's clear that the administration, along with the Armeys and the DeLays, are not interested in real worker protection.

Q: As we speak, the country is now officially in a recession. We have an economic-stimulus bill that's stalled on Capitol Hill. Is there anything in that bill that you think is going to benefit your constituency in this decline?

A: Well, there are really two proposals out there. One is the House bill, which contains tax revisions that are clearly anti-worker while benefitting corporations and the wealthy. The Senate Finance Committee proposal is a fairer proposal that does attempt to address worker issues in a meaningful way. But the administration is not supporting the Senate proposal and, as far as we're concerned, until both houses come up with a bill that has real health coverage and increased unemployment insurance, we're not going to be satisfied.