From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Thu Apr 3 00:25:28 1997 Wed, 2 Apr 1997 23:21:36 -0800 (PST) Wed, 2 Apr 1997 23:20:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 23:20:10 -0800 (PST) To: can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, OIFAC@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: UMASS Student Victory Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >Return-Path: >X-Sender: wkramer@pop.ben2.ucla.edu >Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 10:38:33 -0800 >To: wkramer@ucla.edu >From: William Kramer >Subject: UMASS Student Victory > >After successfully negotiating their demands with the university, 150 >>students came out of the building they were occupying at the University of >>Massachusetts. About 100 supporters waited for at least 4 hours IN THE >>SNOW to welcome the students and share in their victory. Contary to >>press reports, this takeover was not a "minority" or student of color >>action. Although many of the demands focussed around issues effecting >>students of color, others focussed on poor and first generation college >>students, and others addressed issues of interest to many other groups of >>students. Students in the building and others who supported them through >>the 6 days of occupation contintually emphasized that the struggle was a >>student struggle. The following is a summary of the agreement signed by >>the students and the university administration. They were published in a >>special Saturday edition of The Massachusetts Daily Collegian, the >>University newspaper. >> >>1. Achieve and maintain an overall goal of 20% ALANA undergraduate >>students through recruitment and retention. >> >>2. A process to dramatically reduce the number of holds due to >>outstanding bills; an immediate and continuous process; briefing >>statement due May 1, 1997 >> >>3. Increasing need-based financial aid through allocations and fund >>raising; theough FY '98 budget requested five-year support goal of $5 >>million. >> >>4. Greater attention to helping students resolve financial problems; >>immediate and continuing process; briefing statement due May 1, 1997 >> >>5. Diversifying the staff of the Bursar's office as positions become >>available. >> >>6. Diversifying senior adminstration positions as positions become >>available. >> >>7. Strongly supporting evening hours for students to meet candidates; >>request to Departmetns by May 1, 1997 >> >>8. Strong support for a time without classes for student participation >>in searches; request to Calendar and Scheduling Committee by May 1, 1997 >> >>9. Hiring a UALRC (United Asian Learning Resource CEnter) conselor with >>the next new counseling position;l est $40,000 base budget allocation. >> >>10. Filling the four ALANA admissions positions; one filled, remaining >>three by AUgust 1997; full and continuous staffing. >> >>11. Seeing funding for an institutional program to complement AUMMA and >>Talent Search; multi-$100,000 proposal submitted by November 1, 1997. >> >>12. UALRC, BCP (Bilingual Collegiate Program), CCEBMS (Collegiate >>Committee for Education of Black and Other Minority Students) Assisant >>Directors report to Associate Director for ALANA recruitment; immediately. >> >>13. Increased publication etc, for ALANA recruitment. New poublicans >>have just been done to carry through 2000; review at that time; est $5000. >> >>14. Sufficient budget for ALANA needs; continuous review. >> >>15. Encouraging opportunities for students to study Irish, Native >>American, Latin American, and Asian American cultures; immediate and >>continuous. >> >>16. Reaching 15% ALANA students in the graduate school. >> >>17. Tutoring and operating money for ALANA support programs; '98nbudget >>requst $48,000. >> >>18. Hiring a staff member to institute a Native support; est $70,000 >>annually for three years to cover full time staff and program start up >>cost and operating expenses Spring '98. >> >>19. Convening a Task Force on Child Care in March 1997. >> >>20. Dedication of Executive-level adminstrative time for the remainder >>of the semester to fully discuss all unresolved issues. >> >>21. Forming a subcommittee of the Faculty Committee on the Status of >>Minorities to monitor progress of these agreements. >> >> >>For those of you who sent messages of support, you should know that I >>printed them up and got them to the students who were buoyed by them. >>This is a great victory for these students and we hope for the >>strengthening of activism in these very bleak times. Please spread the >>word. After the first day, the media ignored this takeover because it is >>so important. Yesterday, only the local media were here. >> >> >Karen Brodkin >Anthropology Department >341 Haines Hall >UCLA >Los Angeles, CA 90095 >kbsacks@ucla.edu >310-825-3973 > >XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > William Kramer > UCLA LAMAP Coordinator > 1001 Gayley--2nd Floor > Los Angeles, CA 90024 > 310-794-0698 > 310-794-8017 fax > wkramer@ucla.edu > www.lamap.org >XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > > From global@uk.pi.net Thu Apr 3 16:45:42 1997 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 97 23:24:06 From: LCmrci Subject: LCMRCI web site and journal To: socialistact@igc.apc.org, left-unity@jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU, marxjour@dia.edu.ar The new web site of the LCMRCIis: ++ La nueva Pagina Web del Cemicor es: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/8792/ Read our last Internationalist Bulletin: Internationalist Bulletin 2 Publication of the Liaison Committee of Militants for a Revolutionary Communist International Victory to the Albanian uprising! Spring 1997/ Content : Albania: Spontaneous revolt against anti-communists— The ruin of the Balkan capitalist model — Key events in the two months of unrest that have drawn Albania into Revolution — Victory to the Albanian uprising! — Voices from Albania — The MRTA holding of the Japanese ambassador’s house in Lima and the tasks of the working class — Human rights in Peru — Good picket against Fujimori in London — Colombian general strike’s picket — Christmas massacre in Bolivia. Summary of a report from Poder Obrero (Bolivia) — Ecuador: General strike ousts President Bucaram — Guerrilla struggles re-emerge in Latin America. Workers’ Voice (U.S.) — What lessons from the Korean general strike? Communist Workers Group (New Zealand) — The Civil War in Zaire — Imperialists out of central Africa! Workers’ Voice (U.S.) — Down with Milosevic, Zajedno! Crisis looms over Serbia; Workers’ Voice (U.S.) — Pauline Hanson and Australian racism; Communist Left of Australia — New Zealand: The coalition from hell; Communist Workers Group (New Zealand) — Detroit Newspaper strike: UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER! Workers’ Voice (U.S.) — Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! — DOSSIER: Joint declarations of the LCMRCI and the LTT (Iraq, Palestine, Ireland, Trade Union work in Britain, Europe) — Banditry and colonialism will not destroy Poder Obrero in Peru — The bankruptcy of Workers Power’s LRCI — In this issue In this issue we re-reproduce articles from different groups and comrades of the LCMRCI and fraternal groups. We give particular importance to the recent struggles in Latin America. Most of these issues were ignored or badly reported in the European left press. We have an article on two important mass actions in the Andes: the Ecuadorian general strike which overthrew a just-elected populist government; and the armed confrontation between the army and the miners in Bolivia. Our comrades in Peru sent articles related to the occupation of the Japanese diplomatic residence in Lima and how their organisation is existing and struggling in such difficult circumstances. We are reprinting an article from Workers Voice in which it is analyse the development of significant guerrilla struggles in the two major countries which surround the Central American isthmus: Colombia and Mexico. We cover the new troubles in Serbia and, especially, Albania. The latest is a very important development. It is an spontaneous mass rebellion which is not using any anti-Communist or ethnic-nationalist cover and is directly against one of the models of capitalist restoration in the region. The New Zealand comrades wrote articles on the class struggle in the Pacific: the Korean demonstrations and the new reactionary coalition in New Zealand. We also reproduced two articles on Central Africa. The Communist Left wrote on racism in Australia. Workers’ Voice presents an account of the defeat of the Detroit’s newspaper strike, in which they were involved. At the end we are publishing a Dossier with all the documents adopted by the LTT and the LCMRCI. We also have a summary article on our differences with the organisation where we come from: the LRCI. We invite the readers to send their comments. From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Thu Apr 3 18:28:11 1997 Thu, 3 Apr 1997 15:33:25 -0800 (PST) Thu, 3 Apr 1997 15:28:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 15:28:21 -0800 (PST) To: united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, h-uclea@h-net.msu.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: The new, bigger, better NAFTA Sender: meisenscher@igc.org Not globalization, just global capitalism. >From: D Shniad >Subject: The new, bigger, better NAFTA >To: drache@yorku.ca (Daniel Drache) >Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 12:16:56 -0800 (PST) >Cc: sedsall@nswtf.org.au (Sally Edsall), > meisenscher@igc.apc.org (Michael Eisenscher), global@sfu.ca > >The Globe and Mail Thursday, April 3, 1997 > >Treaty to trim Ottawa's power > >Equal-treatment rules for foreign firms could limit research, job- >creation targets > > By Laura Eggertson, The Globe and Mail > >OTTAWA -- An investment treaty under negotiation by the world's >industrialized countries would limit Canada's ability to set employment quotas >or to require foreign-owned companies to conduct specified amounts of >research and development as a condition of investment. > >Canada is joining France in insisting on an exemption for cultural industries in >the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MIA), a draft copy of which was >obtained yesterday by The Globe and Mail. > > The treaty would extend open-border investment guarantees under the North >American free-trade agreement to all 29 countries that belong to the >Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. > >Unlike NAFTA, however, the proposed new treaty imposes so-called national- >treatment requirements on the investment incentives that countries offer >corporations. That means Canada would have to treat foreign corporations >located here exactly as it does domestic companies in terms of subsidies, low- >interest loans and other enticements to get companies to invest. > >For example, under this deal, Industry Canada would be required to provide >foreign-owned aerospace companies the same technology grants it now gives >Canadian-owned companies in order to create jobs and spur economic growth. > >Canadian critics of NAFTA and its predecessor, the Canada-U.S. free-trade >deal, say this new treaty has even broader implications for Canadian >sovereignty. > >"The ability of governments to use investment policy as a tool to promote social, >economic and environmental goals will be forbidden under the MIA," said Tony >Clarke of the Polaris Institute, an Ottawa think-tank that has studied the draft >text. > >If the treaty is adopted, governments who sign it will not be able to opt out for >at least five years. And even if a country does opt out, existing investments >would continue to be covered by its provisions for a further 15 years. > >That means the deal "completely ties the hands" of future governments in their >job-creation policies, said Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians. > >Mr. Clarke concurs. "Just because the Mulroney government and now the >Chretien government have agreed to these kinds of terms, it doesn't mean a >future government down the road wouldn't want to say, 'Look, the crisis is so >great in terms of unemployment in this country that we need a national >employment strategy and we're going to have to . . . put performance >requirements on foreign investment,' " he said in an interview. "That just can't >happen under these circumstances." > >The negotiations for the agreement are now taking place in Paris, where the >OECD is based, and a final pact is not expected before the May deadline. While >the talks are contentious, negotiators are hopeful that they will reach a deal. > >Key elements of the draft treaty: > >No government will be able to require foreign companies to hire locally, comply >with employment targets, establish a head office here or achieve a set level of >research and development as a condition of being allowed to invest. "You >couldn't say: 'We will allow you to establish here as long as you employ 1,000 >people,' " a government official said. "That's consistent with the NAFTA rule." > >The document recognizes that if governments provide low-interest loans, tax >credits or subsidies to lure a company to a region, they are entitled to make >some "reasonable" employment demands in return. But Ottawa, or the >provinces, might not be able to require a foreign corporation to create particular >numbers of jobs or hire local workers. "It would depend upon how it was >interpreted," the official said of this clause. Canadian small-business grants to >assist aboriginals or women, for example, could also be affected by these >provisions, as could U.S. affirmative-action programs. > >A separate section of the agreement guarantees visas for foreign executives, >managers and "specialists" and their spouses and minor children. > >Canada and France want a general exception for cultural industries, something >the United States rejects. But Washington has agreed to negotiate individual >exceptions for countries gravely concerned about this issue. "The readiness of >the U.S. to accept a broad-enough culture reservation for Canada . . . may prove >to be a break point," according to a federal government document. > >The treaty would require countries that privatize government corporations to >consider offers by foreign companies on a basis equal to domestic companies. >The provision might affect employee-buyout plans if they are regarded as >discriminating against foreign investors. > >The agreement would set up dispute-settlement panels, modelled on NAFTA >panels, for resolving investment concerns. This is a first for the OECD, >considered more of a club than an international regulatory body. > >This draft of the treaty would regulate the way corporations are organized. It >would prohibit countries from placing residency or nationality requirements on >members of boards of directors. It would also prohibit companies from issuing >separate classes of shares that give foreigners different voting rights from those >of citizens. Corporate-governance issues have now "dropped off the table" >because countries had too much difficulty agreeing on the provisions, the >government official said. But the national-treatment provisions of the entire >treaty could still have implications for share-class issuance and board-of- >directors requirements. > >Canada has also proposed rules to prohibit countries from passing laws like the >U.S. Helms-Burton law, which attempts to punish companies that do business >in Cuba. Canada's draft article states that no country would be allowed to >impose a liability or sanction corporations from another country that invest in a >third country. Furthermore, under this deal, the United States would not be >allowed to try to drag Canada or the European Union into its economic boycott >of Cuba. > >U.S. negotiators have not agreed to the Canadian proposals, the government >official said. > >"They don't like them at all, but we've made it clear that these are issues that are >important to Canada." > >Japan and the European Union want subnational governments, such as >provinces and municipalities, to be bound by the same agreement. But Canada >has said its negotiations cover only federal measures, and the provinces will not >necessarily sign on. > >The treaty is being negotiated by the OECD after attempts to reach an >agreement through the World Trade Organization broke down when many of >the world's developing countries did not agree to be bound by the provisions. >The United States, which is pushing this agreement, hopes that if it is ratified >by industrialized nations, developing countries will later agree to join. > >That won't happen, said trade consultant Gerry Shannon, a former Canadian >negotiator, because "countries like India and Pakistan . . . will never sign on to >anything they haven't had a hand in negotiating. What's the gain here?" > > From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Thu Apr 3 18:41:14 1997 Thu, 3 Apr 1997 15:36:33 -0800 (PST) Thu, 3 Apr 1997 15:28:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 15:28:30 -0800 (PST) To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, united@cougar.com, OIFAC@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU, can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Documentary on Cesar Chavez margy@uclink.berkeley.edu, jkurz@igc.org Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >Return-Path: >Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 16:11:49 -0500 >Reply-To: H-NET List for Labor Studies >Sender: H-NET List for Labor Studies >From: "David Alexander, H-UCLEA" >Subject: Documentary on Cesar Chavez > >THE FIGHT IN THE FIELDS, CESAR CHAVEZ AND THE FARMWORKERS' STRUGGLE, a >two-hour documentary, will air on PBS on Wednesday, April 16 at 9:00 p.m. >(check local listings). The companion book, published by Harcourt Brace, is >now available in bookstores. The documentaty, produced by Ray Telles and >Rick Tejada-Flores, chronicles the life of Chavez and the history of the >farmworkers movement. The film puts the farmworkers struggle in context -- >showing the powerful forces opposing them and also showing how in the end it >was the support of the American public that assured victore in this David vs. >Goliath struggle. The film contains interviews with many of Chavez's family >and colleagues including Dolores Huerta and Richard Chavez. > >Schools, libraries and other organizations can purchase videocasettes, copies >of the companion book, study guides and posters by contacting (800) 903-7804 >or www.itvs.org/chavez or writing: THE FIGHT IN THE FIELDS > Dept.A, Box 3250 > Sparks, NV 94332-3250 > >For more information, contact Rick Tejada-Flores or Laurie Coyle at (415) >285-3937; FAX (415) 285-5687. E-mail: GRTF@aol.com or GRTF@igc.org > > From shostaka@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu Fri Apr 4 10:55:49 1997 Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 12:44:23 -0500 To: LABOR-RAP@csf.colorado.edu From: shostaka@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu (Art Shostak) Subject: F.Y.I. >Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 16:55:24 -0600 >To: ACTMOTOWN@aol.com >From: Bryan Thompson >Subject: "I" Am Big Labor Campaign > >After getting the latest update from Daymon, I thought I'd send this to all >the supporters on his list. We will be in Detroit that weekend and will be >supporting them until they get their jobs back. > >These items are one way to support them, and all money above cost goes to >the DNA strike fund. we have sent $647 so far from the first 1000 buttons, >and another 1500 from the 2nd order of 2000 will follow shortly. > >In solidarity >Bryan > > >By popular demand we have expanded the "I" Am Big Labor Campaign to >include T-shirts, and Bumper-Stickers. > >Go to http://www.natcavoice.org/biglabor.htm to see all three items. > >The Detroit struggle is not over, in attempting to resolve the strike >by offering to return to work, they have become the victims of a lock-out. > >Your support is needed more than ever. Support the 2000 locked-out >workers in Detroit by participating in the June, March on Detroit, >"Action! Motown '97" and by purchasing items from the "I" Am Big Labor >Campaign. More on that below. > > > [][] > [] > [] Am Big Labor > [] > [][] > > Why is "BIG LABOR" used as an insult? Why is this term used to spread > poisonous distortions about groups of ordinary folks who've merely > organized for their common welfare? > > BIG LABOR is not just union presidents. It's everyone who belongs > to a union or would like to. It's broom pushers, wrench turners, > school teachers, nurses, computer operators, airline pilots and many > others. WE ARE ALL A PART OF BIG LABOR! > > A group of us, union members, scholars, and other friends of labor, > have launched a national campaign to inform our detractors of how BIG > and PROUD we really are. We're going to send them a message that will > induce nightmares, AND, at the same time, raise money to help the > Detroit Newspaper Strikers. > > We're selling 2-1/4 inch buttons, bumper stickers, and T-shirts that > say "_I_ Am Big Labor", the T-shirts also commemorate "Action! Motown > '97". They are being made by union printers. All proceeds over cost > will go to support the Detroit Newspaper Strike. > >Go to http://www.natcavoice.org/biglabor.htm to see all three items. > > *----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----* > | | > | ORDERING INFO: | > | | > | You may use cash, check or money order. Please make checks | > | out to "The NATCA Voice". | > | | > | Send the orders to: | > | | > | Bryan Thompson | > | c/o The NATCA Voice | > | 112 Juliann Drive., #5 | > | Wood Dale, IL 60191 | > | | > | 630-860-7423 or staff@natcavoice.org for any questions | > | | > | BUTTONS are $1.00 each. | > | | > | Also include postage of: | > | $1.00 for 1-8 buttons ordered | > | $2.00 for 9-16 buttons ordered | > | $3.00 for over 16 buttons ordered | > | | > | BUMPER STICKERS are $1.00 each. | > | | > | Also include postage of $1.00 for any quantity, | > | | > | T-SHIRTS are $11.00 each sizes S, M, L, and XL. | > | Add $1.00 for XXL | > | Add $2.00 for XXXL | > | Call for XXXXL | > | Shirt color is ash (speckled grey). | > | | > | Also include postage of $3.00 for any quantity shirts. | > | | > | We are asking you to pay the postage so that all money | > | above the actual cost of the item may be sent to the | > | Detroit Strike Relief Fund. | > | | > *----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----* > > Look for us in America@Work, Solidarity, and around 300 labor > publications around the U.S. soon. If you don't see us in yours > please pass this info along to them. Photos, and camera ready art > available by request. > >"I" Am Big Labor Supporters: > >Len Wilson, Denver CO >IAMAW DL 141, LL 1886 >Shop Steward >Ph: (303)288-9368 (hm) >lbw@cougar.com > >Joe Berry >University of Iowa Labor Center >Iowa City, Iowa 52242-5000 >319-335-4144 >Fax: 319-335-4077 >E-mail: joe-berry@uiowa.edu > >George L. Searfoss >Coordinator, Labor In The Schools Program >Indiana University South Bend >gsearfoss@vines.iusb.edu > >Dennis and Kim Orosz >CWA Local 4900 >dorosz@cl-sys.com >http://www.cl-sys.com/dorosz > >Don Whipkey >USWA Local 1157 >stlwkr@en.com > >Nancy S. Volmer >UC Chapter 925/SEIU >University of Cincinnati >Cincinnati, Ohio >volmerns@sprynet.com > >Bryan Thompson >National Air Traffic Controllers Association >MEBA/AFL-CIO >Editor - The NATCA Voice > >Michael Eisenscher >Workers Education Local 189 (CWA) >meisenscher@igc.apc.org > >Aikya Param >Publisher, Women and Money Newsletter >aikya@ix.netcom.com > >Bob Kastigar >IBEW Local 1220, Chicago >Executive Board Member >R-Kastigar@neiu.edu > >Guy Podzorski >28045 Deiesing >Madison Hgts., MI 48071 >detmius@pipeline.com > >Jim Werner >Secretary-Treasurer >United Transportation Union >Local 18 >JIMW93045@aol.com > >Bill Gorrell >LIUNA Local 703 >co-host, Eastern Illinois Labor Journal, >member, Board of Directors, WEFT-FM >bgorrell@net66.com > >International Union of Operating Engineers >Local 547 A,B,C,E,H -AFL-CIO >24270 W. Seven Mile Road >Detroit, MI 48219 > >Bruce Koldys, VP >Dearborn Federation of School Employees, AFT >http://www.koldys.com > > > >Bryan Thompson H: 630-860-7423 >staff@natcavoice.org http://www.NATCAVoice.org >Editor - The NATCA Voice 800-SKY-TALK ; Pin 114-9137 > > Arthur B. Shostak, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology, Department of Psych/Soc/Anthro, Drexel University, Phila., PA, 19104; 215-895-2466; fax 610-668-2727. email: SHOSTAKA@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu http://httpsrv.ocs.drexel.edu/faculty/shostaka/ "This time, like all times, is a very good one if we but know what to do with it." Ralph Waldo Emerson From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Sun Apr 6 20:03:01 1997 Sun, 6 Apr 1997 18:55:08 -0700 (PDT) Sun, 6 Apr 1997 17:08:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 17:08:57 -0700 (PDT) To: united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, h-uclea@h-net.msu.edu, can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Action! Motown '97-June 20, 21st. Sender: meisenscher@igc.org Here is the latest news (lengthy report) from Detroit provided by one of the strike/lockout coordinators. >Subject: Action! Motown '97-June 20, 21st. >Fyi: >Update on what is happening in the strike/lockout in Detroit from the Detroit >Sunday Journal. >Action! Motown '97 > >Join us for a Solidarity Day June 20, 21st. > >daymon j. hartley >former striker/locked-out newspaper photographer >(Actmotown@aol.com )to request more information on the march! >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Sunday, April 6, 1997 > >Unions' injunction bid makes it to Washington > >LOCKOUT NOTEBOOK > >By Alan Forsyth >Journal Staff Writer > >The National Labor Relations Board in Washington now has the newspaper >unions' request for an injunction that would compel the Detroit >newspapers to take back most of its 2,000 locked-out workers. > >If NLRB General Counsel Frederick Feinstein decides the 10(j) injunction >should be sought, he will ask the board to approve. Then regional >director William Schaub in Detroit will be directed to seek the >injunction in U.S. District Court. > >Ellen A. Farrell, assistant general counsel and chief of the NLRB's >injunction litigation branch, declined to estimate how long it would >take for the board to decide. David Radtke said he and other attorneys >for the unions believe the Washington deliberations probably will take >no longer than did Schaub's investigation of the request for an >injunction, which the unions filed Feb. 21. > >Schaub said last Tuesday he had completed his investigation and was >sending the matter to Washington. Though he made a recommendation to the >general counsel, he did not reveal it. That's standard practice, said >Farrell. > >In terms of the number of union workers involved, this case would be one >of the largest in which the so-called 10(j) injunction has been granted, >she said. > >The injunction, if approved, would not apply to union members fired for >picket-line misconduct. > > >Blackout weakens > > >WRIF (101-FM), one of nine radio stations that refused to broadcast ads >in support of locked-out workers, probably will do so, says a Washington >agency placing the ads. > >The agency approached the 10 largest stations in the Detroit market, but >only WXYT-AM (1270) accepted the ads. Most stations gave no reason for >the rejection. Detroit Newspapers, The Detroit News and the Free Press >have been advertising heavily on radio. > >A handful return > >A few more locked-out workers returned to Detroit Newspapers and the >Free Press last week. But less than 50 of nearly 2,000 workers have >returned, and many who went back were forced to accept lower wages. > >Two reporters started at the Free Press. Eight members of Detroit >Typographical Union Local 18 returned to Detroit Newspapers, the agency >that handles production, circulation and business matters for the News >and Free Press. > >Eight press operators and two paper handlers, members of GCIU 13N, also >went in. "It's a lot different from prestrike," said GCIU Local 13N >president Jack Howe. "They are not letting them exercise any seniority >rights concerning picking hours, shifts or jobs." > >Nine from Teamsters Local 372 returned, leaving 900 members still out. >But not a single mailer from Teamsters Local 2040 has been asked back, >leaving out 300 full-time and 300 part-time workers. > >No one from GCIU Local 289 has returned, but nine photoengravers are to >go back Monday. > > >Giles' wiles > > >The Detroit News, under Publisher Robert Giles, is resisting >integration. It still has not taken back even one locked-out worker. > >The News offered jobs to three workers who declined or postponed their >decisions. Two of them said they preferred to return when all other >locked-out workers return. > >No offers have been made to Newspaper Guild members within commuting >distance. > >If there are few vacancies for reporters or copy editors, it may have >something to do with a spate of hirings and promotions the week that it >became known the return-to-work offer was about to be made. > >Three reporters and three copy editors were hired. Three editorial >assistants, a librarian and an intern were promoted to reporters. > >Most of the hires and promotions were to become effective after Feb. 17, >the day the Newspaper Guild formally made its offer to return. > >"They were packing the newsroom when they knew an unconditional offer >was being made," said Guild Local 22 President Lou Mleczko. He said an >unfair labor practice charge would be filed. > > >Illegal discharges > > >Hearings begin Monday in the first of dozens of cases of locked-out >workers who the government said were illegally discharged by the Free >Press, News and Detroit Newspapers. > >About 30 workers are in the first group that officials at the National >Labor Relations Board allege were discharged for suspect reasons. > >A federal complaint against the newspapers charges the workers were not >discharged because of reasons the company gave, but because they engaged >in "concerted, protected union activities," said William Schaub, >regional NLRB director. > >He said the company also engaged in "disparate treatment" of strikers >and replacements by "coming down hard on a striker and not being as hard >on a replacement or someone else," Schaub said. > >The trial begins at 11 a.m. in Room 300 of the McNamara Federal >Building, at Michigan and Cass avenues in Detroit. > >Administrative Law Judge Richard Beddow Jr. will hear the case. >Attor-ney John Adam, who represents the Guild and GCIU Local 13N, >estimates the trial will last three weeks. > > >Antitrust suit zapped > > >A U.S. district judge decided last week for the defendants in an >antitrust suit against Detroit Newspapers, The Detroit News and the Free >Press. > >Detroit City Council President Maryann Mahaffey, former Mayor Coleman A. >Young, Detroit City Council Member Sheila Cockrel and five others had >sued over the joint weekday editions that the News and Free Press >printed the first two months of the strike. > >Judge John Corbett O'Meara's decision to grant summary judgment means >that neither discovery (pretrial fact-finding) nor a trial will be held. >Wrote O'Meara: "Defendants' publication of a joint-masthead newspaper >for two months during the strike was not anticompetitive behavior but an >attempt by defendants to continue editorial competition between The >Detroit News and Detroit Free Press in the face of severe staff >shortages. Such efforts to prevent the temporary or permanent >disappearance of one or more editorial voices does not give rise to an >antitrust injury." > >W. Todd Miller, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said, "We're disappointed. >We're going to consider an appeal." > >He added that "there has never been discovery to prove they couldn't >have published two papers." > >Mahaffey said: "My initial reaction was that I would think there would >be an appeal. E They did something illegal and they ought to be held >responsible for it." > > >Strikers confront directors > > >Two locked-out newspaper workers and an organizing representative of the >Teamsters were arrested in Chicago on trespassing charges last week for >walking into a law office and requesting a meeting with Tom Reynolds, a >powerful Chicago attorney and member of the Gannett board of directors > >Reynolds is the semi-retired chairman of the high-profile Winston & >Strawn law firm and a director of Gannett and other companies with >records of anti-union activities. The law firm also includes former Gov. >Jim Thompson of Illinois. > >The firm's office in a Wacker Drive office building was the site of a >large and noisy demonstration by union members at noon on Wednesday. A >group sought a meeting following the rally, but were rebuffed by the law >firm. The following day a small group again sought to arrange a meeting >and to deliver information about the strike, but the firm's only >response was to press trespassing charges. > >Strikers and supporters rallied and held actions and receptions for >three days last week in Chicago and Milwaukee. Other actions included a >visit to a Gannett-owned radio station and a rally outside the Milwaukee >Journal, where mailers are struggling to obtain a new contract. > >State permanent replacement ban > >Two hearings are scheduled by a state House labor committee on bills to >regulate anti-union behavior and strike violence by companies involved >in labor disputes. > >The House Labor and Occupational Safety Committee will hold hearings >Tuesday and on April 15, at 9 a.m. in Room 426 of the State Capitol in >Lansing. > >Two bills are under consideration. One includes a ban on the use of >permanent replacement workers and a resolution calling on Congress to >pass similar federal legislation. The second would regulate the use of >private security armies such as Vance security, limiting their use to >company property and imposing other regulations > >New coalition > >Local political, religious and cultural leaders are launching a new >coalition - yet to be named - to battle the Detroit newspapers and >support locked-out newspaper workers. > >A meeting to form the new coalition is being held 7 p.m. Wednesday at >the Sacred Heart Church Activities Building, 1000 Eliot in Detroit, just >southeast of the intersection of I-75 and Mack in Detroit. > >Spearheading the new coalition are City Council President Mahaffey; >Catholic Bishop Thomas Gumbleton; community activists and Readers United >advocates Grace Boggs, Marian Kramer, General Baker, Jeanie >Wylie-Kellermann; Ron Reosti and Rudy Simons. > >"The refusal of the Detroit Newspaper Agency to take back the locked-out >workers makes it clearer every day that the newspaper owners are intent >on breaking the unions and punishing the workers who dared to challenge >these two powerful, out-of-state corporations," the group said in a >letter, adding a primary goal will be mobilizing for a massive turnout >of pro-labor demonstrations June 20- 21. > > Detroit Journal >http://www.rust.net/~workers/strike.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From wkramer@ucla.edu Mon Apr 7 14:49:27 1997 Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 13:37:32 -0700 To: wkramer@ucla.edu From: William Kramer Subject: Jobs with LAMAP LAMAP is hiring more organizers, including labor organizers, lead labor organizers, and a community organizer. I have attatched the job descriptions for all of these jobs. Please spread the word !! ___________________________________________ Job Description: Community Organizer The Community Organizer is the main point of contact and coordination between LAMAP and the community groups and residents with which LAMAP works. The Community Organizer is responsible for outreach to community groups and parishes, for developing participation and membership in LAMAP=92s community work, and for identifying and supporting community leadership. He or she is a spokesperson for LAMAP and acts as a representative for the organization at community meetings and other public gatherings. The Community Organizer reports to the Director of Organizing. More specific responsibilities include the following: COMMUNITY AND ORGANIZING ACTIVITIES =B7 Act as convener, facilitator, and technical support for the comit=E9 comunitario in the development and implementation of citizenship classes, "Know Your Rights" workshops, and other activities that the comit=E9 chooses to undertake. =B7 Support and coordinate efforts to empower and to develop organizations= of community members, especially by providing technical assistance to the lead organizers in the community-based organizations with which LAMAP= collaborates. =B7 Recruit, coordinate, and give support to volunteers. =B7 Assist the Organizing Director in identifying and developing organizing-campaign leads. ADMINISTRATION AND INTERNAL MANAGEMENT =B7 Guide and help carry out all administrative support work required for= the proper functioning of community projects, including the supervision of staff as appropriate. =B7 Represent the needs of community work at internal LAMAP staff meetings. QUALIFICATIONS =B7 The Community Organizer will have appropriate skills and experience in= the areas listed above to successfully execute these responsibilities. These include experience in working with diverse communities, close knowledge of labor organizing, a willingness to work some evenings and weekends, and a solid command of written and spoken Spanish. Please send a resume and any references to Dan Ringer and Joel Ochoa at LAMAP, 3114 East Gage Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90255; 213-585-4596 phone 213-585-4597 fax ------------------------------------------------------------------- Job Description: Lead Organizers and Field Organizers The Los Angeles Manufacturing Action Project (LAMAP) is looking for experienced organizers to help drive one of the most innovative labor campaigns in the country. LAMAP is a community-based labor-organizing project focused on the largely immigrant workforce of the Los Angeles manufacturing sectors. We are working to link workers, community organizations, academics, and multiple unions into organizing drives that target whole sectors rather than individual shops. Job responsibilities for both positions include: o Working with researchers and workers to understand targeted manufacturing industries and related social networks. o Developing contacts and committees among workers at targeted firms and in related communities. o Working with the media, including drafting press advisories and other outreach materials in both English and Spanish. o Basic word processing and layout of materials. Job requirements include: o Verbal and written fluency in Spanish and English. o Excellent verbal communication skills and an affinity for working with all kinds of people, including workers, politicians, journalists, and community leaders. o A commitment to the economic and social rights of workers and immigrants. o A self-motivated and organized work style. o The ability to work long hours both in a team and in isolation. Flexibility, open communication, and a sense of humor are key. o Solid writing skills. Other helpful qualifications include: o A knowledge of the Los Angeles community, including labor organizations, churches, grassroots community organizations, professional nonprofits, ethnic communities, and academic institutions. o More computer skills, including advanced layout design and database management. Lead Organizers will coordinate overall campaigns. Field Organizers will be responsible for individual pieces. Salary is dependent on experience, generally between $25,000 and $30,000, plus benefits. Women and people of color are especially encouraged to apply. Please send a resume and any references to Dan Ringer and Joel Ochoa at LAMAP, 3114 East Gage Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90255; 213-585-4596 phone 213-585-4597 fax XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX William Kramer =20 UCLA LAMAP Coordinator =20 1001 Gayley--2nd Floor =20 Los Angeles, CA 90024 =20 310-794-0698 =20 310-794-8017 fax =20 wkramer@ucla.edu =20 www.lamap.org =20 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Mon Apr 7 15:40:10 1997 Mon, 7 Apr 1997 13:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Mon, 7 Apr 1997 13:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 13:48:53 -0700 (PDT) To: united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Sender: meisenscher@igc.org Excerpted from PEN-L: (see comments on Clinton & CPI revision, NAFTA) > BLS DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, APRIL 3, 1997 > > Budget strategies predicted in April; early talks promising, White > House Legislative Affairs Director John Hilley told a group of > reporters ....The Daily Labor Report story (page A-6) includes: The > issue of adjusting the CPI or cost-of-living adjustments to more > accurately reflect the true measure of inflation has been discussed in > the last two weeks only in the most technical sense, Hilley said. The > White House and budget staffers have talked about what BLS can be > expected to propose by way of a correction "in its own right," he > said. That leaves them to discuss the gap between BLS's technical > adjustments downward, expected by many to be about 0.4 percent, and > other recommendations of as much as 1.1 percent. Although Clinton > found the idea of a special CPI commission to look at an adjustment > beyond what BLS may propose to be tough political sledding at this > early stage of the budget talks, the inflation-measure question > remains on the table between both parties. Hilley said budget > negotiators are ready to build into a five-year plan any corrections > BLS will make to the CPI, but remain undecided about what kind of > adjustment is needed on top of that. For strategic reasons, the White > House is letting the issue lie dormant for the time being .... > > After three years, the North American Free Trade Agreement has not > benefited American workers and is in desperate need of reform, said > Robert E. Scott, Economic Policy Institute economist, at a panel > discussion held at the Foreign Press Office in Washington, D.C. In > contrast, Sidney Weintraub, an economist from the Center for Strategic > and International Studies, argues that NAFTA has benefited the U.S. > economy and the agreement should be expanded to South America > ....(Daily Labor Report, page A-7). > > The Washington Post says in a page A1 story that the protective labor > laws of France hamper economic downsizing. Says the Post, "When times > were good, as they were for much of the postwar period, workers were > protected by these rules. They still are, in large part, but in these > difficult and competitive times, the French government and the private > sector of the economy are beginning to fear that the price for > protecting those already employed and keeping them at their current > level of compensation and job security is fewer jobs for the > nonworking" ....The article is illustrated with a graph that shows the > unemployment rate in various European countries as of January 1997, > led by Spain (21 percent), followed by Finland (15 percent), and Italy > and France (both 12.4 percent) -- as well as job growth in 1985 and > 1995 for the United States, France, and the European Union. BLS DAILY REPORT, FRIDAY, APRIL 4, 1997 > The 1997 edition of "Union Membership and Earnings Data Book: > Compilations from the Current Population Survey" has just been > published by BNA PLUS ....The new edition includes tables relaying > current and historical figures covering state and metropolitan areas, > public and private sector workers, manufacturing and nonmanufacturing, > and detailed industries and occupations. BNA PLUS also has published > an updated reference book on labor and employment information. "The > 1997 Source Book on Collective Bargaining: Wages, Hours and Benefits, > and Other Contract Issues" provides workforce and workplace data on > economic statistics, major 1996 labor law rulings, surveys, studies, > major 1997 contract expirations, negotiated wage increases, employee > benefit costs, CPI tables, innovative contract provisions, and > employer bargaining objectives .... > =============================== BONUS: This from Eric Nillson, posted to PEN-L: Apropos of nothing . . . Do I read one line from US National Income and Product Accounts correctly? It appears that members of boards of directors received 5 billion dollars in 1994 for their services. (Table 6.11, line 27 of the newly revised NIPA tables: "directors' and judicial fees." Earlier NIPA tables indicate it is mostly the former). Director = member of board of directors? Have a good day. Eric Eric Nilsson Department of Economics California State University San Bernardino, CA 92407 enilsson@wiley.csusb.edu From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Mon Apr 7 15:48:30 1997 Mon, 7 Apr 1997 13:52:43 -0700 (PDT) Mon, 7 Apr 1997 13:49:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 13:49:06 -0700 (PDT) To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, h-UCLEA@h-net.msu.edu, united@cougar.com, OIFAC@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU, can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu, pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Sweeney Meets Japanese on New Otani Campaign Sender: meisenscher@igc.org ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 11:18:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Strieb@aol.com Subject: John Sweeney Press Conference in Japan AFL-CIO PRESIDENT SWEENEY TO MEET NEW OTANI EXECUTIVES ABOUT COMPANY'S ANTI-UNION CAMPAIGN IN LOS ANGELES Plans April 9 Press Conference about Major US Labor Dispute John Sweeney, President of the 13 million member AFL-CIO, will meet with executives of the New Otani Company Ltd. on Tuesday, April 8 to discuss the company's continued opposition to employee organizing at their Los Angeles hotel, the New Otani Hotel and Garden -- in what is currently the highest profile labor dispute in the United States involving a Japanese company. Sweeney has also requested a meeting with executives of Kajima Corporation, the hotel's controlling owner, but they have refused to meet him. Sweeney will hold a press conference on Wednesday, April 9 at 12:30 PM to present the outcome of the meeting with New Otani along with more information on the labor situation in Los Angeles -- where workers are attempting to organize a union with help from the Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees Union and have been attacked by management's strong anti-union campaign, including intimidation and firing of union supporters. Joining Sweeney in the press conference will Margarita Salinas, a housekeeper at the Los Angeles New Otani who was fired illegally after working at the hotel for 16 years because she supported the union organizing effort. Since November, JTUC-Rengo and the AFL-CIO have both endorsed the boycott of the non-union Los Angeles New Otani Hotel and have called upon New Otani and Kajima to meet with the union's leaders, rehire the illegally fired workers, and pledge to cease all anti-union activities and to allow the employees an expedited vote on a union through a card-check procedure. Sweeney's main purpose in visiting Japan this week is to discuss a wide range of issues with JTUC-Rengo, including trade policy, a number of organizing and bargaining campaigns, and labor disputes involving Japanese and American multinational companies, such as the New Otani dispute. After leaving Japan, he will travel to Hong Kong to meet with trade unionists there, less than three months before Hong Kong is turned over to Chinese control. He is joined in his delegation by top AFL-CIO leaders including United Auto Workers Union International President Stephen Yokich. WHAT: PRESS BRIEFING ON LOS ANGELES NEW OTANI LABOR DISPUTE WHEN: WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9 -- 12:30 PM WHERE: JTUC-RENGO, SOHYO-KAIKAN, SURUGADAI, KANDA, CHIYODA-KU, 3RD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM A, SUBWAY: SHIN OCHANOMIZU For Directions Contact - Phone: 5295-0527, Fax: 5295-0548 Contact (in English): Phil Fishman, AFL-CIO, (03)3504-1111, Rm. 1685 Lee Strieb, HERE, 010-424-9610 (cellular) From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Mon Apr 7 21:31:31 1997 Mon, 7 Apr 1997 20:31:00 -0700 (PDT) Mon, 7 Apr 1997 20:29:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 20:29:29 -0700 (PDT) To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, united@cougar.com From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: The times they are a changin' Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >From: D Shniad >Subject: The times they are a changin' >Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 14:45:10 -0700 (PDT) > >The Financial Post Saturday, April 5, 1997 > > >LEANING TO THE LEFT > > Economists like Leo de Bever are starting to question whether > deficit reduction and deregulation have gone too far. Like a > growing number of ordinary Canadians, they think the bloom may > be off the free market rose > > By Philip Demont > Telecom Reporter The Financial Post > > >Leo de Bever's world is not as certain as it once was. The vice-president of >the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan Board used to think that a healthy dose >of free market-type policies would be enough to solve most of the ills >facing Canada's economy. > >Now he's not so sure. De Bever, one of the country's better known private >sector economists, figures deregulation and fiscal restraint as practised by >federal and provincial governments may not solve all of Canada's economic >woes after all. "I don't like to see the less well off in society being stepped >on," he says. "I figure there is about 20% that falls into this category. And >I'm frustrated by the lack of a mechanism for getting a reasonable solution." > >De Bever is not alone in having doubts. In the past few years, prominent >Canadians and Americans have begun to question the efficacy of the >deficit-slashing and deregulation policies of provincial, state and federal >governments. > >Since 1990, governments of all stripes have implemented programs to cut >public spending, reduce the regulatory burden on corporations and shrink >social-welfare programs. Canadian governments as ideologically dissimilar >as Roy Romanow's NDP administration in Saskatchewan and Ralph Klein's >Conservatives in Alberta have built their political reputations on getting rid >of budgetary deficits. > >But in the past 15 months, some polls reveal that Canadians are becoming >disenchanted with "slash-and-burn" spending policies. They also appear to >be embracing the deregulated marketplace in the same way cousins hug, >with a distinct lack of enthusiasm. > >"The idea was that there was a kind of magic in market economics that >answers all important questions. It can't be explained that way," says Frank >Cunningham, professor of philosophy at the University of Toronto. > >A January 1997 poll conducted by Environics shows that 57% of Canadians >want the federal government to spend more money on creating jobs and on >health care. Only 35% say Ottawa should keep focusing on the deficit. > >In government-slashing Ontario, Mike Harris' Conservatives now trail the >opposition Liberals in some recent opinion surveys, albeit by a small >margin. > >Even in Conservative-friendly Alberta, where Klein recently won a second >term as premier, 67% of the sample in a recent Angus Reid poll say they are >uneasy about the government's approach to health care reform. > >But that doesn't mean people are uneasy about government in general. > >"Small government is not the objective. What's the real role of government? >That's where the problems lie," de Bever says. > >Indeed, there's some evidence that Canadians now view government in a >better light and business in a worse one than in past years. > >Pollara, a Toronto-based polling company, has found that, since 1992, the >number of people who view government as a positive force jumped by >54%. In the same period, Canadians' positive perceptions of business >dropped by 8%. "Confidence is being re-established in government, >particularly at the federal level," says Don Guy, Pollara's vice-president for >public research. > >And, he adds, these results are in spite of Ottawa's recent debacle over the >reform of the goods and services tax. > >If Canadians are becoming lukewarm to free market solutions, Americans >seem downright frosty. Since U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Newt >Gingrich led the Republican party to an historic Congressional victory in >1994, the right-wing policies advocated by his Contract With America have >become increasingly unpopular and contributed to Bill Clinton's >overwhelming victory in last year's presidential election. "The Contract >With America threatened the safety net," says William Schneider, a fellow >of the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington-based conservative >think-tank. "The Republicans went too far." > >Still, the hardening attitude toward business and free market solutions and >the corresponding softening toward government in general that showed up >in recent polls doesn't necessarily add up to an endorsement of renewed big >public spending. "That would be too strong," Schneider says. Despite recent >trends, he argues that, since 1965, there has been a decline in the >confidence people have in governments. > >Politicians, however, aren't the only ones caught in the public backlash in >the U.S. In a March 1996 survey conducted by pollster Lou Harris and >Associates Inc., 71% of Americans said business already had too much >influence over their lives and 72% felt corporate shareholders were the only >beneficiaries of government deregulation polices. > >That's a bit ironic, considering that key business figures are among those >who have questioned the gutting of social programs and the elimination of >all government rules as a political cure-all. > >In February, prominent U.S. investor George Soros used an Atlantic >Monthly article to warn against excessive reliance upon free market >policies. "Unless [laissez-faire capitalism] is tempered by the recognition of >a common interest, our present system is likely to break down," he wrote. > >Soros has been joined by management guru Peter Drucker who has written >recently about a looming backlash against wealthy Americans. And Robert >Kuttner, a columnist with Business Week, just wrote a book arguing the >need for government in the U.S. > >America's increasingly dubious attitude toward minimalist government and >free market solutions has some prominent economic thinkers perplexed. > >"We're in a state of paralysis. It's very discouraging," says Robert >Heilbroner, professor emeritus at New York's New School for Social >Research and the author of The Worldly Philosophers, which profiled great >economists. > >People and politicians cannot make up their minds which direction they >want economic policy to go, he says. > >Americans have voted to cut welfare for immigrants, but many voters >profess to being increasingly concerned about the state of the U.S. social >safety net, Heilbroner says. "I'm waiting to see what crystalizes out of this," >he says. > >Such angst and uncertainty among U.S. thinkers shouldn't be surprising, >says Gregor Smith, a professor of macroeconomics at Queen's University in >Kingston, Ont. "That is the country where there was the most glaring >income inequity problem," he says. > >Between 1977 and 1996, American families in the lowest 20% of incomes >had their after-tax earnings drop by 11.6% in real terms, according to >Citizens for Tax Justice, a Washington-based labor-sponsored think tank. > >By comparison, the 1% of Americans making more than US$438,400 saw >their after-tax earnings jump by 109.6%. > >In Canada, the income disparity between rich and poor is narrower and that >has led to smaller ideological swings, Smith says. > >"We have had less of a problem than in the U.S." > >Canadians are searching for new answers to the problems of high >unemployment and greater anxiety about the financial future. > >But, in the past 20 years, various governments have tried Keynensian >policies, which call for more government spending in bad times; monetarist >theories, which advocate the stable growth of the country's money supply; >and the supply-side approach, which promotes lower taxes. > >"The last 25 years have been difficult for economists," says Robert Lucas, a >professor of economics at the University of Saskatchewan. > >None of these policies has been ultimately successful in achieving their >touted goals, mainly owing to misuse by politicians, he say. > >The recent reliance upon the private marketplace for all economic solutions >has proven no more robust, Lucas says. > >"The extreme view that the only thing government should do was defence >[and a few other minor functions] was never held by prominent >economists," he says. > >"This has been parlayed into an ideological thing outside the profession." > >Still, there is some hope that governments can provide some leadership >even as Canadians and Americans face an uncertain economic future. > >Bill Clinton has implemented a series of small-scale policies, like >mandating V-chips in new television sets so parents can control their >children's viewing. > >"He's attempting to rebuild trust and convince them that government is >working," Schneider says. > >Such an approach might work up in north as well. > >"There is still a lot of mistrust to bold ideas that appear to expand the role >of government. But, if a great little idea comes along that government can >fill, these are going to be popular," says one longtime political observer. > >If this government watcher is correct, Prime Minister Jean Chretien, who >won the 1993 federal election touting a national infrastructure program as a >big job creator, might be better off with a slogan of "small is beautiful" this >time around. > > From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Wed Apr 9 09:46:56 1997 Wed, 9 Apr 1997 08:39:12 -0700 (PDT) Wed, 9 Apr 1997 08:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 08:37:35 -0700 (PDT) To: united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, h-UCLEA@h-net.msu.edu, pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Sanders vs. Greenspan Sender: meisenscher@igc.org > TO: Vermont Individuals and Organizations >FROM: Philip Fiermonte, Outreach Coordinator, Congressman Sanders' > Office >DATE: April 7, 1997 >RE: Greenspan Meets Bernie > >Thought the following would be of interest to you. ` > > >The Federal Document Clearing House > > TRANSCRIPT > March 05, 1997 > COMMITTEE HEARING > U.S. REPRESENTATIVE MIKE CASTLE (R-DE) > CHAIRMAN > DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL MONETARY POLICY SUBCOMMITTEE OF >THE HOUSE BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE WASHINGTON, D.C. >HOLDS HEARING ON THE FEDERAL RESERVE'S MONETARY POLICY > COPYRIGHT 1997 BY FEDERAL DOCUMENT CLEARING HOUSE, INC. >SUBCOMMITTEE ON DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL MONETARY POLICY OF THE HOUSE >BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE HOLDS HEARING ON THE STATE OF >THE U.S. ECONOMY >SANDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Mr. > Greenspan. And thank you for joining us today. > > Like Mr. Frank, I have respect for you personally. I have > very, very strong disagreements with your policy. It's > incomprehensible to me that President Clinton would have > reappointed you, in fact. > > Mr. Greenspan, like every American, you are entitled to your > political views. And according to newspaper reports over the > years, you have made political contributions to Jesse Helms, to > George Bush, to Bob Dole. You served on the committee to > re-elect or elect President Reagan, as I understand it. And of > course, you worked as a key economic adviser for President's > Nixon and President Ford. > > And I respect that. There's nothing wrong with it. We're > all entitled to our points of view. > > In 1985, and I understand it, you served as a consultant to > many in the savings and loan industry. According to Time > magazine, you suffered your -- quote -- ``greatest embarrassment >in 1985 when, as a private >economist, you wrote letters to > regulators in Congress endorsing Charles Keating and his Lincoln > Savings and Loan. Lincoln subsequently collapsed at a cost to > taxpayers of $2.6 billion, and Keating landed in jail'' -- end > of quote. That was from Time magazine. > > You also served as a consultant for 15 other savings and > loans, 14 of whom eventually failed. > > In your confirmation hearings one year ago, despite the fact > that the minimum wage of $4.25 is at its lowest point in 40 > years, millions of people were working for $4.25 an hour, you > noted your opposition to raising the minimum wage. > This January, you told the Senate Budget Committee that -- > quote -- ``the appropriate capital gains tax rate is zero'' -- > end of quote. Currently, many Senate Republicans are calling for > a capital gains tax cut. > > According to the Center on Budget and Policy priorities, 70 > percent of the benefits of that tax cut will go to households > earning over $100,000 a year. And their proposal is far more >limited than your proposal >suggests. > > Mr. Greenspan, I will grand you consistency in your support > for trickle-down economics. In your career up to today, it is > clear that you have advocated tax and monetary policies which > have benefited the very richest Americans while at the same time > your views reflect policies that come down very heavy on the > middle class, the working class and low-income people. > > In 1983, you were appointed to chair, as I understand it, the > Social Security Commission. Under your leadership, the highly > regressive payroll taxes increased by about $200 billion. You > chose to solve the Social Security crisis by raising the payroll > tax on working Americans while at the same time, as an economic > adviser, you advocated huge tax decreases for the richest people > in America. > > Now currently, as others have suggested, you are a proponent > of reducing the consumer price index. Like Mr. Kennedy, I have > neighbors and friends and elderly people who are trying to > survive on $7,000 or $8,000 a year. And I regard it as horrendous >and vulgar, to be frank >with > you, that there are people in government who want to balance the > budget on the weakest and most vulnerable people in this > society, and then advocate huge tax breaks for the richest > people in this country, as you continuously do. > > Now I would like to ask you, and later on, maybe you can > respond to that. I don't know where you get your information > from. I go, and as I'm sure many of my colleagues do, we talk > to elderly people who are trying to make it. They can't afford > their prescription drugs. > > In my state, it gets 20 below zero. Elderly people can't > afford to heat their homes. Maybe you'll tell this committee > the last time you have sat in a room with low-income senior > citizens and ask them how they're going to survive if they lose > $100 a year in their Social Security benefits? > > SANDERS: What kind of pain they go through now, trying to > survive on $7,000 or $8,000 a year. > > Mr. Greenspan, the United States of America today, not all > through your work but through the help of a lot of other people, > both parties, has the most unfair distribution of wealth and > income in the world, in the industrialized world. > > The richest 1 percent of the population own 42 percent of the > wealth, more than the bottom 90 percent. In the last 20 years, > that unfair distribution of wealth has become even worse. I >would ask you, in your >comments, to tell us what we can do to > equalize wealth in this country so that we don't have such an > unfair distribution of wealth. > > You talk about economic growth. Between 1983 and 1989, 62 > percent of the increased wealth in this country went to the > richest 1 percent. You can have all the growth that you want, > but the middle class continues to shrink. > > People in my state are working two and three jobs just to > survive, because their wages have not kept pace with inflation. > > > And I want to ask you what your policies are doing for the > middle class, for the working class, for low-income people, > rather than the wealthy people, who I think you end up > representing? > > Thank you, Mr. Chairman. CASTLE: Thank you very much, Mr. >Sanders. > Mr. Kanjorski, do you wish to follow that, sir? > > KANJORSKI: I guess I have to apologize for my colleagues' > inability to be direct. > > (LAUGHTER) > > > METCALF: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. > > CASTLE: Thank you, Mr. Metcalf. Ms. Maloney. > > > Oh, excuse me. I'm sorry. The gentleman from Vermont. I > apologize. > > SANDERS: I may be an independent, Mr. Chairman, but -- geez. > > (LAUGHTER) > > Thank you, > XXX you, Mr. Chairman. > > SANDERS: Mr. Greenspan, the wealthiest 1 percent of > Americans now own 42 percent of the nation's wealth, more than > the bottom 90 percent. In 1976, the wealthiest 1 percent owned > 19 percent of the wealth. So we've seen the upper 1 percent > more than double the percentage of the wealth in this country > that they own. > > Does this concern you, the fact that we today have, by far, > the most unequal distribution of wealth and income in the > industrialized world? A -- does it concern you? And B -- what > do you intend to do about it? > > And I have a number of questions to ask you, so I'd > appreciate it if your answers could be brief. > > GREENSPAN: Yes, the answer is it does concern me. It's not > clear to me what monetary policy can do to alter that in any > material way. > > > SANDERS: OK. Mr. Greenspan, from what I just heard a moment > ago, you talked that, from your point of view, the economy is > doing, quote/unquote, ``very well.'' Did I hear you correctly? > > GREENSPAN: That is correct. > > SANDERS: I'd love to take you to the state of Vermont, where > you can talk to working families where workers are working two > or three jobs trying to pay their bills, where women who would > prefer to stay home with the kids are now being forced to work, > where jobs in our economy which used to pay $15 an hour in > manufacturing are now paying $5 an hour working for McDonald's. > > But more importantly, during the past 20 years, we have seen > a decline in wages or stagnation for 80 percent of all American > families, while the people on top have never had it so good. > Twenty years ago, American workers were the best compensated in > the world. Today, we rank 13th in the world. > > In 1973, the average American worker earned $445 a week. And > 20 years later, in '93, that worker was making $373 a week. > Please tell the working people of Vermont and the working people of >this country how the >economy is doing so good for them as > opposed to the very rich who have never had it so good. > > GREENSPAN: Congressman, at any time throughout our history, > there have always been areas in our economy which are doing far > less well than others. All we can measure is the average > changes, and I can suggest to you that in terms of the average > changes, the economy by any measure which we have available to > us is doing well. > > > SANDERS: But Mr. Greenspan, isn't the concept average change > totally meaningless? If you make $1 million a year and I make > $10,000 a year, on average, we're making a little bit less than > $500,000 a year. You're doing very well. I'm dead broke. > > And doesn't this whole ``on average'' concept perpetuate a > fraud when the vast majority of the people in this country have > seen a decline in their wages, working longer hours, when the > new jobs that are being created are terribly low-wage jobs? So > what are we talking about average? GREENSPAN: Well... > > SANDERS: If the rich are getting richer... > > GREENSPAN: ... first of all... > > SANDERS: ... that distorts the whole figure. > > GREENSPAN: ... let me question your data. It is not true > that the vast majority of people have lower wages at this stage. > > SANDERS: You question the statistics that I gave you? > > GREENSPAN: I do. I do, indeed. > > SANDERS: What do you believe? Do you believe that the > working people of this country have seen higher wages? > > > GREENSPAN: No, I'm just saying you said the vast majority. > > SANDERS: That's right. > > GREENSPAN: That's an number which means 60, 70 percent? > > SANDERS: I have said that in 1973, the average American > worker earned $445 a week. Twenty years later, that worker was > making $373. That 80 percent of our working people have seen a > significant decline, 68 percent. > GREENSPAN: You are using BLS's payroll employment figure and > the average hourly earnings -- the average weekly earnings > that's associated with that. That figure is questionable, I > must tell you that. > > SANDERS: Why do you think it is questionable, sir? > > GREENSPAN: Well, it's questionable basically because of the > fact that those data are not produced in an appropriate sample. > The employment figures are, but not the wages, and they're not > revised. > > SANDERS: Let me ask... > > GREENSPAN: Let me just say this. The Bureau of Census has > got alternate data, which they do on a more scientific basis, > which are far less pessimistic than those stats. > > SANDERS: The Labor Department -- I believe it was the Labor > Department came out recently with statistics which says if the > high school graduates who are entering the labor market, for > young men, the wages are 30 percent less than they were 15 years >ago. For women, I believe >it was 27 percent less. > > Significant drop in wages for high school graduates. Is that > also not a good figure? > > GREENSPAN: No, I can believe that figure. > > SANDERS: Well, given that reality and given perhaps the > reality -- what about the figure that the inflation-adjusted > median income for young families -- who are doing worse than > older families -- with children, young families with children, > headed by persons younger than 30, plunged 32 percent between > 1973 and 1990? > > Meanwhile, we have seen a proliferation of billionaires going > from 12 to 135 from 1982 to today. Do you really deny that > while the > > wealthiest people in this country have never had it so good, the > vast majority of the people have seen a decline in their > standard of living? GREENSPAN: The Consumer Price Index, which is >employed to > deflate those data, are -- is precisely the index which I've > been arguing is mis-specified. If you make the appropriate > adjustments, that trend, the decline disappears. Nonetheless, I > grant you that it's pretty stagnant. > > SANDERS: I would simply say -- I would welcome you -- please > give me a ring. You come to the state of Vermont with me, and I > will take you around our state. And I would love to hear the > response when you tell the working families of our state that > the economy is doing very well. > > It is it not doing well for the middle class, for the working > class. Maybe, doing well for upper-income people, but not for > the vast majority of the people. > > Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Greenspan. From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Wed Apr 9 09:59:31 1997 for ; Wed, 9 Apr 1997 08:42:28 -0700 (PDT) for ; Wed, 9 Apr 1997 08:40:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 08:40:49 -0700 (PDT) To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Jane Slaughter on Detroit Strike Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >Business (as Usual) Unionism in Detroit > >The decision that lost the Detroit newspaper strike was made in >September 1995, by the six local presidents of the striking >unions and their lawyer. That Labor Day weekend and the weekend >after, thousands of unionists had converged on the papers' >printing plant. Members of the Newspaper Guild, Teamsters, >Graphic Communications and Typographical unions, along with >supporters--especially auto workers--had come to the picket line. >They stayed up all night to block scab-driven trucks from exiting >with the lucrative combined Sunday edition of the Detroit News >and Detroit Free Press. Demoralized for years by layoffs and >union concessions, a startling number of workers were ready for a >fight. It was a display of class solidarity not seen in Detroit >in decades. > >But management got an injunction that ordered picketers away from >the gates, and the local presidents submitted. The companies, >which had planned to provoke this strike for years, never missed >a day of publication. All subsequent efforts by a remarkable band >of rank and filers never re-created the sense of crisis, and >unity, that existed outside the gates on those nights. The troops >were there, and they were sent home. > >This past February 14, nineteen months into the strike, the >unions offered unconditionally to return to work on management's >terms. Militants had opposed such a move, calling it >"unconditional surrender," but they were not consulted. Only one >of the local presidents even allowed a binding vote. The >leadership is betting on the National Labor Relations Board to >rule that the strike was over unfair labor practices, in which >case the companies will be liable for back pay for any striker >not rehired--a penalty union sources estimate at $250,000 per >day. The companies haven't blinked. They quickly accepted the >offer, claiming victory, but so far, only eight of the 2,000 >strikers have been rehired. Most jobs are filled, the companies >say, and the scabs who fill them have job security. The legal >appeals will take years. > >It seems a bitter twist that only now, a year after the idea was >first broached, has the AFL-CIO called for a national solidarity >march on Detroit, June 20-21. "Maybe it was their idea of a >consolation prize," said fired photographer Daymon Hartley. Many >strikers have found other jobs; some have moved away. The die- >hards, who've organized independent of their officers, with >guerrilla actions from sit-ins to airport drive-throughs, are >pinning their hopes on the June mobilization. But no one is >expecting hundreds of thousands, as the federation mustered in >Washington in 1991. One AFL-CIO organizer's best estimate is >20,000 people. > >What would it have taken to win? The Detroit Free Press and the >News lost $250 million in 1995-96 because of the unions' >circulation and advertising boycotts. However, their corporate >owners, Knight-Ridder and Gannett--the largest newspaper chains >in the country, with record profits in 1996--were willing to take >the loss in order to bust the unions and set an example. > >The unions' only course, therefore, was to create a political >crisis big enough that even at their far-off corporate HQs the >companies would feel the heat. Readers United, a support group >initiated by Detroit's religious left, tried to do this with a >series of sit-ins last spring. Hundreds were arrested, including >two bishops and half the city council. But it was not enough. >Creating the heat would have required action on a national level- >-intervention by AFL-CIO president John Sweeney. It would have >meant convincing other unions--particularly the UAW, which is >450,000 strong in Michigan--to send successive waves of troops to >fill the jails. It would have meant papering cell walls with >injunctions. Activists proposed these tactics; they were ignored. > >The prototype for this sort of illegal defiance with national >backing is the United Mine Workers' winning campaign against >Pittston Coal in 1989. Thousands of supporters visited the >miners' Camp Solidarity in the Virginia hills; civil disobeyers >blocked scab trucks; a plant occupation finally forced >management's hand. Then-president Rich Trumka risked the union's >treasury in the face of $65 million in fines. > >Newspaper workers have risen to such occasions too. In 1990-91 >they struck the New York Daily News, stopped distribution of the >scab product through persuasion, friendly and otherwise, and >blocked the Tribune Co. from busting them. > >Early on, Trumka, now AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer, discussed the >idea of a Pittston-style mobilization with Detroit local leaders, >warning that they should not begin unless they meant to go all >the way. They chose not to begin--and neither Trumka nor Sweeney >pressed the issue. The AFL did send staffers to help in the >boycotts, and the international unions spent millions of dollars. >Official teams of strikers dogged newspaper board members and >spoke in union halls across the country. But what was at stake >from the start--the possibility of a crushed strike in labor's >hometown--was so serious for the entire labor movement that it >demanded more: a bold departure from polite unionism, including >the rules of etiquette that keep federation leaders from actively >intervening in local struggles. > >Yes, the local leadership was timid, but Sweeney, promising a new >militant style for labor, should not have been. He should have >stepped on some toes. He should have used all his moral authority >to call on union members to make Detroit a war zone. Instead, >when he was first asked to call for a national march in Detroit, >for Labor Day 1996, he stalled. He didn't want to embarrass Bill >Clinton's election run-up with a display of "special interest" >acting-out by Big Labor. > >Anyone who cares about the labor movement should be in Detroit on >June 20-21. The fate of 300 fired strikers, including many of the >most active, is way up in the air. If it's not too late for labor >to revive, much more will be asked of us. > >by Jane Slaughter-The Nation-April 14, 1997 > >[Jane Slaughter, a labor journalist in Detroit, has been arrested >twice, so far, in the newspaper strike.] > > > From dcroteau@saturn.vcu.edu Wed Apr 9 15:40:02 1997 Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 17:37:42 -0400 To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: dcroteau@saturn.vcu.edu (david croteau) Subject: San Francisco Teach-In At the request of David Brundage at Santa Cruz I'm passing this on. >__________ > >The AFL-CIO, United Farmworker Strawberry Campaign > and Bay Area Labor Faculty Network present: > > TEACH-IN: > JUSTICE AND DIGNITY IN THE > CALIFORNIA STRAWBERRY INDUSTRY > > SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY > Friday, April 11, 1997 12:00-5:15 pm > > >12:00-1:00 PM: SONGS OF THE FARMWORKERS >Jack Adams Hall, Cesar Chavez Student Union > >Augustin Lira and Alma > > >1:00-2:00 PM: RALLY >Malcolm X Plaza, Cesar Chavez Student Union > >Richard Trumka, AFL-CIO and Dolores Huerta, UFW > > > >2:00-5:15 PM: TEACH-IN >HSS Bldg. Rm. 135 (Corner of 19th and Holloway) > > >THE CONTEMPORARY STRUGGLE IN THE STRAWBERRY FIELDS > >Dianna Lyons, National Lawyers Guild, former UFW attorney >Arturo Mendoza, Director, AFL-CIO Watsonville Organizing Campaign >Eva Royale, UFW, Northern California Coordinator >Don Villarejo, Director, California Institute for Rural Studies > >Moderator: Jose Cuellar, La Raza Studies, SFSU > > >BUILDING SOLIDARITY: COMMUNITY-LABOR COALITIONS > >Katie Nunez Alder, Justice for Janitors Campaign, Oakland/San Jose >Karega Hart, TWU Local 154, City College of S.F. >Alba Morales, Political Ecology Group, Co-author "Bromide Barons" >Howard Wallace, SEIU Local 250, Visiting Nurses and Hospice Campaign > >Moderator: Frank Martin Del Campo, Latin American Labor Committee > > >THE HISTORY OF FARM LABOR ORGANIZING ON THE > CENTRAL COAST AND IN THE SALINAS VALLEY > >Linda Majka, University of Dayton, Sociology and Women's Studies >Theo Majka, University of Dayton, Sociology and Anthropology, > author, FARMERS'AND FARM WORKERS' MOVEMENTS: SOCIAL PROTEST IN > AMERICAN AGRICULTURE >Zaragosa Vargas, UC Santa Barbara, History >Miriam Wells, UC Davis, Anthropology, author STRAWBERRY FIELDS: > POLITICS, CLASS AND WORK IN CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE > >Moderator: Charles Wollenberg, Vista College, History > > >GLOBALIZATION: THE IMPACT ON THE SOUTH BAY > ECONOMY AND LABOR MARKETS > >John Borrego, UC Santa Cruz, Community Studies >Mike Kostyal, Watsonville community activist >Fred Krissman, Washington State University, Pullman, Anthropology >Mary Beth Pudup, UC Santa Cruz, Community Studies > >Moderator: Amy Dean, South Bay Central Labor Council > > >For more information contact: >Marty Bennett: (707) 527-4873; mbennett@floyd.santarosa.edu >David Brundage: (408) 459-4645; brundage@cats.ucsc.edu >Brenda Cochrane: (415) 338-2885; bcoch@sfsu.edu > >__________________________________________________________ > > National March for Justice in Watsonville > sponsored by the AFL-CIO and United Farm Workers > > Sunday April 13th, 1997 Watsonville, California > Contact UFW Public Action Office (415) 674-1884 > >___________________________________________________________ > > >PLEASE CIRCULATE THIS ANNOUNCEMENT > > > ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| David Croteau Sociology/ Virginia Commonwealth University E-mail: dcroteau@saturn.vcu.edu From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Fri Apr 11 12:20:05 1997 Fri, 11 Apr 1997 09:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Fri, 11 Apr 1997 09:21:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 09:21:09 -0700 (PDT) To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, h-UCLEA@h-net.msu.edu, united@cougar.com, pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: CIA & the News Media; Russian Strikes C:\INTERACT\DATA\MEISENSC\RUSSIA.TXT; Sender: meisenscher@igc.org --=====================_860775711==_ I received (complements of Kim Scipes) two lengthy reports which may be of interest to some. They came in two parts each which I have combined into separate text files, which are attached. The first is an analysis of CIA penetration and manipulation of the media. It includes footnote references, and concludes with a web address where other resources may be found. The second file is an analysis of the recent unprecedented political strikes that swept Russia. If anyone has difficulty accessing either file, send me a message (to me, not the list), and I will forward the original two-part email messages directly to you. In solidarity, Michael --=====================_860775711==_ > > From NameBase NewsLine, No. 17, April-June 1997: > > > Journalism and the CIA: The Mighty Wurlitzer > > by Daniel Brandt > > Alongside those Greek morality plays and Biblical injunctions, we are >also reminded by history itself that the use of unethical means to achieve >a worthy end can be self-destructive. Power, by definition, is isolated >from the correcting signals of external criticism. Or perhaps the feeling >of fighting evil fits so comfortably, that it's difficult to shed even >after objective circumstances change. > > The history of U.S. intelligence since World War II follows both >patterns. The Office of Strategic Services, the CIA's predecessor, had >jurisdiction over wartime covert operations and propaganda in the fight >against fascism. OSS chief William Donovan recruited heavily among social >and academic elites. When the CIA was launched in 1947 at the beginning >of the Cold War, these pioneers felt that they had both the right and the >duty to secretly manipulate the masses for the greater good. > > OSS veteran Frank Wisner ran most of the early peacetime covert >operations as head of the Office of Policy Coordination. Although funded >by the CIA, OPC wasn't integrated into the CIA's Directorate of Plans >until 1952, under OSS veteran Allen Dulles. Both Wisner and Dulles were >enthusiastic about covert operations. By mid-1953 the department was >operating with 7,200 personnel and 74 percent of the CIA's total budget. > > Wisner created the first "information superhighway." But this was >the age of vacuum tubes, not computers, so he called it his "Mighty >Wurlitzer." The CIA's global network funded the Italian elections in >1948, sent paramilitary teams into Albania, trained Nationalist Chinese >on Taiwan, and pumped money into the Congress for Cultural Freedom, the >National Student Association, and the Center for International Studies at >MIT. Key leaders and labor unions in western Europe received subsidies, >and Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty were launched. The Wurlitzer, an >organ designed for film productions, could imitate sounds such as rain, >thunder, or an auto horn. Wisner and Dulles were at the keyboard, >directing history. > > The ethos of the fight against fascism carried over into the fight >against godless communism; for these warriors, the Cold War was still a >war. OSS highbrows had already embraced psychological warfare as a new >social science: propaganda, for example, was divided into "black" >propaganda (stories that are unattributed, or attributed to nonexistent >sources, or false stories attributed to a real source), "gray" propaganda >(stories from the government where the source is attributed to others), >and "white" propaganda (stories from the government where the source is >acknowledged as such).[1] > > After World War II, these psywar techniques continued. C.D. Jackson, >a major figure in U.S. psywar efforts before and after the war, was >simultaneously a top executive at Time-Life. Psywar was also used with >success during the 1950s by Edward Lansdale, first in the Philippines and >then in South Vietnam. In Guatemala, the Dulles brothers worked with their >friends at United Fruit, in particular the "father of public relations," >Edward Bernays, who for years had been lobbying the press on behalf of >United. When CIA puppets finally took over in 1954, only applause was >heard from the media, commencing forty years of CIA-approved horrors in >that unlucky country.[2] Bernays' achievement apparently impressed Allen >Dulles, who immediately began using U.S. public relations experts and >front groups to promote the image of Ngo Dinh Diem as South Vietnam's >savior.[3] > > > The combined forces of unaccountable covert operations and corporate >public relations, each able to tap massive resources, are sufficient to >make the concept of "democracy" obsolete. Fortunately for the rest of us, >unchallenged power can lose perspective. With research and analysis -- the >capacity to see and understand the world around them -- entrenched power >must constantly anticipate and contain potential threats. But even as >power seems more secure, this capacity can be blinded by hubris and >isolation. > > Troublesome notes were heard from the Wurlitzer in the 1960s -- but >not from American journalism, which had already sold its soul to the >empire. Instead, the announcement that the emperor had no clothes was >made by a new generation. Much that was dear to this counterculture was >stylistic and superficial, and there were many within this culture itself, >and certainly within the straight media, who mistook this excess baggage >for its essence. Nevertheless, the youth culture's rumpled opposition was >sufficient to slow down the machine and let in some light. > > The ruling class failed to see the naked contradiction that they had >created. They expected that the most-privileged, best-educated generation >in history could be forcibly drafted to fight a dirty war against popular >self-determination some 8,000 miles away -- a war that clearly had more to >do with anticommunist ideology and corporate greed than it did with the >defense of America. The elites didn't have a clue that this was even a >problem; President Johnson's knee-jerk response to the student antiwar >movement, for example, was to pressure the CIA into uncovering the >nefarious (and nonexistent) foreign influences behind it. > > Thus the crack in the culture that eventually encouraged American >media to take a look at themselves. With rare exceptions,[4] it was the >alternative press that began to question racism, police brutality, >Vietnam, the defense establishment, and the JFK assassination. In 1967 >Ramparts magazine exposed a portion of the CIA's covert funding network, >whereupon the New York Times and Washington Post began naming more names. >By then the Wurlitzer would never sound the same, particularly after the >1968 assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy invited >further suspicions. > > The counterculture burned out once the war wound down, but it had >already dented the lemming-like consensus that typified an earlier period. >For roughly ten years, between 1967 and 1977, Americans learned something >of their secret history. From the perspective of twenty additional years, >the results were mixed and much remains secret. But it's scary to think of >where we might be now if the counterculture had never happened. > > > During the last half of those ten years, sandwiched between Watergate >coverage on one end, and Congressional investigations of the CIA on the >other, the media showed some interest in examining their own intelligence >connections. The first shoe was dropped by Jack Anderson in late August, >1973, when he revealed that Seymour Freidin, head of the Hearst bureau >in London, was a CIA agent. Freidin, already in the news because the >Republicans paid him $10,000 in 1972 to spy on the Democrats, confirmed >Anderson's story. At that point William Colby, the new CIA director, was >asked by the New York Times and the Washington Star-News if any of their >staff were on the CIA payroll. > > James (Scotty) Reston of the NYT was satisfied with an evasive >answer, but when the Star-News editorial board met with Colby, they made >some progress. The other shoe dropped with an article by Oswald Johnston >on November 30: the Star-News learned from an "authoritative source" >(Colby) that the CIA had some three dozen American journalists on its >payroll. Johnston named only one -- Jeremiah O'Leary -- who was one of >their own diplomatic correspondents. (The Star-News stopped publishing >in 1981, at which point O'Leary joined Reagan's national security staff. >>From 1982 until his death in 1993, he was with the Washington Times.) > > That was the first and last time that Colby was helpful on this >topic. Some believe that the new director was under pressure from the >"young Turks" (junior staffers) at the Agency, who were granted a mandate >by Colby's predecessor to cough up the "family jewels" -- a list of illegal >exploits that could be culled from the CIA's files. Already there were >rumors that the CIA was guilty of illegal spying on the antiwar movement >-- rumors that were confirmed a year later by Seymour Hersh, whose sources >were some of these same "young Turks." > > Why was Colby initially forthcoming on the issue of the CIA and the >media, and why did he then start stonewalling? Some believe that he was >attempting a "limited hangout" as the best way out of a position that >made him nervous, while others feel that he was implicitly threatening to >provide additional names in order to scare off the media. Colby had reason >to be worried: by late 1973, investigative journalism was in the air >because of Watergate -- an issue that had more than the usual share of >CIA connections. > > Colby's stonewalling continued for the remainder of his tenure, even >as a Senate committee led by Frank Church desperately tried to squeeze >more names out of him. George Bush replaced Colby in January, 1976, >and eventually agreed to a one-paragraph summary of each file of a CIA >journalist, with names deleted. When the CIA said it was finished, the >Church committee had over 400 summaries. > > The committee staff was shocked at the extent of the CIA's activity >in this area, and felt that they still didn't have the story. But they >were running out of time, and expected that the Senate's new permanent >oversight committee would continue their work. The Church committee's >final report contained only a handful of vague and misleading pages on >the CIA and the media. "It hardly reflects what was found," stated Senator >Gary Hart. "There was a prolonged and elaborate negotiation [with the CIA] >over what would be said."[5] > > > The House investigation of the CIA, under Otis Pike, had more >problems than the Senate investigation. The full House voted to suppress >its committee's final report under pressure from the executive branch, at >which point Daniel Schorr of CBS leaked a copy to the Village Voice. This >report contained just twelve paragraphs on the topic of the CIA and the >media, including the tidbit about the CIA's "frequent manipulation of >Reuters wire service dispatches."[6] Another paragraph gave some idea of >the scope of the CIA's efforts in this area: > > Some 29 percent of Forty Committee-approved covert actions were > for media and propaganda projects. This number is probably not > representative. Staff has determined the existence of a large number > of CIA internally-approved operations of this type, apparently > deemed not politically sensitive. It is believed that if the correct > number of all media and propaganda projects could be determined, > it would exceed Election Support as the largest single category > of covert action projects undertaken by the CIA.[7] > > One enterprising researcher took this 29 percent figure, and >extrapolating from figures on CIA expenditures for covert operations, >found that the cost of propaganda in 1978 was around $265 million and >involved 2,000 personnel. Comparing this to figures for other news >agencies, he concluded that the CIA "uses far more resources in its >propaganda operations than any single news agency.... In fact, the CIA >propaganda budget is as large as the combined budgets of Reuters, United >Press International and the Associated Press."[8] > > CBS took Daniel Schorr off the air after he leaked the Pike committee >report. This was most likely a convenient opportunity for William Paley, >chairman of CBS, who didn't approve of Schorr's interest in the network's >own CIA connection. Former CBS News president Sig Mickelson, who by 1976 >was president of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, said that in October >1954, Paley called him into his office for a friendly discussion with two >CIA officials. Schorr mentioned this on Walter Cronkite's show, and in >an op-ed piece for the New York Times (Arthur Hays Sulzberger, the late >publisher of the Times, had been cozy with the CIA also). "There are >executives and retired executives," Schorr wrote, "who could help dispel >the cloud hanging over the press by coming forward to tell the arrangements >they made with the CIA."[9] > > Little had changed since 1974, when Michael J. Harrington, a >Democratic congressman from Massachusetts, leaked Colby's closed-door >testimony about CIA involvement in the 1973 coup in Chile. Harrington >soon found himself the target of a formal Ethics Committee investigation; >now Schorr was also their target. Apparently Congress was fearful that >the executive branch might paint them as bungling and irresponsible when >it came to keeping secrets, and then use this as a club to deprive them >of access to information. > > If Congress felt this way, it was more than simple paranoia. In 1976 >the CIA began cranking up their Wurlitzer on the matter of Richard Welch, >a station chief in Athens who was assassinated by urban guerrillas at the >end of 1975. The CIA's exploitation of this timely tragedy had both an >immediate target and a general target. Ostensibly the CIA was complaining >about an obscure Washington magazine called CounterSpy, which had been >printing CIA names. In the same spirit, Philip Agee's just-published diary >of CIA tricks in Latin America was loaded with names, and was already an >international sensation. But the general target of this campaign was more >important -- the CIA managed to change the nature of the debate. Suddenly >it was no longer a question of what dirty work the CIA might be doing, but >rather a question of what happens when the press recklessly endangers the >lives of our brave boys overseas. > > The fact that Welch's name had been published by the East Germans >five years earlier, and that he could be identified as a CIA officer from >his listing in the unclassified 1973 State Department Biographic Register, >were both ignored. In any case, it was hardly a secret in Athens -- the >group that killed Welch had been stalking his predecessor, Stacy Hulse, >until Welch moved into the Hulse residence five months earlier. Colby >eventually admitted to a House subcommittee that Welch's cover was >inexcusably weak, and that the publication of his name in an Athens >newspaper had only an indirect effect on his assassination.[10] > > Colby could say this two years later because by then his comments >were destined for a back page. The battle to rein in the CIA was already >lost. In 1982 Congress passed a controversial new law that made publication >of CIA names a felony under certain conditions. Although these conditions >rarely applied to journalists, the wide coverage on this issue served to >intimidate most publishers and editors. > > Today the CIA, which once issued an automatic "no comment" when >asked anything by reporters, is playing an adept game of "soft cop, >hard cop" public relations. In 1991 an internal CIA task force recommended >a more active posture by the public affairs office when responding to >requests for assistance (that year they handled 3,369 telephone inquires >from reporters, provided 174 unclassified background briefings for >them at Headquarters, and arranged 164 interviews with senior Agency >officials).[11] The "hard cop" was discovered by Katrina vanden Heuvel, >editor of The Nation. In 1995 she was telephoned by Vin Swasey, CIA deputy >director of public affairs, who strongly objected to an editorial because >it included the names of nine former station chiefs in Guatemala.[12] >Reuters was persuaded by Swasey's colleagues to run the story without >the names. > > > The final months of 1977 produced three significant pieces of >journalism on the CIA and the media, just before the issue was abandoned >altogether. The first, by Joe Trento and Dave Roman, reported the >connections between Copley Press and the CIA. Owner James S. Copley >cooperated with the CIA for three decades. A subsidiary, Copley News >Service, was used as a CIA front in Latin America, while reporters at the >Copley-owned San Diego Union and Evening News were instructed to spy on >antiwar protesters for the FBI. No less than 23 news service employees >were simultaneously working for the CIA. James Copley, who died in 1973, >was also a leading figure behind the CIA-funded Inter-American Press >Association.[13] > > The next article was by Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame. In a >long piece in Rolling Stone, he came up with the figure of 400 American >journalists over the past 25 years, based primarily on interviews with >Church committee staffers. This figure included stringers and freelancers >who had an understanding that they were expected to help the CIA, as well >as a small number of full-time CIA employees using journalism as a cover. >It did not include foreigners, nor did it include numerous Americans who >traded favors with the CIA in the normal give-and-take between a journalist >and his sources. In addition to some of the names already mentioned above, >Bernstein supplied details on Stewart and Joseph Alsop, Henry Luce, Barry >Bingham Sr. of the Louisville Courier-Journal, Hal Hendrix of the Miami >News, columnist C.L. Sulzberger, Richard Salant of CBS, and Philip Graham >and John Hayes of the Washington Post. > > Bernstein concentrated more on the owners, executives, and editors of >news organizations than on individual reporters. "Lets's not pick on some >poor reporters, for God's sake," William Colby said at one point to the >Church committee's investigators. "Let's go to the management. They were >witting." Bernstein noted that Colby had specific definitions for words >such as "contract employee," "agent," "asset," "accredited correspondent," >"editorial employee," "freelance," "stringer," and even "reporter," and >through careful use of these words, the CIA "managed to obscure the most >elemental fact about the relationships detailed in its files: i.e., >that there was recognition by all parties involved that the cooperating >journalists were working for the CIA -- whether or not they were paid >or had signed employment contracts."[14] > > The reaction to Bernstein's piece among mainstream media was to >ignore it, or to suggest that it was sloppy and exaggerated. Then two >months later, the New York Times published the results of their "three- >month inquiry by a team of Times reporters and researchers." This >three-part series not only confirmed Bernstein, but added a wealth >of far-ranging details and contained twice as many names. Now almost >everyone pretended not to notice. > > The Times reported that over the last twenty years, the CIA owned >or subsidized more than fifty newspapers, news services, radio stations, >periodicals and other communications facilities, most of them overseas. >These were used for propaganda efforts, or even as cover for operations. >Another dozen foreign news organizations were infiltrated by paid CIA >agents. At least 22 American news organizations had employed American >journalists who were also working for the CIA, and nearly a dozen American >publishing houses printed some of the more than 1,000 books that had been >produced or subsidized by the CIA. When asked in a 1976 interview whether >the CIA had ever told its media agents what to write, William Colby >replied, "Oh, sure, all the time." > > Since domestic propaganda was a violation of the their charter, >the CIA defined the predictable effects of their foreign publications as >"blowback" or "domestic fallout," which they considered to be "inevitable >and consequently permissible." But former CIA employees told the Times >that apart from this unintended blowback, "some CIA propaganda efforts, >especially during the Vietnam War, had been carried out with a view toward >their eventual impact in the United States." The Times series concluded >that at its peak, the CIA's network "embraced more than 800 news and >public information organizations and individuals."[15] > > > By the time the Times series appeared, Congress was looking for a >way out of the issue. Obligingly, Stansfield Turner promised that the CIA >would avoid journalists "accredited by any U.S. news service, newspaper, >periodical, radio or television network or station." There were at least >three problems with this that most press coverage overlooked: many >stringers and freelancers are not accredited; it didn't cover any >foreign-owned media; and as Gary Hart complained at the time, the new >policy included a provision that allowed the CIA to unilaterally make >exceptions whenever it wished.[16] > > Within several years of this alleged policy, the new Reagan >administration ignored it in favor of a shooting war in Central America, >one component of which was an illegal CIA-administered propaganda war at >home. Edgar Chamorro, a contra sympathizer in Miami with a background in >public relations, was recruited by the CIA in late 1982. After two years >of following the CIA's instructions regarding the manipulation of U.S. >journalists and even members of Congress, Chamorro went public with his >story.[17] By now Congress was clearly out-maneuvered, even though it >alone held the purse strings that controlled funding for the war. > > The inability of Congress to address the CIA-media problem in >the 1970s meant that more powerful forces were at work. In fact, while >Congress was wringing its left hand over illegal CIA activities, its right >hand was helping the CIA overhaul its Wurlitzer. Ever since 1967, when the >Katzenbach committee was tasked by Lyndon Johnson to study the problem of >the CIA's use of domestic organizations, the agenda at the highest levels >had been to remove such activities from the CIA's payroll and continue >them under a new umbrella. In the unclassified portion of their report, >this committee recommended giving money openly through a "public-private >mechanism." "The CIA's big mistake was not supplanting itself with private >funds fast enough," observed Gloria Steinem, who had been part of the >CIA's global network.[18] > > The Asia Foundation was given a large "severance payment" so that >they could find private funding,[19] and the Congress for Cultural Freedom >got over $4 million from the Ford Foundation.[20] In 1971, Radio Liberty >and Radio Free Europe were spun off and funded separately by new >legislation. While this hardly diminished the CIA's control of these radio >stations, it did help public relations by facilitating "deniability."[21] >Then in 1983, Congress created the National Endowment for Democracy, with >funding to carry on many of the activities that the CIA once carried out >covertly within its own budget. > > Bits and pieces of the old Wurlitzer were still evident everywhere: >John Richardson, Jr., the new chairman of NED, had been president and CEO >of Radio Free Europe during the 1960s, and some of the NED's dozens of >grants were issued to groups that solicited aid for the contras.[22] >"It is not necessary to turn to the covert approach," commented Colby >in regard to the NED program. "Many of the programs which ... were >conducted as covert operations [can now be] conducted quite openly, >and consequentially, without controversy."[23] As if to prove his point, >Colby's wife was soon a member of NED's board of directors. > > > Two major changes since the 1980s -- the collapse of socialism and >the centralization of domestic and transnational media, suggest that the >CIA now has everything well in hand. But it is far too early to tell. >The pressure to stay competitive in the global marketplace could provoke >economic nationalism in places where the CIA was once free to roam. France >and Germany, for example, have recently expelled CIA agents. At the same >time, the Soviet people are having second thoughts about all those benefits >of U.S.-imposed capitalism. China remains aggressive and uncompromising; >they may even tolerate less interference from us in their political >process than we do from them. > > It's a different world, and it's unfamiliar. A blue-ribbon panel of >the Council on Foreign Relations suggested last year that the CIA be freed >from some policy constraints on covert operations, such as the use of >journalists and clergy as cover. This is alarming. Unlike the typical >corporate-funded think tank, filled with pro-Pentagon pundits, the folks >at CFR are either running the world or they know who does. For 70 >years they've rarely recommended anything that has not become policy. >Furthermore, they've thoroughly co-opted the major media (see sidebar). > > There have also been official announcements that the CIA is >mission-creeping into economic intelligence and computer-age information >warfare. This might reflect a bit of nostalgia for the job security and >moral clarity of the Cold War, or it could be a premonition that the >American Century is over and the masses are expected to get uppity. >Perhaps the First Amendment has always been something of a con -- a matter >of "freedom," but only for those who own the presses, or for those who >lived in an earlier century, before psywar and public relations experts. > > Then again, stay tuned -- the credibility gap is back. A recent >poll shows that Americans are fed up with mainstream news media. "Very >favorable" ratings for television network news fell from 30 percent in >1985 to just 15 percent this year, and for large national newspapers it >dropped 12 percent. A majority now believe that news stories are often >inaccurate.[24] > > After factoring in the new global economics and recalculating the >prospects for the middle class, all bets are off. The poor performance >of Congress and the press on the issue of journalists and the CIA may >mean that the next time around, the elites will lack even the credibility >to stage another co-opting charade of "oversight." That could prove >beneficial, particularly if next the time threatens to be as >inconsequential and diversionary as the last time. > > 1. Philip Agee, Inside the Company: CIA Diary (Harmondsworth, Middlesex, > England: Penguin Books, 1975), pp. 70-71. > > 2. Richard H. Immerman, The CIA in Guatemala (Austin: University of > Texas Press, 1982), pp. 111-114; Thomas P. McCann, An American > Company: The Tragedy of United Fruit (New York: Crown Publishers, > 1976), pp. 45-48. > > 3. Eric Thomas Chester, Covert Network: Progressives, the International > Rescue Committee, and the CIA (Armonk NY and London: M.E. Sharpe, > 1995), pp. 160-183. > > 4. The first anti-CIA book appeared in 1964: David Wise and Thomas B. > Ross, The Invisible Government (New York: Random House). CIA director > John McCone, and other officials acting under his direction, > contacted the publisher in an effort to stop it. > > 5. Carl Bernstein, "The CIA and the Media," Rolling Stone, 20 October > 1977, pp. 65-67. > > 6. "The CIA Report the President Doesn't Want You to Read," Village > Voice, 20 February 1976, p. 40. > > 7. Ibid, p. 36. > > 8. Sean Gervasi, "CIA Covert Propaganda Capability," Covert Action > Information Bulletin, No. 7, December 1979 - January 1980, pp. 18-20. > > 9. Daniel Schorr, Clearing the Air (New York: Berkley Medallion Books, > 1978), pp. 204-206, 275-277. > >10. Norman Kempster, "Identity of U.S. Spies Harder to Hide, Colby Says," > Los Angeles Times, 28 December 1977, pp. 1, 8. > >11. Central Intelligence Agency, Memorandum for Director of Central > Intelligence from the Task Force on Greater CIA Openness, 20 December > 1991, 15 pages. > >12. Allan Nairn, "The Country Team," The Nation, 5 June 1995, p. 780. > >13. Joe Trento and Dave Roman, "The Spies Who Came In From the Newsroom," > Penthouse, August 1977, pp. 44-46, 50. > >14. Bernstein, p. 58. > >15. John M. Crewdson and Joseph B. Treaster, "The CIA's 3-Decade Effort > to Mold the World's Views," New York Times, 25 December 1977, pp. 1, > 12; Terrence Smith, "CIA Contacts With Reporters," New York Times, > p. 13; Crewdson and Treaster, "Worldwide Propaganda Network Built by > the CIA," New York Times, 26 December 1977, pp. 1, 37; Crewdson and > Treaster, "CIA Established Many Links to Journalists in U.S. and > Abroad," New York Times, 27 December 1977, pp. 1, 40-41. > >16. While it's true that Gary Hart's complaint was not widely covered > (there's one paragraph in the Los Angeles Times on 16 December 1977, > p. 2), it is still amazing that when this clause was rediscovered in > early 1996, indignant columnists pretended that it had been a secret > all along. The truth is, journalists haven't been doing their > homework for the last 18 years. This led the Society of Professional > Journalists to earn a flunking grade for their 23 February 1996 press > release: "An executive order during the Carter administration was > thought to have banned the practice [of the recruitment of > journalists by the CIA]. After a Council on Foreign Relations task > force recommended that the ban be reconsidered, it was revealed that > a 'loophole' existed allowing the CIA director or his deputy to grant > a waiver. After protests, Deutch refused to rule out the practice, > saying in some cases it might be necessary." To rephrase this > politely, it took 18 years for the SPJ to become aware of the fine > print in the CIA's policy. This is probably due to poor reporting > from newspapers such as the Washington Post, which the innocents at > SPJ must think of as not only "liberal," but also competent. So why, > when the Post's intelligence reporter, Walter Pincus, was told about > the waiver last year, did he write it up as a scoop in the 22 February > 1996 Washington Post??? Perhaps Pincus really didn't know. Or perhaps > ever since Pincus took money from the CIA in the early 1960s, it has > affected his reporting on this issue. > >17. Edgar Chamorro, Packaging the Contras: A Case of CIA Disinformation > (New York: Institute for Media Analysis, 1987), 78 pages; Jacqueline > Sharkey, "Back in Control," Common Cause Magazine, September/October > 1986, pp. 28-40. > >18. "CIA Subsidized Festival Trips: Hundreds of Students Were Sent to > World Gatherings," New York Times, 21 February 1967. > >19. Victor Marchetti and John D. Marks, The CIA and the Cult of > Intelligence (New York: Dell Publishing, 1975), p. 179. > >20. Peter Coleman, The Liberal Conspiracy: The Congress for Cultural > Freedom and the Struggle for the Mind of Postwar Europe (New York: > The Free Press, 1989), pp. 224-225. > >21. Marchetti and Marks, pp. 174-178. > >22. John Kelly, "National Endowment for Reagan's Democracies," The > National Reporter, Summer 1986, pp. 22-26; Council on Hemispheric > Affairs and Inter-Hemispheric Education Resource Center, National > Endowment for Democracy (NED): A Foreign Policy Branch Gone Awry > (Resource Center, Box 4506, Albuquerque NM 87196), 1990, 93 pages. > >23. William Colby, "Political Action -- In the Open," Washington Post, > 14 March 1982, p. D8. > >24. Jack Nelson, "Major News Media Trusted Less, Poll Says," Los Angeles > Times, 21 March 1997. > > >Sidebar from NameBase NewsLine, No. 17, April-June 1997: > > Journalists at Work: Who's Watching the Watchdogs? > > In the handful of self-critical articles about the media that >appeared twenty years ago, the matter of CIA connections with executives, >editors, and reporters was emphasized. While this makes for good copy >and is certainly worth repeating, it also fails to challenge American >journalism at it weakest point: the corrupting influence of fame and >fortune. Someone who has looked at this issue recently is James Fallows, >formerly of Atlantic Monthly. Fallows argues in his recent book, Breaking >the News: How the Media Undermine American Democracy, that his profession >is becoming seriously compromised. > > The name recognition that comes from flaccid punditry can be lucrative >on the lecture circuit. Or if you have a name already, perhaps by doing >something useless or naughty at the White House, you can acquire pundit >status by writing a kiss-and-tell book. Big stars such as Cokie Roberts >can collect five figures simply by offering up flattering platitudes at a >corporate convention. > > Another problem is the revolving door between the media and >government. It's considered a badge of honor for a journalist to have >spent time working for the White House, whereas it should be seen as a >conflict of interest. Some suggest that it's okay to make the switch once >-- Bill Moyers can call himself a journalist after working for Lyndon >Johnson, but David Gergen has been spinning through the door so often that >it makes the rest of us dizzy. Gergen flacked for Nixon, Ford, Reagan and >finally Clinton, and between administrations he was an editor at U.S. >News & World Report and a commentator for PBS. Come to think of it, James >Fallows himself, the new editor at U.S. News & World Report, was the chief >speech writer for Jimmy Carter. > > Pundits and superstars aside, the larger problem is that the media >is owned by the ruling class. With the increased media centralization of >the last twenty years, their lock on the masses is now so complete that >when they maintain an appearance of objectivity, it's only out of habit. >(Sentences containing the words "ruling class" are scribbled self- >consciously these days -- a measure of how well they have cornered the >market on perception, and perverted what class consciousness we once >had into a mass-consumer consciousness.) > > How can one distinguish between news and propaganda when the overlaps >and interlocks are so pervasive? John Chancellor was with NBC, then with >Voice of America, and then again with NBC. John Scali was with ABC, and >then with Nixon, and then again with ABC. Ben Bradlee, of Watergate and >Washington Post fame, was once a propagandist in Paris, taking orders from >the CIA station chief, and was friends with James Angleton. Bradley's >sister-in-law was Mary Meyer, divorced from Cord Meyer. She was JFK's >lover, and her 1964 murder was never solved. Robert John Myers was in the >CIA for twenty years, at one time as an assistant to William Colby, and >became publisher of the New Republic in 1968. Generoso Paul Pope, Jr. >was in the CIA the year before he bought the National Enquirer in 1952. >Laughlin Phillips, co-founder of the Washingtonian, was in the CIA for >fifteen years. Former top CIA officials Cord Meyer, Jr. and Tom Braden >became columnists (unlike Braden, Meyer rarely talks about his CIA >career). George R. Packard and L. Bruce van Voorst were with the CIA >before they joined Newsweek, and Philip Geyelin worked for the CIA while >on leave from the Wall Street Journal. > > There's always Katharine Graham, one of the world's richest women, >who is now recognized as a victim of the male-dominated culture because >her new autobiography says it's so. In a 1988 speech at CIA headquarters, >Graham warmed to her audience: "We live in a dirty and dangerous world. >There are some things the general public does not need to know and >shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take >legitimate steps to keep its secrets, and when the press can decide >whether to print what it knows." > > Here is a list of some pundits, news anchors, columnists, >commentators, reporters, editors, executives, owners, and publishers. >This list was compiled much too quickly, merely by scanning the 1995 >membership roster of the Council on Foreign Relations -- the same CFR >that issued a report in early 1996 bemoaning the constraints on our poor, >beleaguered CIA. It's not a wallet-size card, but keep it handy somehow. >The next time someone denounces all conspiracy theories as wacky, check >out the name. You might not be surprised. > > By the way, first William Bundy and then William G. Hyland edited >CFR's flagship journal Foreign Affairs between the years 1972-1992. >Bundy was with the CIA from 1951-1961, and Hyland from 1954-1969. > >Roone Arledge Peter Grose Walter H. Pincus >Sidney Blumenthal Jim Hoagland Norman Podhoretz >David Brinkley Warren Hoge Dan Rather >Tom Brokaw David Ignatius Stephen S. Rosenfeld >William F. Buckley, Jr. Robert G. Kaiser A. M. Rosenthal >James E. Burke Marvin Kalb Jack Rosenthal >Hodding Carter III Peter R. Kann Diane Sawyer >John Chancellor Anne Karalekas Daniel L. Schorr >George Crile III Joe Klein Robert B. Semple, Jr. >Arnaud de Borchgrave Morton Kondracke Hedrick L. Smith >Karen DeYoung Charles Krauthammer George Stephanopoulos >Christopher S. Dickey Irving Kristol Strobe Talbott >Joan Didion Jim Lehrer Laurence A. Tisch >Leonard Downie, Jr. Joseph Lelyveld Seymour Topping >Elizabeth Drew Lee Lescaze Robert C. Toth >Rowland Evans, Jr. Anthony Lewis Mark Uhlig >James Fallows Flora Lewis Garrick Utley >Thomas L. Friedman Mitchel Levitas Katrina vanden Heuvel >Suzanne Garment Michael E. Lind L. Bruce van Voorst >Leslie H. Gelb Kati Marton Milton Viorst >David R. Gergen Jessica T. Mathews Ben J. Wattenberg >Philip L. Geyelin Karl E. Meyer Craig R. Whitney >Georgie Anne Geyer Sig Mickelson Steven Weisman >Katharine Graham Judith Miller Lally G. Weymouth >James L. Greenfield Jack Nelson Roger W. Wilkins >Meg Greenfield John B. Oakes Mortimer B. Zuckerman > >........................................................................... >: For references to more information on this topic, search for the proper : >: names found in this essay by using NameBase Online, a cumulative name : >: index of 500 investigative books, plus 20 years of assorted clippings. : >: http://www.pir.org/ info@pir.org : >:.........................................................................: > --=====================_860775711==_ >1 RUSSIA: Protest Day Heralds More Active Measures >2 RUSSIA: Zyuganov Defends Party Program > >Moscow Sovetskaya Rossiya in Russian, 3 Apr 97 p1 > >[Article by Konstantin Molchanov: "Containing Their >Wrath. On 27 March an Event Took Place That Was >Unprecedented in Its Scale and Significance"] > >[FBIS Translated Excerpt] The next morning, 28 March, >the authorities and television pretended that nothing >special had happened, or, at any rate, nothing that was >worthy of their attention, evaluation, or conclusions. The >Kremlin and the White House set about their current tasks, >and television hurried to switch to other topics -- in >particular, to the subject of Belarus. Newspaper reports >were also more than modest, as if it were a question of some >routine, banal event.] >However, on 27 March 1997 an event took place in Russia >that was unprecedented in its scale and significance, and >possibly heralded the beginning of a new phase in the >Russian working people's struggle for their rights against >the antipeople regime. >The all-Russia protest action that swept through the >country last Thursday has no counterpart in post-Soviet >history, let alone in Soviet history, and is comparable only >with the all-Russia political strike of October 1905, which, >as is well known, was the prologue to the subsequent >revolutionary events in Russia. [passage omitted] >In spring 1997 we are witnessing an obvious weakening >of the position of the ruling regime in the face of the >growing national protest . Today it is not parliament, the >opposition factions, parties, and movements, or the >individual political leaders aspiring to the presidency that >represent the main threat to the regime, but the despairing >masses -- the only real force in Russia. >The events of 27 March showed that it is pretty easy to >organize the people on a nationwide scale, that the >necessary mechanisms for this exist, and work faultlessly. >Try to imagine such a demonstration in support of the >government and the president! To organize such a >demonstration is impossible in principle today; the people >would not turn out, and you would not find any organizers >for it outside the Sadovoye Koltso Beltway [central Moscow]. >But something else also became clear 27 March: People >actually do not want an "Albanian scenario," they do not >want disorder, they still hope for a peaceful solution to >their basic problems . In this sense our people are far more >civilized and democratic than the Russian authorities, who >have repeatedly resolved their own problems with the aid of >force. Participants in the all-Russia protest action >expressed their demands entirely peacefully and with >dignity. There was not a single excess -- not because the >police guarded law and order so well, and not because the >authorities managed by their preventive measures, as some >people interpret, to "reduce tension," "to hold [people] in >check," and "to prevent emotions from spilling over," and so >forth, on which grounds such people talk almost of yet >another "victory" for Yeltsin. There were no excesses >primarily because the people themselves did not want them >and did not commit them (and if they had wanted them, no one >could have restrained them). The action was conceived and >prepared as a peaceful action from the very first, and was >carried out as such, as a last warning to the authorities, a >demonstration of the unity and solidarity of the masses. For >this thanks should have been offered to people the next >morning; humble respects should have been paid to them; but >the Kremlin pretended that nothing special had happened the >day before, thereby yet again showing disrespect for the >people and ingratitude for their long patience. >What was the overall outcome? In assessing this, let >us start first of all with the premise that the 27 March >protest was not the people's "final, decisive" battle with >the antipeople regime. Rather, it was a show of strength, a >flexing of muscles, and a clear and impressive warning of >intentions. Today three main political forces operate on the >political stage -- the authorities, the people, and the >opposition. The action of 27 March 1997 showed that none of >these forces is yet capable of changing anything >fundamentally in the prevailing situation in the country . >Assessing the results of the first all-Russia political >strike in 1905, Lenin said that the revolution was not yet >capable of dealing the decisive blow to the autocracy, but >that the autocracy was also no longer capable of resisting >the revolution openly. He called this situation "a balance >of power between the classes." Something like this is >happening in Russia today too. >The president and the government are not capable of >resisting nationwide protest, but nor are they capable of >overcoming the financial and economic crisis. They can only >simulate some kind of activity in this direction and patch >holes; but they are not capable of resolving the problem >fundamentally while remaining within their chosen course. >They will go on issuing pay to people as and when it becomes >possible, in dribs and drabs, as they have been doing up to >now. But it is more than likely that they will not exert >themselves too hard to do so, as they did before 27 March, >and that there will be a repeat of the situation of last >July, before the elections, when there was virtually >televised monitoring of the payment of wages, but after the >elections this troublesome task was immediately abandoned. >The government's next surge of activity on the pay front >should now be expected a week before the May Day >demonstration, and if the "danger is averted" again, it will >then rest content and take it easy right through till >November. >The people are also for the time being powerless to >change their position for the better immediately, even with >the aid of such a powerful mass action. This time they only >declared their demands. This was a protest without pressure >on the authorities; but they never do anything unless >pressure is put on them. After 27 March the people will face >the blunt question: What next? Should they resign >themselves to pathetic handouts and be done with it? Should >they continue to present their polite demands to the >authorities, while fearing to really offend, alarm, or >insult them? Or switch to fundamentally new methods of >fighting for their rights? The answer to these questions >will evolve of its own accord over the next few months. If >the pay situation really is rectified (but how?), that is >one thing; if the situation deteriorates still further -- >the people will simply no longer have a choice. >Finally, let us speak of the role of the opposition. >The events of 27 March showed that it is not yet ready to >exploit such actions in order to achieve its cardinal >political task -- a change of government. Yet again its >colossal lack of coordination, its inability to put up a >united front against the common foe, was demonstrated -- >everyone joined the ranks of the masses from his own side >and paraded some sort of ambitions of his own; some people, >such as Lebed, looked simply ridiculous in the process. No >one -- including, unfortunately, the People's Patriotic >Union of Russia -- managed to take full advantage of the >platform of the all-Russia strike and the unique >possibilities that it afforded. The political opposition's >role proved more than modest -- it attended, rather than >participated in, let alone leading, the event. But after >all, this was not some celebratory May Day demonstration, >when flowers, smiles, and high spirits are sufficient; this >was a protest action, which is a different political "genre" >altogether. If you cannot exploit such actions, what else, >what further opportunities, do you expect? >I am not saying that it was necessary to have called on >the people to besiege the Kremlin. Nor that this action >alone might have achieved some kind of global result, if the >opposition had not missed the opportunity. But if you summon >people and they come, point out to them the end goal and >explain the ways of achieving this goal and the stages on >the way to achieving it, including the practical sense of a >stage like the current action. Otherwise there will >inevitably be disappointment that people came out and >marched all over Russia, but essentially achieved nothing. >And could have achieved nothing. Because the specific goal >they were aiming for was not spelled out, because the sort >of demands that could have been insisted on until a >victorious conclusion on this very occasion were not put >forward. >But imagine that such an action had taken place under >Soviet rule in about 1990 or 1991. How would the democratic >opposition, the press, the West have taken advantage of it, >how they would have blown up everything out of proportion, >doubtless calling the event nothing less than a revolution >and not allowing the people off the streets until they had >obtained the necessary resignations and freedoms, or even >power itself. However, why tax our imaginations trying to >imagine something that did not happen and could not have >happened (pay was paid on time in those days). Let us rather >tax our memories. In August 1991 only a few thousand >Muscovites marched on the White House. The rest of Russia >was calm and quiet. And this was presented to the whole >world as "the expression of the will of the people," who >were allegedly thirsting "to overthrow the totalitarian >regime," something that was in fact accomplished by a small >group of politicians allegedly carrying out "the will of the >people." >As for the effectiveness of our action, everything at >the moment remains where it was: the authorities in power, >the opposition in opposition, and the people, as before, >without their wages. A balance of power or a balance of >powerlessness? >And yet: Does the absence of a visible result from the >protest of 27 March 1997 mean that the actions undertaken >that day were in vain, that they did not prove their worth? >No, it does not; this was basically the first demonstration >on this scale, the first attempt to switch from local, >passive forms of protest to mass protest, to more active >forms of protest. Protest is rapidly gaining momentum in >society, and on 27 March millions of people all over Russia >received a fine opportunity to come together with their >"comrades in misfortune," to mix, to express their views >frankly, to share with one other their most pressing >concerns, and to compare interpretations of what is going on >in the country and attitudes to the authorities and to the >policy they are carrying out -- and to the opposition and >its leaders too, incidentally. In conditions in which social >organizations have been abolished in enterprises, in which >people have been effectively deprived of the possibility of >gathering together as a collective to discuss their >problems, and many have actually lost their jobs and become >isolated, even one day of such contact is worth much. This >is genuine political education for the masses; this is the >school of solidarity and struggle; and for this reason 27 >March will not have been in vain for Russia. > >RUSSIA: Zyuganov Defends Party Program > >Moscow Sovetskaya Rossiya in Russian, 25 Mar 97 p 2 > >[Article by Gennadiy Zyuganov, chairman of the Central >Committee and Program Commission of the CPRF: "A Banner >Raised High: How We Should Work on the Party Program"] > >[FBIS Translated Text] The regular, Fourth Congress of >the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) >assembles in April of this year. Its agenda includes the >question of making amendments and supplements to the Party >Program. During the pre-congress report and election >campaign, this issue has drawn the fixed attention of >Communists. Along with numerous proposals to refine the >program, the Central Committee is also receiving questions: >What makes it necessary to modify the existing program? >Life does not stand still, and a political party must >be constantly measuring its activities against the changing >situation. That is an axiom; it is clear by itself. But it >is also clear that by no means can every change in the >situation serve as the cause to modify party programs, for >documents of this rank deal with problems on a very general, >strategic, and long-run level. As for more particular and >short-run problems tied to the ongoing situation, they are >classified as tactical and become the subject of >resolutions, election platforms, and party documents of the >type that are constructed within the framework of general >program principles. >The introduction of changes in the program is usually >mandated by very special factors. There can be several such >factors: >1. All or a majority of the party goals reflected in >the program have been achieved. >2. The program goals have changed: Some of them have >been recognized as mistaken, others as untimely, new goals >have been added, and so forth. >3. The conditions of party activity have changed >fundamentally and, accordingly, the necessity has arisen to >change the entire system of forms and methods of work. (For >example, the party has ceased to be a ruling party and has >gone into principled opposition. This is exactly what the >CPRF had to experience, and that is one of the reasons we >adopted a new program two years ago.) >4. The nature of the party itself and its social base >have changed, the party has become the expression of the >interests of different classes and social groups. >5. There have been changes in the party's world view >system and its fundamental political, theoretical, and moral >assessments of its past, present, and prospects for the >future; in other words, the ideological foundation of all >its activity has changed significantly. >6. None of the above has changed, but in the existing >program things are treated so poorly and inappropriately >that a significant editorial reworking of the text is >required. >Each person who proposes specific amendments to the >program is obliged, in my opinion, to point clearly to one >or several of the enumerated factors. Only after taking a >painstaking "inventory" of the entire content of the >existing party program based on the framework I have >outlined is it possible to make the highly important >decision to modify particular provisions of the program. And >so, self-critically assessing the results of the work of the >>Program Commission, I have to conclude that we are still a >long way from fully resolving this problem. This forces you >to think more deeply about the motives that permit >amendments to be made to the program. >Let us start with the last-mentioned of the motives >above--the need for editorial refinement of the text. There >is no limit to the refinement process, of course, and >therefore the present text of the CPRF Program is entirely >susceptible of editorial improvement. This can be done, but >whether it needs to be done is the big question. In my >opinion, the text adopted by the Third Congress treats the >problems enumerated in the first five points fairly >accurately, and it is irrational to assign a party congress >the functions of editorial commission. >A desire to improve the text is completely >understandable, but one can go too far. We could easily fall >here into the common mistake that Engels warned against long >ago: slipping from the formulation of program goals into >commentary on them. This shortcoming was very evident in the >3rd Program of the CPSU (1961), whose authors forgot that >the program should be a summary of the goals and principles >of party activity, not a commentary on them. >Certainly, commentaries (both scientific and highly >popularized ones) are essential, but not in the program >itself. The job of preparing them falls to the ideological >subdivisions of party organs and to the party's scientific >contingent. Unfortunately, in the two years that have passed >since the last congress, little has been done in this >direction. >Lenin once said that the party program is its banner >raised on high. A banner is exactly right--a simple, vivid >symbol visible from everywhere, a guide on the field of >battle. But it is not a map of the terrain, nor an >operational plan, without which, of course, you cannot get >by and which must be carefully developed. >And that is why Lenin's party of Bolsheviks, famous for >their amazing tactical flexibility, did not hurry to change >their program at every occasion. And there was need--two >wars and two revolutions! The time to review the program, >that is review not just tactics but also strategy, came only >on the very eve of the socialist revolution when it became >clear that in the age of imperialism it would not be >accomplished in the way that people in the 19th century had >pictured it. And then the revision finally became absolutely >necessary after the revolution was victorious and the >program had been, in this way, fulfilled. >Then afterward the party was very solicitous of its >second program, adopted in 1919. Even such a major political >and socioeconomic change as the transition to the New >Economic Policy [NEP] did not occasion a modification of the >program. After the fact Gorbachev used it as a foundation, >and we all know what happened with that. >Now let us look at the content side of things. >Have we fulfilled even one of the goals of our program? > No, unfortunately we have not so far. >Perhaps we have formulated our goals incorrectly? I >think our general goals have been set correctly, namely our >general goals, the overall guidelines. In some ways we will >clarify and develop them, especially when it comes to >specific ways of achieving them. And we are doing this and >doing it continuously, but this does not change the essence >of the program goals. >Perhaps we are already the ruling party? But even if >we were to become it, we would not have to change our >program but work and work by the sweat of our brow in order >to fulfill at least the minimum program. >Perhaps we have ceased to be the party of the working >people? Or we are no longer the party of patriots and it is >time to throw out this point, as some of our idiotic >"leftist" comrades advise? >Perhaps we have renounced Marxism-Leninism as our >theoretical foundation like the Social Democrats? No, far >from renouncing it, we are striving to develop it >creatively, for Marxism is a generalization and essential >conclusion from all the achievements of world science and >culture. Many decades have already passed since Marx, >Engels, and Lenin, and during them human thought has not >stood still. We have made some steps in this direction, and >the results are already included in our program. >Some will say that we included the wrong things, or did >it in the wrong way. Well, all right, let us discuss this >issue. That is, offer scientific arguments and--most >important--measure the conclusions in practice. And here we >move on to another equally important question: the procedure >for adoption and political and scientific testing of program >propositions. I would like to recall how the existing CPRF >Program was developed and adopted. >Work on it began even before the official restoration >of the party, which occurred at the Second Congress in early >1993. This congress, however, did not adopt a program at the >beginning, only a "program declaration," which was very >sketchy and preliminary. That is understandable--too many >theoretical and practical questions of party life and >activity under the new conditions remained open to be in a >hurry with final formulations. >An exchange of opinions on all these issues continued >in the party, and resulted in the preparation, after a year, >of the "Theses for Development of the CPRF Program," >approved at a plenum of the Central Committee and >distributed to party organizations for further discussion. >This stage concluded at the all-Russian party conference in >April 1994, which adopted and published the "Program Theses >of the CPRF" as the foundation for continuing work. >Then followed one more cycle of general party debate >during which the Program Commission prepared and in the >autumn submitted to a plenum of the Central Committee what >was now the "Draft Program of the CPRF." They approved and >submitted it to the court of the entire party. >We remember that the discussion was certainly not >formalistic. An enormous number of assessments and proposals >were received, which forced the Program Commission to work >very seriously on polishing the draft. And only after this >was the updated draft approved by still another plenum of >the Central Committee and submitted to the Third Party >Congress. >But work still continued at the congress. About 10 >fundamental additions and amendments were made to the text. >And so adoption of the existing program required, for >one thing, partywide discussion of five versions of the >text, and second, official decisions by three plenums, a >conference, and two party congresses. >But even that is not all. As we know, the most complex >theoretical issue of the party program concerning the >prospects of development of world civilization and Russia's >place in it became the subject of painstaking scientific- >theoretical work. The problem, as we recall, was posed by >the late Valentin Afanasyevich Koptyug. To discuss it the >party Central Committee (I emphasize, the Central Committee >itself, and not some other nonparty organization) in three >years conducted three major, purely theoretical conferences >on the problem of "stable development." It was subjected to >detailed, critical analysis, resulting in the proposal of >the socialist version of the idea of stable development, >cleansed of bourgeois and mondialist interpretations and >overlays. Only after this was it included in the program >under the name "optimal socialist development." >The reason I enumerated all these party and scientific >forums is certainly not to use their authority to claim that >we now have an absolutely irreproachable text in which not a >comma can be changed. No, I am far from such a thought, but >I consider it relevant to recall the history of the adoption >of the existing program in order to point out the high >standards we ourselves set and observed, which we must >continue to observe in the future when making such important >party decisions. >Unfortunately, at the present time in the matter of >making amendments and additions to the program we are not >fully observing these standards. >What do we have as the basis for debate right now? The >decision of the previous plenum to include this question on >the agenda of the fourth congress and the letter of the >Central Committee in which the question of amendments is >touched on in very general terms. >In fact party members were given a very abstract >invitation: "Send in your proposals!" So we are in the very >early phase of the debate, in the stage of free searching >with all the features characteristic of such stages. For >example, many of the proposals coming in indicate that their >authors are only superficially familiar--if at all!--with >the existing CPRF Program. Many of the things being proposed >are already reflected and fixed in the text. A number of >proposals begin, as it were, with a clean slate, as if the >party did not have an officially adopted program at all >before. Such instances illustrate that work on studying and >promoting the party program was apparently poorly organized >in many organizations. >But let us turn to sensible, practical proposals. There >are quite a few of them, too. The logic of the adoption of >party decisions demands that after they are reviewed and >summarized, the Program Commission uses this as the basis to >prepare a concrete draft of the changes and additions which >were examined by one of the plenums of the Central Committee >and then published for partywide discussion. It seems to me >that such a stage is absolutely essential in adopting >decisions of this degree of importance. >But we do not have such a draft yet. Less than a month >is left until the congress, but the debate continues in the >very initial stage. It is going on "in general," not around >a specific subject. And even if the party receives the text >of a draft of amendments by the time of the pre-congress >plenum, there will no longer be enough time for a partywide >discussion of it. Nor will there be any certainty that we >will truly improve our program. The reason things are behind >should be sought in the fact that we gave ourselves too >tight a schedule. And we need to decide whether to meet it >"at any cost" or to adjust its times. >In view of the above, I personally am inclined to >conclude that work on amendments should be continued, but >continued in a serious manner without haste to adopt them at >the next congress no matter what. The draft should be >prepared and submitted for discussion by the whole party. At >the same time there should be careful scientific-theoretical >testing of it, for which a series of scientific conferences >should be organized under the aegis of the Central >Committee. After that, discussion at another plenum, and >possibly even call an all-Russian party conference for this. >In other words, prepare in a really fundamental way and >bring this question to the fifth congress. As for the >upcoming fourth congress, it should make a serious >contribution to this cause. >In the first place, at the highest party forum we >should discuss the problem itself and ways and approaches to >solving it. The congress can summarize certain results of >the exchange of opinions occurring in the party, determine >the main areas in which the program should be refined, and >possibly work up a general conception of this. >It seems that such a conception cannot emerge as the >result of purely theoretical debate; it cannot be >"invented." Only innovations that have already been tested >in reality, in practical party work, can and should be put >in the program. In the last two years there have been many >important events in which the party participated in one way >or another; they were all reviewed by the party and >reflected in the documents of party conferences and plenums, >in the pre-election platforms, and elsewhere. These are >precisely the documents that should be the foundation for >development of the draft of amendments and additions being >made to the program. >>From the mass of developments in recent years the most >important and deserving of inclusion in the program, it >seems to me, are propositions concerning the relations of >socialism and patriotism, the specific cultural-historical >features of Russia, and new trends in the development of the >social class basis of the Communist Party. Nonetheless, they >will require careful critical analysis and singling out the >things in them that have truly been confirmed in practice. >As Lenin said during discussion of the draft of the second >program: "The program must describe reality with absolute >accuracy. Then our program is invincible" (Complete Works, >Vol. 38, p. 159). >In the second place, the proposals received during the >debate and the materials prepared by the Program Commission >will not simply disappear. No one is preventing us from >considering them during preparation of extensive resolutions >of the congress on the broadest range of issues, including >program issues. Among them are, for example, the questions >of a minimum program, questions of the party's agrarian and >ethnic policy, and so on. >At the last plenum we were probably in a hurry and took >a somewhat casual attitude toward a very important problem. >It is not too late to correct this mistake. I think that the >pre-congress plenum of the Central Committee could propose >that the party congress clarify the corresponding point of >the agenda, formulating it in approximately this way: "On a >Conception (Principles, Main Areas) of Making Additions and >Amendments to the CPRF Program." Needless to say, this >question is for the plenum to decide, but the final word >belongs to the congress alone. >In conclusion I would like to emphasize: The program >must be respected, the program should be promoted and >studied, and the program must be fulfilled. I must note with >concern that the people who latched onto the idea of >amending the program with special zeal are the same ones who >in the two years since its adoption have not done the first >thing, the second, or the third either. The psychological >motivation here is simple: How can you respect, study, and >fulfill it if it needs to be changed? >Our most important challenge is not to let ourselves be >caught up by such an attitude. And in light of this >challenge, I hope that comrades will correctly understand >the motives and essential points of the proposals set forth >in this article. > --=====================_860775711==_ ************************************************** Michael Eisenscher Workers Education Local 189, CWA Doctoral Candidate, Public Policy Program University of Massachusetts-Boston 391 Adams Street Oakland, CA 94610-3131 ------------------------------------------------------------- Phone: (510) 893-8382 (voice/fax) E-Mail: meisenscher@igc.apc.org ************************************************* "Class consciousness is knowing which side of the fence you're on; class analysis is knowing who is there with you." ----from a poster, source unknown "Peter Drucker, whose many books and articles over the years have helped facilitate the new economic reality, says quite bluntly that 'the disappearance of labor as a key factor of production' is going to emerge as the critical 'unfinished business of capitalist society.' " Quoted in Jeremy Rifkin, THE END OF WORK (NY: Tarcher/Putnam, 1995) p.12 He cites the Drucker book which I haven't seen. I apologize for the confusion. (thanks to Gary L. Olsen for this quote and citation) "We are not merely an economy, but also a culture." "It has never been economics alone that defines America. If we choose, as a culture, to push back against the economic forces that would otherwise divide us, it is within our power to do so." -- Robert Reich -- Resignation address "[There is a] growing assertion that globalization and technological change make inevitable low wages and inequalities....The counter argument that has not gained much popular support is that inequalities result from human agency; they are not the inevitable consequence of 'progress.'" S.M. Miller and Charles Collins "Growing Economic Fairness" Social Policy, Summer 1996 "Whenever you are in doubt...apply the first test. Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man whom you may have seen, and ask yourself if the step you contemplate is going to be any use to him. Will he gain anything from it? Will it restore him to a control over his own life and destiny? True development puts first those that society puts last". - Mahatma Gandhi --=====================_860775711==_-- From aaron@burn.ucsd.edu Mon Apr 14 03:03:56 1997 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 05:03:36 -0400 To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu, LABOR-L@YORKU.CA, a-infos@tao.ca From: aaron@burn.ucsd.edu (Aaron) Subject: Argentina: Teachers struggle in the face of repression; one dead Comrades, Given the lateness of the hour, I will only briefly summarize what I have gleaned from a number of items in Spanish that I have received in the last 24 hours. The Spanish-language documents can be found at . * Teachers throughout Argentina have been struggling intensely against cutbacks in educational spending, including cuts in teachers' salaries. Since April 1, there has been an ongoing hunger strike of about 50 teachers in front of the Congress. * Teachers in Neuquen have been on strike for over a month. On Friday, a demonstration there of teachers and supporters was attacked by police. A 24-year-old houswife was killed and many were wounded. * There was a mass demonstration on Saturday to protest the repression. There is or was (I'm not sure which) a nation-wide strike of education workers. I'm sorry I can't give fuller information. I hope that others will have information that they can post to these lists today. -- In solidarity, -- Aaron From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Tue Apr 15 23:41:29 1997 Tue, 15 Apr 1997 22:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Tue, 15 Apr 1997 22:38:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 22:38:17 -0700 (PDT) To: united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Fax and E-mail Support for Santos Workers Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >From: Jack Petith >Subject: Fax and E-mail Support for Santos Workers > >URGENT: > >The Police have attacked the portworkers of Santos, Brazil. The army may >be next. > >E-mail president Cardoso of Brazil to urge restraint against the workers >and to emphasize world-wide support for the Santos workers. >You can e-mail president Cardoso at this address: >e-mail: pr@planalto.gov.br > >Send a copy to the Santos portworkers union: >interportus@portodesantos.com > >You can also fax president Cardoso at: >Fax: (55 61) 226 7566 > >Be sure to include your union/organizational affiliation. > >The Brazilian government Web site can be found here: >http://www.brazil.gov.br/ >You may find useful further contact information on it. If you do, you >might post it to the list and/or on the Web. > >In Solidarity, >Jack > > From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Wed Apr 16 09:28:38 1997 Wed, 16 Apr 1997 08:24:27 -0700 (PDT) Wed, 16 Apr 1997 08:23:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 08:23:57 -0700 (PDT) To: can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: LAMAP Job--Student Coordinator Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >Return-Path: >X-Sender: wkramer@pop.ben2.ucla.edu >Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 06:38:22 -0700 >To: wkramer@ucla.edu >From: William Kramer >Subject: LAMAP Job--Student Coordinator > >LAMAP would like to hire someone to help me coordinate student involvement >with the project both at UCLA and at other campuses. All "Friends of LAMAP" >are strongly encouraged to apply. Resumes and cover letters sent by email >attachment are welcome. We want to act quickly on this so respond soon if >you are interested. > > > > >------------------------------------------- >Job Description: LAMAP Student Coordinator > >The Los Angeles Manufacturing Action Project (LAMAP) is a community-based >labor-organizing project focused on the largely immigrant workforce of the >Southern California manufacturing sector. LAMAP is seeking a Student >Coordinator to help develop LAMAP's relationship with students at UCLA and >at other campuses in Southern California. This person will work under the >direction of the UCLA/ LAMAP Coordinator at the UCLA Labor Center, in >addition to spending time at the LAMAP Office in Huntington Park. > >Job responsibilities: > >Do outreach at UCLA and other campuses for LAMAP Field Study classes. > >Help plan and coordinate the LAMAP Field Study Classes > >Assist with LAMAP citizenship classes, which includes helping >- Coordinate and supervise teams of UCLA students who help teach the classes >- Develop "know your rights" speakers and exercises >- Coordinate and supervise outreach for the classes > >Conduct company and community research > >Assist with office and clerical work to support LAMAP research and >organizing activities. > >Job qualifications: > >A commitment to economic and social justice > >Strong organizing skills. > >Bilingual English/ Spanish. > >Good communication and writing skills. > >The ability to works with all kinds of people. > >A knowledge of the Los Angeles community, including labor organizations, >churches, grassroots organizations, ethnic communities, and academic >institutions. > >Some experience in labor research preferred. > >Experience organizing students, especially at UCLA, preferred. > > >Hours and Salary: > >15-20 hour per week, flexible hours with some evening work > >Salary based on experience. > >Work study preferred but not required. > >To Apply: > >Send cover letter and resume to: William Kramer, UCLA/LAMAP Coordinator, >1001 Gayley Ave, 2nd Floor, LA, CA 90024 or fax to 310-794-8017. For more >information call 310-794-0698. > > >XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > William Kramer > UCLA LAMAP Coordinator > 1001 Gayley--2nd Floor > Los Angeles, CA 90024 > 310-794-0698 > 310-794-8017 fax > wkramer@ucla.edu > www.lamap.org >XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > > From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Wed Apr 16 10:31:15 1997 Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:14:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:14:35 -0700 (PDT) To: united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Port of Santos situation after police intervention Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >Subject: Port of Santos situation after police intervention >Date: Wed, 16 Apr 97 11:46:28 +0000 >From: > >Latest news from Port of Santos dispute translated from Port of Santos Unions web site by LabourNet (www.labournet.org.uk) > >---------------------------- > >At 13 pm today, April 15, the situation was very tense at the gates of the steel company, Cosipa. The TV was present. The president of the Sole Workers Union cenfederation (CUT), Vicente Paulo da Silva spoke to the demonstrators. There were not clashes with the police, but barricades were erected with burning tyres. > >During the morning only three ships were handled in the harbour during the morning. >The strike could be national from the end of the afternoon. > >2 PM PRESS RELEASE > >The Santos Port is completely paralysed by a protest strike which started today, April 15, after the assault by the police of the ships "Marcs Dias" and "Vancouver" at the berth of the the Sao Paulo Steel Company (Cosipa). These ships had been occupied by the workers, in defence of their jobs, since April 2. The strike could spread this afternoon to all other Brazilian ports. The Federacoes Nacion >ais dos Estivadores (FNE) and Federacaos Nacionais odos Conferentes e Consertadores (Fenccovib) unions are currently in a meeting with the National Confederation of Transport Workers (Contmaf), to decide holding a general strike in all Brazilian ports. > >The workers arrested in the morning have already been questioned by the Federal Police and released. They are all well and none of them reported police violence. Some of them, who occupied the ships for 12 days, went back to Cosipa=B4s gates to address the demonstrators, who received them with cheers and a loud ovation. The struggle, they declared, does not end with the end of the occupation of the=20 >ships. > >Cosipa tried to handle the ships in its berth with its own non unionised labour but failed. The company refuses to make any comments, but inside informations indicate that the lack of skills of the youth hired to substitute unionised labour could lead to problems and accidents. The work in the berth started at 8,30 am but had to be stopped at 10 am. > >24 DOCKERS AND CONFERERS HELD BY FEDERAL POLICE >HANDLING OF SHIPS STILL PARALYSED >10 AM PRESS RELEASE > >The 24 workers who were aboard the two ships "Vancouver" and "Marcos Dias" are currently being questioned at the Santos Federal Police delegation. The questioning insists in knowing the resaons for the "invasion of the ships". The ships were assaulted by 60 federal agents at 4 am this morning, April 15, by sea and land. > >At the gate of Cosipa, the situation is extremely tense. Nearly 1000 workers are there in protest. There are 500 military police in the terminal, armed and with dogs. So far there have been no reports of police violence. > >The two ships were started to be handled at 9 am with non unionised labour, but operations have been stopped again. The POrt of Santos is completely paralysed by a protest general strike. > >-------------- > >COSIPA NEVER WANTED TO NEGOTIATE > >In an interview to Radio CBN, a short while ago, the Santos Federal Police chief, Ariovaldo Peixoto dos Anjos, declared that already on Sunday April 13, the way to assault the two ships, timetables and other operational details had been arranged with other military forces. In that same day Cosipa had tried to deceive the workers into think that they wanted to reopen negotiations, which, as we now=20 >know, was just a manouvre. > >"On Sunday we arranged everything with the military police and the Navy, in order to guarantee land and sea support for the assoult to the ships. Without that help and coordination the assault would have been impossible" he said. >------------------ >Background info in English at LabourNet: www.labournet.org.uk > >There is a lot more news in Portugese on the Santos unions web site. >http://www.portodesantos.com/sindicatos > >E-mail president Cardoso of Brazil to urge restraint against the workers >and to emphasize world-wide support for the Santos workers. =20 >You can e-mail president Cardoso at this address: >e-mail: pr@planalto.gov.br > >Send a copy to the Santos portworkers union: >interportus@portodesantos.com=20 > >You can also fax president Cardoso at: >Fax: (55 61) 226 7566=20 > > >$*$*$*$*$ 3 LINES REFORMATTED BY POPPER AT igc.apc.org $*$*$*$*$ > From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Thu Apr 17 09:12:29 1997 Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Thu, 17 Apr 1997 07:54:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 07:54:50 -0700 (PDT) To: h-uclea@h-net.msu.edu, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Future of Bus. Conf. Papers Sender: meisenscher@igc.org FYI: >Return-Path: >Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:02:51 EDT >Reply-To: H-Net Labor History Discussion List >Sender: H-Net Labor History Discussion List >From: "Seth Wigderson, H-Labor" >Subject: FUTURE OF BUSINESS HISTORY" CONFERENCE PAPERS TO BE PUBLISHED > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > "FUTURE OF BUSINESS HISTORY" CONFERENCE PAPERS TO BE PUBLISHED >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >The Fall 1997 issue of Business and Economic History (Volume 26, No. 1) >will publish all seventeen papers prepared for the April 4 and 5, 1997, >"Future of Business History" conference at Hagley Museum and Library. >These published papers will be extended versions of the presentations >delivered at the conference. > >By special arrangement with Business and Economic History, there will be a >one-time printing of additional copies of this issue, available for >purchase through the Hagley Museum and Library. Orders must be prepaid and >received by July 25, 1997, to guarantee delivery. Please remit $5 per copy >for addresses in North America and $10 per copy elsewhere in the world. No >email or fax orders will be accepted. Send all orders to: Carol Ressler >Lockman, Hagley Museum and Library, P.O. Box 3630, Wilmington, DE >19807-0630. > >Eric Guthey, "Ted Turner, Media Legend/Market Reality" > >Allen Kaufman, "Privatizing America's Arsenal of Democracy: Liberal Norms, >Hot/Cold War Rivalries and Technological Imperatives, 1920-1961" > >Debra Michals, "Toward a New History of the Postwar Economy: Prosperity, >Preparedness, and Women's Small Business Ownership" > >David Sicilia, "Distant Proximity: Writing the History of American >Business since 1945" > >Joseph T. Rainer, "The 'Sharper' Image: Perceptions and Reality of the >Yankee Peddler's Business Practices in the Antebellum South" > >Sally Clarke, "Consumer Negotiations" > >Christine Rosen, "Industrial Ecology and the Greening of Business History" >Ken Lipartito, "The Business of America is Culture: The Culture of America >is Business" > >Robert Frost, "Deconstructing the Rhetoric of Bigness and the Promise of >Rationality: Visions of Decentered Capitalism" > >Katina Manko, "'Now You Are in Business for Yourself': The Independent >Contractors of the California Perfume Company" > >Gerald Berk, "Discursive Cartels in the Public Interest: Uniform >Accounting among Manufacturers before the New Deal" > >Roland Marchand, "Where Lie the Boundaries of the Corporation? Pondering >the Scope of Corporate Responsibilities in the 1930s" > >Julie Winch, "'You Know I am a Man of Business': James Forten and the >Factor of Race in Philadelphia's Antebellum Business Community" > >Robert Weems, "Out of the Shadows: Business Enterprise and African >American Historiography" > >JoAnne Yates, "Business History and Anthony Giddens' Theory of >Structuration" > >Christiane Diehl-Taylor, "Charles Perrow and Business History" > >Naomi Lamoreaux, Daniel Raff, and Peter Temin, "New Economic Approaches to >the Study of Business History" > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ORDER FORM (Best viewed in Monaco or another monospace font) >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Name: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > >Company: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- >Address: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Phone: (phone needed to confirm orders) > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Fax: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > e-mail: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Number of copies: Amount enclosed: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > >Please make checks payable to Hagley Museum and Library. > >Print out this form and return it to: > >Carol Ressler Lockman >Hagley Museum and Library >P.O. Box 3630 >Wilmington, DE 19807-0630 > > From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Thu Apr 17 19:55:46 1997 Thu, 17 Apr 1997 18:55:07 -0700 (PDT) Thu, 17 Apr 1997 18:54:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 18:54:48 -0700 (PDT) To: united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: OECD Plots Fate of Global Economy Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >The following article was printed in The Guardian (UK) on 15 April 1997. >The author, George Monbiot, is one of the UK's leading environmental >activists. > > >A CHARTER TO LET LOOSE THE MULTINATIONALS > > by George Monbiot > >For the past four weeks - arguably the past five years - almost every >mainstream journalist in Britain has been recruited to the single task of >speculating about the election. Entire news networks have been reorganised >to cover this event and no other: ITN has destroyed even its canteen in >order to create more space. > >This is, we are told, an unprecedented exercise in democracy, a political >dissection so thorough that no one need enter a polling booth unaware of >how his or her vote will affect our political future. But while our >stargazers squabble over the portents, none of them seems to have noticed >the meteor heading our way. > >For the real future of Britain is being discussed not here, but elsewhere, >and in the utmost secrecy. The columnists who have so shrilly defended the >sovereignty of Parliament from the technocrats in Brussels have so far >failed to devote a single column inch to the shady deliberations of the >EU's bigger brother. > >The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development is, in >essence, a research establishment, providing the world's richest nations with >information about economic trends. Yet, without debate or consultation, >unannounced, unguided even by national parliaments, it has been >negotiating a treaty which will reduce our representatives to filing clerks. >The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) intends to outlaw all >restrictions and controls that national governments might wish to impose on >foreign investment. "We are," one of its leading negotiators boasts, >"writing the constitution of a single global economy". The identity of the >next government will be immaterial if this treaty goes ahead. > >Investment, ownership, consumer protection and environmental legislation >will be wrenched out of our hands. If the OECD gets its way, the British >government will never again be permitted to restrain the rapacity of the >private sector. Multinational corporations will be exempt from minimum- >wage legislation, or from requirements to draw the workforce from the >neighbourhood or even the nation. Government attempts to prevent sudden >capital flight to avert a balance-of-payments crisis will be forbidden. >Governments will not be permitted to address foreign ownership of the >media; to hold controlling shares in private utilities, or to insist that >foreign companies whose relocation they have sponsored remain in the >country. > >The MAI, in conjunction with the World Trade Organization, could forbid >nations from discriminating against, or even distinguishing between, >sustainably and unsustainably harvested timber, or organic and >conventionally toxic food. It could overrule both the Montreal Protocol - >which aims to protect the ozone layer - and the Climate Change >Convention. > >If corporations find a regulation objectionable, they will be entitled to >sue a government or local authority at an international tribunal. There >will be no right of appeal. But governments, as the Ecologist magazine >points out, will have no reciprocal right to sue a corporation on the >public's behalf. This is a charter for multinationals. It accords them >absolute rights without a shred of responsibility. > >If the results are likely to be devestating here, they will be catastrophic >in much of the developing world which, while barred from the negotiations, >will be "invited" to sign the treaty. Already, OECD negotiators are talking >darkly about membership of the MAI being seen as a "certificate of good >conduct", without which a nation could expect no substantial foreign >investment. Nations which sign up will find themselves facing punitive >sanctions if they refuse to surrender their resources as foreign companies >demand. > >So who are these faceless bureaucrats, signing away our sovereignty? >Campaigners who have secured an audience with MAI negotiators report >that the fiercest proponent of the treaty is Britain's Department of Trade and >Industry. Without consulting Parliament, while deliberately misleading both >the Department of the Environment and the ODA about the content of the >talks, the DTI has been secretly surrendering our legislative independence. > >The game it is playing is filthy. Britain cannot, the DTI tells us, afford >special measures to protect its workers, consumers or environment because >other countries, with lower standards, would out-compete us. Yet the same >department is secretly insisting that such standards be lowered worldwide. >With an eye to the future it is engineering, the DTI already behaves as if >it is mandated not by Parliament but by corporations. > >The negotiators tried to rush the agreement through by May, but the >discussions have, for the moment, stalled. We now have the merest >twinkling of an opportunity to try to stop this monstrous treaty. If we fail, >we may as well forget about the election. When the constitution of the >global economy has been agreed, then the task of every parliament on earth >will be reduced to mere ratification. > > From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Thu Apr 17 21:37:11 1997 Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:36:23 -0700 (PDT) Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:35:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:35:35 -0700 (PDT) To: can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: joke for our grad student colleagues... Sender: meisenscher@igc.org From: sscipe1@icarus.cc.uic.edu (Kim Scipes) Subject: joke for our grad student colleagues... One sunny day a rabbit came out of her hole in the ground to enjoy the fine weather. The day was so nice that she became careless and a fox snuck up behind her and caught her. "I am going to eat you for lunch!", said the fox. "Wait!", replied the rabbit, "You should at least wait a few days." "Oh yeah? Why should I wait?" "Well, I am just finishing my thesis on 'The Superiority of Rabbits over Foxes and Wolves.'" "Are you crazy? I should eat you right now! Everybody knows that a fox will always win over a rabbit." "Not really, not according to my research. If you like, you can come into my hole and read it for yourself. If you are not convinced, you can go ahead and have me for lunch." "You really are crazy!" But since the fox was curious and had nothing to lose, it went with the rabbit. The fox never came out. A few days later the rabbit was again taking a break from writing and sure enough, a wolf came out of the bushes and was ready to set upon her. "Wait!" yelled the rabbit, "you can't eat me right now." "And why might that be, my furry appetizer?" "I am almost finished writing my thesis on 'The Superiority of Rabbits over Foxes and Wolves.'" The wolf laughed so hard that it almost lost its grip on the rabbit. "Maybe I shouldn't eat you; you really are sick ... in the head. You might have something contagious." "Come and read it for yourself; you can eat me afterward if you disagree with my conclusions." So the wolf went down into the rabbit's hole ... and never came out. The rabbit finished her thesis and was out celebrating in the local lettuce patch. Another rabbit came along and asked, "What's up? You seem very happy." "Yup, I just finished my thesis." "Congratulations. What's it about?" "'The Superiority of Rabbits over Foxes and Wolves.'" "Are you sure? That doesn't sound right." "Oh yes. Come and read it for yourself." So together they went down into the rabbit's hole. As they entered, the friend saw the typical graduate abode, albeit a rather messy one after writing a thesis. The computer with the controversial work was in one corner. And to the right there was a pile of fox bones, on the left a pile of wolf bones. And in the middle was a large, well-fed lion. The moral of the story: The title of your thesis doesn't matter. The subject doesn't matter. The research doesn't matter. All that matters is who your advisor is. >>------------------------------------------------------------------- >>John P. Walsh 312-996-4663 (phone) >>Department of Sociology 312-996-5104 (fax) >>1007 W. Harrison St, 4112 BSB JWalsh@uic.edu (email) >>University of Illinois at Chicago >>Chicago, IL 60607-7140 >> > > > From aaron@burn.ucsd.edu Fri Apr 18 14:51:07 1997 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 16:50:46 -0400 To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu, LABOR-L@YORKU.CA From: aaron@burn.ucsd.edu (Aaron) Subject: Teachers' strike and mass struggle in Argentina Comrades, This item from Agence France Presse, dated Monday, is the only thing I've found in English so far about the teachers' struggle going on in Argentina. There's a lot of stuff in Spanish, some of which you can find posted at my web site: . If anybody out there can do some translations into English, it would be great! I'd be glad to help, but don't have the time to do them myself. -- In solidarity, -- Aaron [The following is taken from ] Teachers walk out nationwide in response to Argentina crackdown BUENOS AIRES, April 14 (AFP) - Teachers across Argentina walked off the job Monday to protest a weekend crackdown on demonstrating colleagues in Neuquen province in which one protestor was killed. Neuquen teachers protesting a proposed provincial pay cut and planned layoffs clashed with national police sent in to break up their blocking of a national highway. Police used water cannon, rubber bullets and tear gas. Teresa Rodriguez, a 24-year-old maid who was protesting in solidarity with the teachers, died from a gunshot wound in the neck, the local hospital director said. Twenty-two people were injured and 35 arrested in the clashes. The origin of the bullet that killed Rodriguez has yet to be established= .. The General Workers Conferation called for a general one-hour work stoppage on Thursday in solidarity with the teachers. The Education Workers Confederation is demanding increases in government education funding and the resignation of Interior Minister Carlos Corach. Corach says he will not resign and that the bullet "is not the kind used by security forces." =A9AFP 1997 21:53 GMT, 14 April 1997 From rgardne@BGNet.bgsu.edu Sat Apr 19 13:37:14 1997 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 15:37:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Ultramarine Reply-To: Ultramarine To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu Subject: BREAKING NEWS: Graduate Employees Win at U. of Illinois!!! (fwd) I recieved this post on PSN (Progressive Sociologist Network). Below is the press release sent out by the GEO. in solidarity, Robert Gardner Bowling Green State University Bowling Green, Ohio ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ==============S T A R T P R E S S R E L E A S E================ Urbana-Champaign, IL - Graduate employees have spoken: they want the G.E.O. to be their union. In a union election held April 15th and 16th, 64% of graduate employees voting chose the G.E.O. to be their representative in employment matters. The election turnout was exceptional, with almost 50% (2,539) of 5,446 graduate employees voting. These statistics are comparable to some, but better than most percentages in any state or national election. By comparison, recent University of Illinois Student Senate election turnout was only 5%, and Champaign county election turnout was 23%. The Religious Workers Association of Champaign-Urbana, who conducted the election have officially announced the results. 1,633 voted for the Graduate Employees' Organization - IFT/AFT and 906 voted for "No Representative." Last year, 3,226 graduate employees signed our petition requesting an election for union representation. This week's election was the fulfillment of that request in spite of the University's refusal to sanction the election up front. Now, with the solid backing of graduate employees, the GEO has called on the administration to: % recognize and abide by the results of this election % drop their unnecessary lawsuit % begin an open discussion with the GEO on employment issues The G.E.O. is ready to represent graduate employees, but will the University administration recognize the wishes of the majority? With this mandate from the majority, failure to recognize the graduate employees' chosen bargaining agent would be a flagrant attack on graduate employees democratic right to negotiate and a demonstration of the administration's anti-union stance. Regardless of the response, the Graduate Employees' Organization will continue to fight for the rights of graduate employees. ===============E N D P R E S S R E L E A S E==================== From culturex@vcn.bc.ca Sat Apr 19 14:52:54 1997 Sat, 19 Apr 1997 13:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 13:52:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Franklin Wayne Poley Subject: Re: Multilateral Agreement on Investment To: "William J. Schleich" Ftr_Cities@websightz.com, ccpa@policyalternatives.ca, Labor-L@YORKU.CA, LABOR-RAP@csf.colorado.edu, United@cougar.com, publabor@relay.doit.wisc.edu In-Reply-To: <33586B7F.146E@pobox.com> On Sat, 19 Apr 1997, William J. Schleich wrote: > I think it would be wise for as many of us as possible to visit this URL > http://www.policyalternatives.ca/ > > then look up the Multilateral Agreement on Investment. > > This is one mean document...and you government is thinking about signing > it. > > In effect it will give multinational corporations defacto power of > taxation...effectively allowing them to come to Canada, grab there > profits and go home...transferring the power of taxation to another "out > of this country" jurisdiction. IMO the billionaire class in Canada or any other country for that matter regard themselves first as global citizens and secondly as citizens of a particular country. By the way I understand that some 350 billionaire families have as much wealth as the poorest half of the planet's people. The remedy I have proposed is a form of economic democracy. There are already many large >50% worker-owned companies in the U.S. and elsewhere so there are precedents. I have suggested extending this to a WOC, Worker-Owned Conglomerate which will make all of the major amenities for the lifestyle sought by the citizenry from as far back in the production chain as possible. Thus Canadians could start with minerals/mineral concentrates; coal/oil/gas/wood; livestock and seeds and make all of this step-by-step into cars, housing modules, furniture and appliances, clothing, medicines etc. How many people are needed to do this? Well 6 billion would do it. 6 million? 600,000? Anyway it is a problem with a solution. Lavalle Technopole was announced a few years ago as Canada's first Japanese-style Technopolis. Otherwise I haven't heard any reports on it but a network of worker-owned Technopolises across Canada could do the trick. This would protect worker owners from predatory international trade practices without restricting any other economic model alongside it. If we don't do this I think the future of the Canadian worker is that of the Maquilladora worker in Mexico. And I don't buy the rationalizations that NAFTA, GATT etc. will bring the standards of Mexican workers up, not bring ours down. > I realize that NAFTA also allows the removal of profits out of the > country tax-free (which I do not agree with), but this one seems much > more ominous. > > I would appreciate some opinions here. > > It is quite a lot of reading, so be prepared. > > You know, when you take NAFTA, add-in AIT (Agreement on Internal Trade) > and throw this MAI into the mix...it makes you wonder if there is a > politician anywhere in this country who is NOT "on-the-take". I keep looking for ONE, just one at the provincial or federal level. So far no luck. They don't blow the whistle until it is too late, like John Nunziata, MP who said after he stepped out of Liberal caucus to sit as an Independent, "Just 4 people run this country". David Mitchell, MLA (B.C.) said he might introduce a private member's bill along the lines of what I proposed above re WOC/Technopolis, then a few months later he quit politics. > The obstacles just keep getting worse. These guys are playing for keeps, > and the prize they treasure is Canada. > > I say, Abrogate NAFTA, and the FTA...tear 'em up, burn 'em, and lets > regain our sovereignty ! > > Willy I agree Willy. But we need an alternative plan or we could go from the frying pan to the fire. FWP. From aaron@burn.ucsd.edu Sun Apr 20 23:09:47 1997 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 01:09:30 -0400 To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu, LABOR-L@YORKU.CA From: aaron@burn.ucsd.edu (Aaron) Subject: World Bank/IMF vs free education? Info wanted! Friends, Comrades, ???, I received the following request from a correspondent in Peru who is active on behalf of children: >I wonder...if you could find out if it is World Bank, IMF policy to >force poor school children in indebted nations to pay part of the cost >of their education...ergo, $10 entry fee, books and supplies, uniforms >etc. Some countries, like Sri Lanka have completely free education, >and I'm wondering why Peru forces about 1,000,000 kids out of school >by making them pay exobitrtant fees for school. I'd like to blame the >World Bank but I need a citation. I think he could also use such citations regarding the IMF and similar organizations as well. Please send your responses to me at . I will forward them to him. References to documents available at web sites of known organizations would probably be most useful to him, but citations of printed material might also be useful. -- In solidarity, -- Aaron From phardwic@u.washington.edu Mon Apr 21 11:48:15 1997 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 10:48:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Paula Hardwick To: LABOR-RAP@csf.colorado.edu Subject: UW: Student Action Network Listers: Just to announce more widely the inception of a formal student networking project at the University of Washington designed to, among other things, promote student awareness and active participation in labor-related and other progressive issues and events. Contact for more info. P. Hardwick ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:13:36 -0700 (PDT) From: "J. Simer" Subject: Student Action bulletin #1 ***PLEASE FORWARD TO ANYONE WHO MIGHT BE INTERESTED*** Welcome to the first weekly bulletin of the nascent Student Action Network. SAN's objectives are threefold: to provide information about progressive activities on the U.W. campus, to facilitate communication between left-leaning groups and individuals, and to encourage community activism. This is will be an *incomplete* list of progressive politics events for the coming week. If you contributed something that doesn't show up below, don't feel bad--we'll work out the kinks soon enough. Hopefully future bulletins will incorporate more information, as people send in more stuff and the m.o. for this thing develops. And with any luck, SAN will soon be a registered student organization with a mailbox on campus and its own email address, making sharing information easier. SAN will hold its first meeting next Wednesday afternoon/evening or Thursday, April 23 or 24. If you want to help out please let me know what exact times you're available and I'll get back to you. CALENDAR OF EVENTS: Wednesday, April 16 Don't forget the RALLY today in Red Square for domestic partnership equality, put on by, who else, the Coalition for Domestic Partnership Equality. It'll take place 12 p.m.-1 p.m. and will include speakers from the Coalition and the community, chanting, and possibly a little disco music. This rally represents a culmination of the Coalition's months of work, so be there to show your solidarity, all right? Thursday, April 17 The Committee to Organize Rape Education and many other groups are co-sponsoring a TAKE BACK THE NIGHT rally tonight on the HUB lawn, at 7:00 p.m. Speakers will include Migeal Scherer, Dr. Paula Nurius, Debbie Maranville, and Valerie Alipio. Friday, April 18 The Coalition for Domestic Partnership Equality will hold another quiet SIT-IN at the U.W. BOARD OF REGENTS MEETING. It starts at 1:30 but get there at 1 p.m. to grab a seat. Regents Room, Gerberding Hall, third floor. The Coalition will present its 3,000 petition signatures to the Regents and ask them to they get their asses in gear on this vital issue. Tuesday, April 22 CAMPUS RADICAL WOMEN sponsors journalist and UW alumna SANDY NELSON in her talk "The Media Monopoly." Nelson was demoted by the Tacoma News Tribune in 1990 for participating in a gay rights initiative campaign, and the Washington Supreme Court recently decided that the newspaper had the right to do so. "She'll examine the disastrous effects of the growing corporate control of the U.S. media for readers, reporters, journalism students and faculty..." says the press release. 12:30-1:30 p.m., HUB 209B. For more info. call 722-6057 or 722 2453. Representatives of the AFL-CIO Summer Institute will be speaking on "Organizing Justice: Building Worker's Rights in the 1990's" and careers in labor organizing, in Gowen 1b from 12:30-2:00. Bring your lunch! OTHER NOTICES: How about a LABOR CLUB? The UW needs a student organization dedicated to standing up for labor, whether it be by attending strikes and pickets, organizing boycotts, helping with the teach-in in May, or just raising awareness of labor issues on campus. If you're interested in participating, reply to this address. The LATIN AMERICAN STUDIES program is sponsoring an ongoing FILM SERIES called "Women, Dictatorship and Revolution in Latin America." Contact lasuw@u.washington.edu for more details. The UW GREENS are putting together some interesting projects: a campaign to reduce paper waste on campus, a "community mug" program to reduce the use of paper cups, and a coalition against advertising in schools. Contact uwgreens@u.washington.edu for more details. FROM THE GROUND UP is a "regional social justic activist skills building conference" at the Evergreen State College in Olympia, May 9-11. E-mail dixonchr@elwha.evergreen.edu for details. ***SPREAD THE WORD*** From culturex@vcn.bc.ca Mon Apr 21 22:58:18 1997 Mon, 21 Apr 1997 14:17:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 14:16:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Franklin Wayne Poley Subject: MIA Constitution, was Re: MUST READ HTTP (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 12:46:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Franklin Wayne Poley To: "William J. Schleich" canspeak@websightz.com, getreal@axionet.com Subject: MIA Constitution, was Re: MUST READ HTTP When I read the article by Eva Lyman in the Columbia Journal (p.7, April/97) the light bulb came on. She submits the following quote from the Director of WTO: "We are writing the constitution of a single global economy." Perhaps that is the bottom line. The Multilateral Investments Agreement is the first draft of a Globalist Constitution; at least the first draft to come from the big players. Thus it would in due course replace GATT/NAFTA/WTO etc. Canada (i.e. the politicians employed by the MIA billionaire clans) will sign next month. The U.S. later. How does it work? "It lets any corporation that objects to a city,state or national law bring suit before an international MIA panel-which could then order the law overturned as a violation of the pact. Governments would enjoy no reciprocal right to sue corporations on the public's behalf." (p.7). On Mon, 21 Apr 1997, William J. Schleich wrote: > On Sun, 20 Apr 1997 11:19:07 > Nora Galenzoski said: > > < > Hi Nora > > << Give it a rest, shall we? >> > > Not likely > > << There is probably not a thing we can do about this agreement.>> > > In this context, can "probably" be taken to mean, highly unlikely, or do > you mean "impossible"? > > << It seems to me that we spend a lot of time and energy fighting > against things that we cannot reasonably expect to win,>> > > True enough, but at least "trying" is better than letting them have all > the apples without a fight, eh! > I for one do not intend to give up "informing" "blowing the whistle" or > otherwise creating awareness to whomever I can get to listen, about the > "stuff" "they" don't want anyone to know. I absolutely despise these > slimes, and if I can help create even a little bit of grief for these > "elected traitors" I will on each and every opportunity that presents > itself. > > << and that even if we could win, we would only have created a void at > best.>> > > You'll have to explain that one. VOID, > > << Why don't we consider putting our time and energy into a plan of > action that would produce the kind of community and country we want?>> > > Hey I have no problem with that at all...I agree whole heartedly. I am > in the midst of compiling just such a plan as we communicate, and when > it is reasonably complete, it will have an interactive website to go > with it, so people can voice there opinion, pro or con, in addition > to...whatever...sort of democracy in action. > > In the meantime, in order to have something ( THE PLAN) for "sale", I/we > must have a market, so I guess you could say I am in the process of > creating that market, or a least a deman for the product, and education > is one of my tools. > > What's the point of having a plan, any plan, or product if no one is > interested. Which, if you think about it, when we end up with the final > version of whatever PLAN, who is going to be interested if they don't > think anything is wrong with the current system, or even if they know > something is wrong but they just can't seem to put a finger on it, why > would they look at our product versus say REFORM or PC or Liberal or > whomever. (IMHO these parties should not even be on the list of > political parties for anyone with any idea of what is really going on to > vote for) > > Well I say, let's make people aware, and I don't mean talking about this > symtomatically, I mean structurally. Lets talk foundation, not glitter > and razzle dazzle superfical crap...let's go deep... I agree with this completely. The need for awareness is great when you consider that the establishment (read billionaire traders) monopolizes public communications-pretty well has the major institutions sowed up. Government, academia, media etc. When someone like Diane Francis, Financial Post editor says on national TV that our democracy is a farce she doesn't repeat it. We are buried under the massive propaganda campaign of a dictatorship run by the ultra rich for the ultra rich. The Federal Reform Party consists of cheap whores waiting for their day in the trough. And I am not holding my breath for any new party like CAP. > The "structure" these traitors have established has definitive weak > links and education is our most powerful weapon against them...they are > scared to death of an educated populace, as well they should > be...because that is the only thing that can kill them dead in their > tracks, and they know it. > > So what do we have, they are organized, extremely well funded, have > their people well placed in all the significant positions of power (in > Canada and Globally) My suggestion is two-fold: (1) expedite the market penetration of Internet so that direct electronic democracy will be workable and (2) work toward the integration and improvement of the system of worker-owned companies which already exists. That pertains to my proposal re WOC's -Worker Owned Conglomerates. I have submitted this through the union lists in particular. FWP. From rross@clarku.edu Wed Apr 23 11:33:33 1997 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 13:30:35 -0400 From: "Robert J.S. Bob Ross" Subject: Take Daughters to Work? Union Offers Another Idea To: Al Haber , Allen Young , Betty Garman Robinson , Cathy Wilkerson , Clark Kissinger <73447.1527@compuserve.com>, David Wellman <" WELLMAN"@CATS.UCSC.EDU>, Dorothy Burlage , "Goldsmith, Steve" , "JAMES W. RUSSELL" , Jim Monsonis , Jim Russell , Joan Goldsmith , Jonny Lerner , Laura Hammond , Liora Proctor-Salter , Marc Flacks , Marilyn Katz , Marilyn Webb , Mariya Strauss <71112.2765@compuserve.com>, Michael James , Michael James , "Pearson, Chad" , "SCHIFFER, Josh" , "DORAN, peter" , "Forsblad, sorin" , "Lucente, Neil" , "SIGAL, Anni" , "GOEDE, Marci" , "HANDVERGER, Josh" , "Kudatgobilik, Zeynep" , Warren Heyman <71363.1235@compuserve.com>, Tom Gallagher , Progressive Sociology Network This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------696830574354 Friends and comrades, This deserves a read and a thought. Venceremos, Bob http://www.nytimes.com/partners/iib/services/bin/fastweb?getdoc+iib-site+iib-site+163+0++sweatshops -- Robert J. S. Ross Professor and Chair of Sociology Clark University 950 Main Street Worcester, Massachusetts 01610 508 793 7243 fax: 508 793 8816 Rross@clarku.edu --------------696830574354 rvices/bin/fastweb?getdoc+iib-site+ iib-site+163+0++sweatshops" Take Daughters to Work? Union Offers Another Idea banner Toyota
toolbar
April 23, 1997

Take Daughters to Work? Union Offers Another Idea

By STEVEN GREENHOUSE

NEW YORK -- Upset that so many New York apparel factories still use child labor, the nation's largest apparel union has come up with a novel approach to combat this longstanding problem -- it is called Don't Bring Our Daughters to Work Day.

While the union says it applauds the millions of American parents who will take their daughters to work Thursday to excite them about potential careers, the apparel union will spend the day telling thousands of garment workers, many of them struggling immigrants from China, not to take their daughters to work Thursday, or any other day for that matter.

The campaign seeks to draw attention to the sweatshop conditions by capitalizing on the growing prominence of Take Our Daughters to Work Day. In fliers and educational meetings, the Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees is warning garment workers who let their daughters work in apparel factories that such child labor is often illegal and dangerous.

"Child labor in the shops is a serious problem, especially in the summer," said Danyun Feng, coordinator of the Don't Bring Our Daughters program. "Unfortunately, these children are very easy to exploit, and their wages are usually very low."

The union has several reasons for pushing this program: it thinks child labor is wrong and hurts youngsters, it asserts that child labor undercuts union wage scales, and it recognizes that campaigning against such violations could make the union more popular among the Chinese-American workers it is seeking to unionize.

The child labor campaign is concentrated in two Chinese-American neighborhoods where apparel factories flourish: Chinatown in Manhattan and Sunset Park in Brooklyn.

"Child labor has been a source of heartache for garment workers past and present," said May Ying Chen, assistant manager of Local 23-25, representing 24,000 New York garment workers. "It's wrong not to let kids have their childhood or obtain the education these people brought their kids to this country for."

She said apparel workers often tell her that they have little alternative but to take their daughters to work on Saturdays or summer days. They often take 3-year-olds who play next to their sewing machines and frequently take 13-year-olds who are employed at nearby machines.

"They tell us they are low-income families who have to work very hard and need almost everybody in the family to help earn money," Ms. Feng said. "They cannot afford expensive summer camps or day care, and they have no place to send their kids. They are scared to leave them in the streets. So they automatically take their children to the shops, where a lot of them are put to work."

The campaign aims not just to discourage children from working but also to develop ways for children to spend their nonschool days and summer somewhere other than an apparel factory. Last summer, the union funneled some teen-agers into a voter registration drive.

This summer, the union hopes to establish a program in which young teen-agers can take courses, care for young children and clean their neighborhoods. The union is also advising workers that instead of taking their children to the factory, they might be able to place them in summer programs run by Catholic Charities or other organizations.

Union officials feared that the Ms. Foundation for Women, which sponsors the nationwide Take Our Daughters to Work Day, would attack their program for mocking the name of the national effort. But Marie Wilson, president of the Ms. Foundation, said: "I think it's great. When we created this day, it was really to call attention to the conditions in which girls live. This day is all about respecting your daughter, and that's what this program does."

Ms. Wilson said she sympathized with the predicament of poor apparel workers who cannot afford day care or summer camp. "These people say, 'You want us to do something different with our daughters, and we want to,' but, to use a cliche, where's the village? Where are the child care services? Where are the summer programs? Where are the park services? Where are the people who are going to help their daughters develop an entrepreneurship program? Where's the village?"

Union officials acknowledge that part of the Don't Bring Our Daughters drive is intended to encourage the children of apparel workers to aspire to better-paying, more stimulating careers. At the same time, the union wants to make sure that children appreciate how hard their parents toil and how bad factory conditions often are.

"Of course, we want our children to get better jobs than we have," said Chung Siu, a garment district seamstress. "They should go to college. We hate these garment shops."

Miu Shun Chan, a garment worker in Chinatown, conceded that her daughter, Evelyn, worked at a shop one summer when she was 13. Ms. Chan said that her husband had just died and that the family desperately needed the extra income. "She really didn't like it," she said. "The shop is very hot. It's not really healthy. It had a bad psychological effect."

Her daughter, now a freshman at Baruch College, recalled: "It was really easy, but it was boring. It was horrible. It was low-pay. I'd never go back."

Ying Yi Deng, a garment worker who lives in Sunset Park, said that what was needed most was a program for children 12 through 16. "At that age, if you leave them at home or in the street, you really worry about what they're going to learn," she said. "So you bring them to work instead. We really need some programs for them."


Home | Sections | Contents | Search | Forums | Help

Copyright 1997 The New York Times Company


Toyota

--------------696830574354-- From aikya@ix.netcom.com Wed Apr 23 23:59:21 1997 by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id sma010753; Thu Apr 24 00:58:49 1997 From: "Ms. Aikya Param" To: Labor Research and Action Project , "'Robert J.S. Bob Ross'" Subject: RE: Take Daughters to Work? Union Offers Another Idea Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 22:45:26 -0700 Several things are disturbing about the article Bob has posted. First of all, I see no reason in the world why the daughters of unionized garment workers should not go to work with their parents just because there are other children present, some of whom are working. First, however, the parents might set aside their own judgments about what is going on and go with their children and get to know the other working parents whose children are there, sometimes working, sometimes playing, next to them. How much are those parents with young children playing next to their sewing machines paid? How much do they make that they cannot afford day care? Maybe the worker who belongs to a union could explain the wage benefits of union membership. Maybe the workers who belong to unions could help provide vouchers for day care for those mothers so their little ones could go to a good day care facility. Many the union people could find out whether there are any day care facilities which have openings. Maybe the unionized worker could organize for more day care facilities especially for the garment industry-with Saturday and summer programs. And why shouldn't the daughters of those union members see their mothers and fathers opening their hearts, listening to those underpaid workers? Why shouldn't those daughters see the struggle of those less fortunate families and feel some compassion for them, rather than rejection and judgment? Why shouldn't the daughters of those unionized garment workers see their parents do something to help those people so that their children can be learning and playing more like they do. What a beautiful lesson that they would always remember! Some members of this list may know that one of the most powerful workers against child labor started his world wide work when he was in eighth grade. He is a young man in Canada. I suppose he is now nearly finished high school. How magnanimous of those unionized spoiled so-and-sos to send these people to Catholic Charities! If all union people are like them, soon there won't even be 10% of workers will be represented! Some of us will understand why. Mind boggling! Aikya Param Publisher Women and Money http://www2.netcom.com/~aikya/womenandmoney.html ---------- Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 1997 10:31 AM To: Labor Research and Action Project Subject: Take Daughters to Work? Union Offers Another Idea <>Friends and comrades, This deserves a read and a thought. Venceremos, Bob http://www.nytimes.com/partners/iib/services/bin/fastweb?getdoc+iib-site+iib-site+163+0++sweatshops -- Robert J. S. Ross Professor and Chair of Sociology Clark University 950 Main Street Worcester, Massachusetts 01610 508 793 7243 fax: 508 793 8816 Rross@clarku.edu From clawson@sadri.umass.edu Thu Apr 24 20:57:56 1997 Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 22:57:54 -0400 (EDT) 24 Apr 1997 22:57:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 22:57:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Dan Clawson Subject: class privilege and naivete In-reply-to: <01BC503A.2051FAA0@ala-ca8-60.ix.netcom.com> To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu If anyone had been in doubt about WOMEN AND MONEY, we now have some sense of how incredibly (offensively) naive and class privileged a publication it must be if the publisher has so little conception of what is and is not possible for exploited garment workers. Perhaps WOMEN AND MONEY could speak to UNITE about spending a day or two working in a garment sweatshop. -- Dan Clawson work = 413-545-5974 home 413-586-6235 Contemp. Sociology = 413-545-4064 fax 413-545-1994 email = clawson@sadri.umass.edu consoc@sadri.umass.edu From aikya@ix.netcom.com Thu Apr 24 22:36:53 1997 by dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id XAA03795 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 23:36:50 -0500 (CDT) id sma003683; Thu Apr 24 23:35:47 1997 From: "Ms. Aikya Param" To: Labor Research and Action Project Subject: RE: class privilege and naivete Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 21:32:20 -0700 I realize I completely lost it in that post. I can always admit to incurable naivete. What upset was what seemed to me like racism and sexism in the organized response. Maybe I didn't understand what was intended. It wouldn't be the first time. To me it just seemed like the white guys didn't get it again about how what it is to be female, poor, working, with kids...and Asian or Hispanic, not knowing English. I am currently working with various organizations which are helping poor and very poor people start their own businesses in the U.S. and around the world. Most of the poorest people both around the world and in the U.S. are women, many of whom have children. As we poor people work together to start and expand our tiny businesses, which often fill community needs, we are also working together to deal with needs like lack of child care and lack of health insurance as well as lack of credit from traditional sources. Sometimes this means that we work with people of different races, different cultures, people who don't speak English. But we are working together to solve our common problems in spite of all that. BTW, last year I made $12,000 of which unemployment accounted for $3,995. My landlord got $6,000. This year is better. I work a part time job with hourly pay of around $10 for the University of California at Berkeley and I am proud to be an active union member there. I am also trying to get the newsletter, Women and Money, going. I work about 12-18 hours a day, seven days a week. I do not have any health insurance. I do not have any dental insurance and I sure don't have a pension. I'm 53. I've been laid off four times. The last time was from a union job in which I gave every ounce of whatever I had of any value as Chief Steward including organizing every working person in the place. The loss of that job was like the loss of my own family because I had cared about and fought for every single one of those 82 people who was laid off. I've had it. I want some control of my destiny and I want to do something to help my community and others who are struggling to survive. I hope if I can ever hire anyone I will be a decent, fair and caring employer. I know working conditions in sweatshops are awful. I also know that those workers can be exploited for a lot of reasons: lack of knowledge of English, not much education, or other saleable job skills I also know that the lack of day care is a widespread problem for working women, inside and outside the garment industry, leaving aside other cultural issues I am glad that brother Dan understands how hard it is to be a garment worker and happier still if he is helping to organize them. Aikya Param ---------- Sent: Thursday, April 24, 1997 3:58 PM To: Labor Research and Action Project Subject: class privilege and naivete If anyone had been in doubt about WOMEN AND MONEY, we now have some sense of how incredibly (offensively) naive and class privileged a publication it must be if the publisher has so little conception of what is and is not possible for exploited garment workers. Perhaps WOMEN AND MONEY could speak to UNITE about spending a day or two working in a garment sweatshop. -- Dan Clawson work = 413-545-5974 home 413-586-6235 Contemp. Sociology = 413-545-4064 fax 413-545-1994 email = clawson@sadri.umass.edu consoc@sadri.umass.edu From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Fri Apr 25 21:04:41 1997 Fri, 25 Apr 1997 19:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Fri, 25 Apr 1997 19:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 19:16:12 -0700 (PDT) To: united@cougar.com, can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Job Announcement: SVTC Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >>From svtc Fri Apr 25 16:40:02 1997 >Return-Path: >Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 16:35:57 -0700 (PDT) >X-Sender: svtc@pop.igc.org (Unverified) >Old-Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" >To: svtc@igc.org >From: Leslie Byster >Sender: svtc@igc.org >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by igc3.igc.apc.org id >X-Content-Type-Bogus: text/plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" > >Dear Friends-- >Please share and post as appropriate > >________________________________________________ >Job Announcement > >Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition is seeking a Program Associate to work >full-time in San Jose=82, CA on our campaigns to promote responsible technology. =20 > >Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition is a diverse grassroots organization >consisting of environmental and neighborhood groups, labor unions, and >public health leaders, people affected by toxic exposure and others. Our >core values include a commitment to the practice of social justice and >multi-racial democracy. > >Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition embraces a vision of a future which is= based >on sustainable, non-polluting economy where a healthy environment is >considered a right rather than a privilege. We strive to achieve this >vision by being a leader, both locally and nationally, in: >Educating the community about the danger of toxic hazards; >Empowering people to hold government and industry accountable; >Documenting and exposing the hazards of toxic chemical pollution; and >Shifting the environmental priorities of industry and government to a focus >on pollution prevention and the development of environmentally beneficial >technologies and alternatives.=20 > >Responsibilities: > >Work with local communities to develop and implement models of= sustainability=20 >Policy analysis and development re: responsible technology and/or sustainability >Expand and maintain network of international high-tech activists leading to= =20 > international conferences on the impacts of high-tech development >Research corporate and environmental issues related to high-tech= development >Write pamphlets, fact sheets, issue papers > >Qualifications: > >Commitment to Environmental Justice >Excellent written and oral communication skills - a second language is >highly desirable >Prior community work and program implementation experience >Strong interpersonal skills, previous experience working in team setting, >strong organizational skills; >Familiarity with databases, word processing, and electronic communication >Previous research experience desirable > >Salary is commensurate with experience. SVTC offers health and dental >benefits, paid vacations and sick leave. SVTC is an equal opportunity >employer committed to diversity; people of color are encouraged to apply. = =20 > >Send r=82sum=82 and writing sample to svtc@igc.org or SVTC, 760 N. First= St., >San Jos=82, CA 95112 or fax to 408-287-6771 by no later than June 1, 1997 >Leslie Byster >Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition >760 N. First Street >San Jose, CA 95112 >408-287-6707-phone >408-287-6771-fax >svtc@igc.apc.org > >>NOW AVAILABLE AT OUR WEBSITE -- New information on the=20 >>grassroots politics of regulatory reinvention. Includes >>a new chart comparing Project XL other models of community participation. >Also information on the the impacts of high-tech industry. >> >> http://www.svtc.org/svtc/ >> >> > > From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Sat Apr 26 13:12:56 1997 Sat, 26 Apr 1997 12:11:11 -0700 (PDT) Sat, 26 Apr 1997 12:09:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 12:09:27 -0700 (PDT) To: can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu, united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, OIFAC@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: MAY 1 in Berkeley (fwd) Sender: meisenscher@igc.org >From: Nathan Newman >Subject: MAY 1 in Berkeley (fwd) > >_____ >John Hurley jhurley@fas.harvard.edu >933 Adams St., Albany CA 94706 >PhD Candidate, History of American Civilization, Harvard University > >Subject: MAY 1 actions - CUE ideas? > >[stuff deleted] > > > Any ideas? Picket lines will presumably be up all three days - last > time we had our banner up during a noon rally. > > We should all plan to go to the rally at least. > > Upte is doing a sympathy walkout May 1 because they have no contract > and therefore no penalty to walkout. They will also wear red shirts. > > > ------------------------------- > MAY 1 ACTIVITIES > ------------------------------- > > > 7 am at Sproul Plaza, picketing and donut holes - graduate students > are in their second day of striking > > 12 noon - in front of California Hall > rally - picket, chanting. Bring drums, bells, noisemakers, very > short speaches by endorsers > > Flyer will be out this weekend. Text follows. Tang Center Nurses are > an additional endorser. > > NO TAX DOLLARS FOR UC UNION BUSTING **** MAY DAY 1997 > > > We, the union members of UC, dedicate this May Day to strikes, work > stoppages, and other actions to protest the erosion of educational and > working conditions at UC. The blame for such deterioration belongs to > one group, and one group only: the UC administration. > > The UC administration has spent millions of tax dollars to demoralize > and defraud its workers: > > * The courts recognize UC Graduate Student Instructors as > employees, but UC > is appealing the decision. We estimate that UC has spent $1.5 million > fighting this case. > > * The courts found UC guilty of retaliating against its technical > employees for unionizing by withholding a cost-of-living adjustment > authorized by the State legislature. UC wasted more money appealing > the decision, only to be found guilty a second time. > > * During the past year, UC has been found guilty of other > violations against its employees such as 'Failure to bargain > unilateral change at UC Davis and Lawrence Berkeley Lab' (UPTE v. > Regents, proposed decision S-CE-69-H). > > The UC administration's ongoing assaults against its employees often > affect the wider community: > > * UC's plan to privatize teaching hospitals (at UCSF, UC Irvine, and > UC San Diego) would give away research hospitals paid for by tax > dollars and would mean breaking existing union contracts. > > * The UC Regents decision to eliminate affirmative action harms > hundreds of thousands of Californians ands sets an appalling precedent > for the rest of the state and country. > > UC STALLS SHAMELESSLY at the Bargaining Tables > > * Tutors and Readers have been negotiating a contract with UC for over > 3 years. > > * Technical employees have been at the bargaining table for over 2 > years. > > UC PROVES ITS VISION IS MYOPIC. > > * USING WORDS LIKE "VISION" AND "TEAMWORK," UC has taken the > first steps to implement a new management program which will replace > regular step pay raises with special performance prizes and > incentive awards for those selected by supervisors, for whatever > reason. A divisive "teamwork" program and a new emphasis on attitude > give supervisors increased justification for discriminatory behaviour > or just plain favoritism. > > HONOR THE AGSE/UAW PICKET LINE > CONTRACTS NOW FOR TECHS, READERS & TUTORS > > Endorsers: AGSE-UAW (Association of Graduate Student Employees-United > Auto Workers); CUE (Coalition of University Employees); IWW-EWIU 620, > Local 13 (Industrial Workers of the World-); UC/AFT Local 1474 > (University Council/American Federation of Teachers); UPTE -CWA 9119 > (University Professional and Technical Employees-Communications > Workers of America) > > From aanz@sirius.com Sat Apr 26 20:40:42 1997 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 19:47:53 +0100 To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu From: aanz@sirius.com (anzalone/starbird) Subject: Re: MAY 1 in Berkeley (fwd) >>Actually, not to far from Berkeley we already have a May Day event >>planned to celebrate the 8 hour day at Laney College. Hosted by the Laney >>College Labor Studies Club musicians will perform for the student body in >>the quad for free during the lunch hour (12-1) with brief speeches >>between sets by Asian Immigrant Women Advocates, HERE, the United Farm >>Workers, the Organizing Institute and the recently triumphant ILWU >>strikers from Rubber Stampede. The event will be from 11 to 5 pm. Those >>interested in setting up a table on campus to put forward their position >>are welcome, there is no charge to pro-labor organizations. A May Pole >>will be provided as well. It may just be a little too much fun for what we older fossils from the left are used to, but the idea was to reach out to the not yet labor studies students who know nothing about the labor movement (much less the history of the movement) and have a little warm weather fun along with a little gentle warning about the pending threat to overtime/the eight hour day. I'd be available to picket the UC on another day though, keep me posted. Ellen From: Nathan Newman >>Subject: MAY 1 in Berkeley (fwd) >> >>_____ >>John Hurley jhurley@fas.harvard.edu >>933 Adams St., Albany CA 94706 >>PhD Candidate, History of American Civilization, Harvard University >> >>Subject: MAY 1 actions - CUE ideas? >> >>[stuff deleted] >> >> >> Any ideas? Picket lines will presumably be up all three days - last >> time we had our banner up during a noon rally. >> >> We should all plan to go to the rally at least. >> >> Upte is doing a sympathy walkout May 1 because they have no contract >> and therefore no penalty to walkout. They will also wear red shirts. >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> MAY 1 ACTIVITIES >> ------------------------------- >> >> >> 7 am at Sproul Plaza, picketing and donut holes - graduate students >> are in their second day of striking >> >> 12 noon - in front of California Hall >> rally - picket, chanting. Bring drums, bells, noisemakers, very >> short speaches by endorsers >> >> Flyer will be out this weekend. Text follows. Tang Center Nurses are >> an additional endorser. >> >> NO TAX DOLLARS FOR UC UNION BUSTING **** MAY DAY 1997 >> >> >> We, the union members of UC, dedicate this May Day to strikes, work >> stoppages, and other actions to protest the erosion of educational and >> working conditions at UC. The blame for such deterioration belongs to >> one group, and one group only: the UC administration. >> >> The UC administration has spent millions of tax dollars to demoralize >> and defraud its workers: >> >> * The courts recognize UC Graduate Student Instructors as >> employees, but UC >> is appealing the decision. We estimate that UC has spent $1.5 million >> fighting this case. >> >> * The courts found UC guilty of retaliating against its technical >> employees for unionizing by withholding a cost-of-living adjustment >> authorized by the State legislature. UC wasted more money appealing >> the decision, only to be found guilty a second time. >> >> * During the past year, UC has been found guilty of other >> violations against its employees such as 'Failure to bargain >> unilateral change at UC Davis and Lawrence Berkeley Lab' (UPTE v. >> Regents, proposed decision S-CE-69-H). >> >> The UC administration's ongoing assaults against its employees often >> affect the wider community: >> >> * UC's plan to privatize teaching hospitals (at UCSF, UC Irvine, and >> UC San Diego) would give away research hospitals paid for by tax >> dollars and would mean breaking existing union contracts. >> >> * The UC Regents decision to eliminate affirmative action harms >> hundreds of thousands of Californians ands sets an appalling precedent >> for the rest of the state and country. >> >> UC STALLS SHAMELESSLY at the Bargaining Tables >> >> * Tutors and Readers have been negotiating a contract with UC for over >> 3 years. >> >> * Technical employees have been at the bargaining table for over 2 >> years. >> >> UC PROVES ITS VISION IS MYOPIC. >> >> * USING WORDS LIKE "VISION" AND "TEAMWORK," UC has taken the >> first steps to implement a new management program which will replace >> regular step pay raises with special performance prizes and >> incentive awards for those selected by supervisors, for whatever >> reason. A divisive "teamwork" program and a new emphasis on attitude >> give supervisors increased justification for discriminatory behaviour >> or just plain favoritism. >> >> HONOR THE AGSE/UAW PICKET LINE >> CONTRACTS NOW FOR TECHS, READERS & TUTORS >> >> Endorsers: AGSE-UAW (Association of Graduate Student Employees-United >> Auto Workers); CUE (Coalition of University Employees); IWW-EWIU 620, >> Local 13 (Industrial Workers of the World-); UC/AFT Local 1474 >> (University Council/American Federation of Teachers); UPTE -CWA 9119 >> (University Professional and Technical Employees-Communications >> Workers of America) >> >> From aanz@sirius.com Sun Apr 27 10:22:12 1997 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 09:29:25 +0100 To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu From: aanz@sirius.com (anzalone/starbird) Subject: Re: World Bank/IMF vs free education? Info wanted! Greetings Companero, The April 7, 1997 issue of "The Nation" (a U.S. Canadian magazine publication) on page 10, hosts the Alexander Cockburn column. In the second column on page ten, subtitled "If I had a Rocket Launcher..." Cockburn quotes the "Financiail Times" (a London newspaper?) for a March 14 report. According to Cockburn: "On March 13 the boards of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund agreed that only by April 1998, at the earliest, would Uganda be offered debt relief. This means, so a story in the London "Financial Times" for March 14 reported, that Uganda will lose between $35 million and $40 million this year, which had been earmarked for free primary-school slots. And so why won't more than a million Ugandan children be able to go to school this year? After all, only last October at the I.M.F./World Bank annual meeting there had been, as a member of the Ugandan goverment wrote to the "Financial Times", "a widespread view that as Uganda alraedy had an eight-year record [of 'adjustment," i.e., dancing to the bankers' tune], debt relief should be gievn as early as possible, with the options of spring or summer 1997 explicitly discussed." Cockburn goes on to sess that Uganda's current sympathy with the Kabila resurrection is why Washington has decided to squeeze them via the I.M.F., reminding his readers that Uganda's $3.4 billion in external debt was from the U.S./Imperialist endorsed Idi Amin and Milton Obote. (Emphasis poorly supplied by me, can't figure out how to highlight nor underline on this blasted e-mail, my early female typist training gone to good waste I'm afraid...) Hope this is helpful to our compa in Peru. En Solidaridad, Ellen M. Starbird, Labor Studies Laney college (Oak, CA) >Friends, Comrades, ???, > I received the following request from a correspondent in Peru who is >active on behalf of children: > >>I wonder...if you could find out if it is World Bank, IMF policy to >>force poor school children in indebted nations to pay part of the cost >>of their education...ergo, $10 entry fee, books and supplies, uniforms >>etc. Some countries, like Sri Lanka have completely free education, >>and I'm wondering why Peru forces about 1,000,000 kids out of school >>by making them pay exobitrtant fees for school. I'd like to blame the >>World Bank but I need a citation. > >I think he could also use such citations regarding the IMF and similar >organizations as well. Please send your responses to me at >. I will forward them to him. References to >documents available at web sites of known organizations would probably >be most useful to him, but citations of printed material might also be >useful. > > -- In solidarity, > -- Aaron From aanz@sirius.com Sun Apr 27 10:25:16 1997 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 09:32:23 +0100 To: aaron@burn.ucsd.edu (Aaron) From: aanz@sirius.com (anzalone/starbird) Subject: Re: World Bank/IMF vs free education? Info wanted! >Friend, Comrade, Oh! P.S.: I forgot to give you the internet siting for "The Nation" http://www.TheNation.com E-MAIL: info@TheNation.com Again, in solidarity, ellen starbird ???, > I received the following request from a correspondent in Peru who is >active on behalf of children: > >>I wonder...if you could find out if it is World Bank, IMF policy to >>force poor school children in indebted nations to pay part of the cost >>of their education...ergo, $10 entry fee, books and supplies, uniforms >>etc. Some countries, like Sri Lanka have completely free education, >>and I'm wondering why Peru forces about 1,000,000 kids out of school >>by making them pay exobitrtant fees for school. I'd like to blame the >>World Bank but I need a citation. > >I think he could also use such citations regarding the IMF and similar >organizations as well. Please send your responses to me at >. I will forward them to him. References to >documents available at web sites of known organizations would probably >be most useful to him, but citations of printed material might also be >useful. > > -- In solidarity, > -- Aaron From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Sun Apr 27 15:43:48 1997 Sun, 27 Apr 1997 14:42:00 -0700 (PDT) Sun, 27 Apr 1997 14:41:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 14:41:44 -0700 (PDT) To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, h-UCLEA@h-net.msu.edu, united@cougar.com, pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu, OIFAC@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU, can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Cuba Sender: meisenscher@igc.org At the request of Jack Kurzweil, I am forwarding this announcement and invitation regarding a trip to Cuba. Michael =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D To: Higher Education Activists interested in Cuba From: Jack Kurzweil, San Jose State University kurzweil@email.sjsu.edu jkurz@igc.org 510-548-7645 In conjuction with the organization Global Exchange based in San Francisco, I am organizing a trip to Cuba to examine the condition of socialism in Cuba and its prospects. =20 Cuba: Socialism in Transition January 5-13, 1998 This trip is intended for those who are interested in learning about Cuba sees itself evolving as a socialist country absent the support of the Soviet Union, blockaded by the United States, and developing a variety of partnerships with multinational capital. The trip is entirely legal and involves no risk of unwanted entanglements with the INS or the State= Department. I have recently returned from a trip to Cuba with Global Exchange. This was my fourth trip since 1971 and my first since Cuba began its current process of active decentralization in certain sections of the economy, political reform, and accelerated relationships with foreign capital. I came away thinking that if Cuba is successful in developing its economy within this framework and simultaneously maintaining its social framework of medical care and education, we will be witnessing a line of development that many of us had not considered. =20 Aside from that, Cuba is simply an exciting place to visit. I have included below a very tentative itinerary based on initial discussions with Global Exchange. This itinerary gives you an idea of the kinds of things that we can do. It should be fully expected that the itinerary will change according to the interests of those who participate and better information about who is available to meet with us in Cuba. The current itinerary combines discussions, cultural events, trips outside Havana, and hanging out. We will be staying at the Hotel Capri, run by George Raft for the Mafia until the Revolution, which is right in the center of things. Near the Havana Libre, the Malecon, the University of Havana, and a short walk from historic Old Havana. It is necessary to have a minimum of 15 people to make the trip happen and we must have commitments from those 15 by mid September. The maximum participation is 30. The cost of the trip is $1350 departing from and returning to Cancun. When you add the cost of getting to Cancun, staying overnight before departure on Jan 5, and pocket money in Cuba, the total becomes around $2300. Please feel free to circulate this to your friends and colleagues. The earlier that I hear from you, the better. 1. Co-Sponsoring organizations and contact persons Global Exchange 2017 Mission St. #303 San Francisco, CA 94110 Tel: 415-255-7296=20 Fax: 415-255-7498 Sonia Lee, Cuba Seminars Coordinator E-Mail: gx-sonia@globalexchange.org =20 2. Tentative Program =09 Day 1 Monday, Jan 5=20 Departure from Canc=FAn to Havana. Arrive, check-in to Hotel Capri which= is located near the University of Havana, near the Malecon, and near many theaters and restaurants. It's really in the center of things. =09 Welcome, orientation meeting and walk around Old Havana and dinner. =09 EVE: Meeting with Juan Jacomino, a journalist at Radio Havana Cuba who specializes in the economy and was previously a functionary at the Foreign Ministry. Day 2 Tuesday, Jan 6 AM: Tour of the University of Havana to meet with university professors and students. The University of Havana is the main and largest university in Cuba, with a student body of 30,000 students and 1700 professors. =09 Lunch with members of Faculty =20 PM: Optional visit to museums and art galleries in Old Havana (eg: Museo de la Revolucion, Museo de la Musica or Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes ) =09 EVE: Optional excursion to salsa club or theater/ballet performance ( to be arranged) =09 Day 3 Wednesday, Jan 7 AM: Meeting with Julio Carranza, economist with the Institute for the Study of the Cuban Economy. Lunch at El Bambu, vegetarian restaurant, and meet with the restaurant managers Dr. Tito Nu=F1ez and Dr. Madeleine Valdez about their ongoing national project to develop vegetarian restaurants and societies for the promotion and understanding of the nutritional aspects of a healthy= lifestyle. PM: Visits to urban gardens, a farmer's market, a green pharmacy and La Maqueta de la Habana, a scale model of the city with the Group for the Integral Development of the Capital. EVE: Optional meeting with members and their families of the Committee for Defense of the Revolution and/or visit to a club or attend performance. ( to be arranged) =09 Day 4 Thursday, Jan 8 AM: Day trip to Matanzas - visits and/or meetings will include: *Agricultural cooperative. Discuss how collective farming is working in Cuba and how the agricultural laws are evolving. * Lunch with head government official of Province - woman leader. * Factory visit (to be arranged) * Dinner with CDR members and their families * Back to Havana =09 =09 Day 5 Friday, Jan 9 AM: Meeting with Cuban Trade Union (CTC) officials. PM: Visit with the Union of Writers and Artists. (UNEAC) EVE: Meeting with Estella Bravo, film-makers and writers. Day 6 Saturday, Jan 10 AM: Visit to the Biotech Institute and/or meet with Philosophers/Social scientists. PM: Overview of Cuban Health Care System; in-depth talk on the integration of traditional and alternative practices in all aspects of Cuban health care: lecture led by Dr. Leoncio Padron Caceres, Director, Division of Traditional and Natural Medicine of the Ministry of Public Health, and Dr. Marta Perez, Havana director for Traditional and Natural Medicine. EVE: Optional salsa night.=09 =09 Day 7 Sunday, Jan 11=20 AM/PM: Visit Varadero and relax at the beach. Meeting with tourism= officials. EVE: Optional cultural event. Day 8 Monday, Jan 12 AM: Visit with CUBASOLAR, Cuba's foremost non-governmental organization promoting renewable energy products utilizing wind, hydro, biomass conversion and solar energy. =20 Lunch and meeting with Federation of Cuban Women. PM/EVE: Dinner and evening event with Cuban Communist Party official as is available. Day 9 Tuesday, Jan 13 Departure for Canc=FAn and return to US. This tentative program is subject to change. We will endeavor to accommodate program requirements as much as is possible within our control, however we may need to adjust or remove some of the scheduled meetings/visits if time does not allow for them. We will try to arrange optional meetings to suit participants' particular interests (as available). =20 3. Costs The cost for this delegation is $1350 per person based on a minimum of 15 people. The price includes * Round-trip airfare between Canc=FAn and Havana * All hotels based on double occupancy basis* * Transportation by private, air-conditioned motor coach, minibuses, or minivans as well as transfers as appropriate * Spanish/English speaking tour guides and Global Exchange trip leader will accompany the group throughout the touring period=20 * Preparatory reading materials * Admission and fees to museums and program activities, except where noted as optional on itinerary * Breakfast and dinner each day * Cuban visa The price does not include the following: * Expenses of a purely personal nature * Lunches * Airport taxes * Room service charges * Transportation of excess luggage in excess of limit * Conveyance fees used for private purposes * Gratuities to the tour guides, hotel personnel, and drivers * Evening excursions/events/parties * Single rooms are available for an additional fee of $250 per person. 4. Global Exchange's Responsibilities Global Exchange agrees to arrange all the necessary logistics for the delegations: =20 * processing of applications * reservations of all flights * organization and confirmation of the itinerary=20 * arrangement for all accommodations * preparatory materials 6. Payment Based on the above-stated trip dates, the following dates hold true. Deposits and Payment Schedule: =20 * A $200 non-refundable deposit is required to reserve a space for all participants. Deposits are due no later than Sept 30, 1997. * Final payment: The remaining balance is due on November 21, 1997. =20 7. Cancellations Cancellations and/or amendments must be received in writing and all cancellations will be effective on the date the written notification is received. Penalties in accordance with the following schedule: Date Penalty After receipt of deposit Full deposit After November 21 100% of total tour cost From aaron@burn.ucsd.edu Sun Apr 27 22:27:57 1997 Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 00:27:38 -0400 To: (Recipient list concealed) From: aaron@burn.ucsd.edu (Aaron) Subject: PERU - URGENTE (Espan~ol/English) ------------------- El original en espa=F1ol: ------------------- Date: 27 Apr 1997 01:16:00 +0100 =46rom: Voz Rebelde URGENTE - URGENTE A LAS ORGANIZACIONES DE DERECHOS HUMANOS, A LAS ORGANIZACIONES DE SOLIDARIDAD: El dia 25 de abril, fueron detenidas Rosa C=E1rdenas Rodriguez y Susana Roque Castro. Denunciamos la arbitraria detencion de ambas senoras, luego de haber visitado a la madre de Rolly Rojas, para presentarle sus condolencias por la perdida de su querido hijo Rolly Rojas. La Sra. Rosa es esposa del Abogado Americo Gilvonio Conde y cunada de Nancy Gilvonio Conde ambos detenidos en la carcel de yanamayo. La sra. Susana es hermana de Bernardo Roque, recluido tambien en el penal de Yanamayo. El Gobierno peruano, luego del asesinato de los integrantes del Comando Edgar Sanchez ha continuado hostilizando a sus familiares asi como a los familiares de los presos pol=EDticos. Urgente pedimos por favor enviar Fax a: Ministerio del Interior 51-1-2243272 Ministerio de Justicia 51-1-4223577 Y a las embajadas o consulados de los paises respectivos. --------------------- My translation: -------------------- URGENT - URGENT TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS, TO THE SOLIDARITY ORGANIZATIONS. On April 25, Rosa C=E1rdenas Rodriguez y Susana Roque Castro were detained [by the Peruvian government] after having visited the mother of Rolly Rojas to express their condolences for the loss of her beloved son Rolly Rojas. We denounce the arbitrary detention of both women. Rosa is the wife of the lawyer Americo Gilvonio Conde and sister-in-law of Nancy Gilvonio Conde, both detained in the Yanamayo prison. Susana is the sister of Bernardo Roque, also held in the Yanamayo prison. The Peruvian government, following the murder of the members of the Edgar Sanchez commando, has continued harassing their family members as well as those of the political prisoners. We urgently request that you send a Fax to: Ministry of the Interior 51-1-2243272 Ministry of Justice 51-1-4223577 and to the Peruvian embassies and consulates in their respective countries. --------------------- End of translation: -------------------- From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Sun Apr 27 23:23:28 1997 Sun, 27 Apr 1997 22:23:08 -0700 (PDT) Sun, 27 Apr 1997 22:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 22:21:58 -0700 (PDT) To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, united@cougar.com, OIFAC@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU, can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Meet to plan resistance to anti-immigrant laws Sender: meisenscher@igc.org ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 20:00:02 -0700 From: FireWorx Subject: Resist Anti-Immigrant Laws--May 3rd Event ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ you are invited to a RESISTANCE CAMPAIGN KICK-OFF: STOP ATTACKS ON IMMIGRANTS! Help build a network of service providers, school workers and community members who refuse to cooperate with the INS and are committed to education and social services for all, regardless of immigration status. Revive the Pledge against Prop. 187 to fight the new federal anti-immigrant "welfare reform" laws. *Saturday, May 3rd* *10 am - 1 pm (coffee at 9:45 am)* *Capp Street Center* *362 Capp Street, San Francisco* *between 18th & 19th* - develop strategies for organizing in the workplace-your own and others - hear how others are resisting anti-immigrant laws - become part of an outreach and education effort for the Bay Area and beyond! Wheelchair accessible Childcare provided Spanish translation provided Immigrant Rights are Human Rights! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For more information, contact: Immigrant Rights Action Coalition (IRAC) voicemail: 415-243-9286 ext. 371 co-sponsored by Northern California Coalition for Immigrant Rights (NCCIR) From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Sun Apr 27 23:27:38 1997 Sun, 27 Apr 1997 22:27:13 -0700 (PDT) Sun, 27 Apr 1997 22:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 22:25:17 -0700 From: meisenscher To: united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu Subject: [Fwd: Teamster Relief Effort - for Flood Victims] Sender: meisenscher@igc.org Path: news.igc.apc.org!cdp!labornews From: Institute for Global Communications Newsgroups: labr.announcements Subject: Teamster Relief Effort - for Flood Victims Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 22:29:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Gateway: notes@igc.apc.org Lines: 23 From: Institute for Global Communications Subject: Teamster Relief Effort - for Flood Victims /* Written 9:16 PM Apr 23, 1997 by justmk@aol.com in igc:alt.society.la */ /* ---------- "Teamster Relief Effort - for Flood" ---------- */ Over 500 Teamster Brothers and Sisters are out of their homes by the floods of the Red River . There are over 50,000 homeless and evacuated in the communities of Grand Fork and East Grand Fork. We can all help with the Massive Relief effort by sending Clothes, Canned Goods, and/or Cash (no donation TOO small, all needed) to: Teamsters Relief Effort C/o Teamsters Local Union No. 116 Dean Cypher, Principal Officer P.O. Box 2785 Fargo, N.D. 58108 For more info......701-232-3215 For Boxs of Goods, clothes, toilet items etc, send to ( 21 South 18th St, 58103 ) In Unity, Your Brother Teamster From mdelao@colef.mx Mon Apr 28 14:12:45 1997 Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 13:24:02 -0700 To: Labor Research and Action Project From: Maru de la O Subject: Meet to plan resistance to anti-immigrant laws ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 20:00:02 -0700 From: FireWorx Subject: Resist Anti-Immigrant Laws--May 3rd Event ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ you are invited to a RESISTANCE CAMPAIGN KICK-OFF: STOP ATTACKS ON IMMIGRANTS! Help build a network of service providers, school workers and community members who refuse to cooperate with the INS and are committed to education and social services for all, regardless of immigration status. Revive the Pledge against Prop. 187 to fight the new federal anti-immigrant "welfare reform" laws. *Saturday, May 3rd* *10 am - 1 pm (coffee at 9:45 am)* *Capp Street Center* *362 Capp Street, San Francisco* *between 18th & 19th* - develop strategies for organizing in the workplace-your own and others - hear how others are resisting anti-immigrant laws - become part of an outreach and education effort for the Bay Area and beyond! Wheelchair accessible Childcare provided Spanish translation provided Immigrant Rights are Human Rights! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For more information, contact: Immigrant Rights Action Coalition (IRAC) voicemail: 415-243-9286 ext. 371 co-sponsored by Northern California Coalition for Immigrant Rights (NCCIR) From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Mon Apr 28 16:28:44 1997 Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:50:04 -0700 (PDT) Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:49:15 -0700 (PDT) To: united@cougar.com, labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Supranational corporate government Sender: meisenscher@igc.org From: D Shniad Subject: [PEN-L:9696] More on MAI X-Comment: Progressive Economics JOURNAL OF COMMERCE Wednesday, April 23, 1997 GLOBAL GIANTS: FEARS OF THE SUPRANATIONAL Critics say a proposed treaty could give too much power to multinationals, whose revenues can exceed those of some nations. By Paula L. Green, Journal of Commerce staff Corporate economic tentacles will creep a bit further around the globe with an investment treaty now before the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris. Critics already upset with the growing influence of multinationals are afraid that the Multilateral Agreement on Investments -- a full-blown international treaty facing approval by each signatory's parliament -- will simply hand corporations more power if it is signed. Officials from the 29 OECD countries are meeting this week in Paris to talk about the pact -- aimed at providing a level playing field for international investors by mandating national treatment. That means foreign investors will have the same breaks as domestic companies, even in such traditionally sensitive sectors as mining, fisheries and agriculture. "I think it's overwhelmingly negative and gives corporations more power," said Mark Weisbort, research director at the Preamble Center for Public Policy, a Washington think tank. "It takes economic decision- making from elected officials and parliaments and gives it to unaccountable, unelected, supranational institutions." After nearly two years of negotiations, the pact is set for completion within the next year. Several developing nations, including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Singapore and Taiwan are reportedly interested in signing. Critics say the agreement goes beyond the investment treaty approved as part of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, known as Trims, or Trade-Related Investment Measures. It could even hurt developing countries' ability to control the activity of foreign investors and their impact on land, water and air use, they add. "We're concerned about its deregulation aspects on the environment . . . and there's no balance in it. Corporate rights are not balanced with corporate responsibility," said Charles Arden-Clarke, a senior policy analyst at the Worldwide Fund for Nature in Gland, Switzerland. But Robert Z. Lawrence, a professor at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, believes the globalization of corporations has provided substantial social benefits and given countries more options. "The idea that bigger and bigger companies is a bad idea is false. Countries have grown tremendously by attracting foreign investment," Mr. Lawrence said. "And as global markets become more competitive, it tilts the balance in favor of the country." Corporate critics have long charged that multinationals take advantage of globalization to get around national tax, environmental and operating rules. The proliferation of trade pacts and a worldwide economic shift toward more open markets from Moscow to Mozambique has also given multinationals more leverage against the nation state. At the Institute for Policy Studies, which last year released a study called "The Top 200: The Rise of Global Corporate Power," analysts view the OECD pact as a mechanism to give corporations more power. "It's a scary development . . . it lifts control on corporations without giving any more power to the people," said Sarah Anderson, a fellow at the Washington-based institute who worked on the study. "Trade barriers have been lifted with trade pacts and this lifts investment barriers. It takes away regulations that have been developed over the decades to protect governments and citizens." The institute study, completed last fall, shows that 51 of the 100 largest economies in the world are corporations. The study uses 1995 statistics to compare a company's annual sales with a nation's gross domestic product. The output of General Motors Corp. is bigger than Denmark's economy, for example. And the annual sales of Wal-Mart Inc. exceed the gross domestic products of 158 nations, including Israel, Poland or Greece. Media blitz misleading Ms. Anderson says multinationals are already creating worldwide webs of production, consumption and finance while bringing economic benefits to only a third of the planet's 5.6 billion people. And the corporate media blitz about the benefits of globalization are misleading, she claims. Corporations, for example, always tout the number of jobs they are able to provide as trade barriers fall and investment regulations ease. This liberalization has allowed them to tap into new markets from Mexico to Thailand. Yet the largest 200 corporations only provide 18.8 million jobs -- less than three-quarters of 1% of the world's work force of 2.6 billion, Ms. Anderson said. "These big companies can afford to invest in technology and robots that replace workers," Ms. Anderson said. "With Nafta, a lot of the small Mexican companies have been wiped out by large companies." Nafta is the North American Free Trade Agreement signed by Mexico, the United States and Canada. Analysts also point to a shift in the mind-set of many developing countries. Twenty years ago, foreign investors were often viewed with suspicion. Now, many Third World countries from China to Bolivia are competing fiercely for multilateral investment. This places more power in the board room, some fear. Positive shift But Mr. Lawrence sees the shift toward competition for foreign dollars as positive. In the days of closed markets and state-owned monopolies, countries and their consumers had far fewer choices and often were the victims of their domestic companies. "If you only have one company making aircraft, who has the power? Boeing or China?" he asked. "But if you have Boeing and Airbus, you can play off one against the other. China has the power." Meanwhile, the spread and speed of cross-border dealings is leaving a widening gap between the economic and political arenas. From his vantage in the ivory tower of the Brookings Institution in Washington, analyst Wolfgang H. Reinicke sees a world in which government policy-makers can't keep pace. "There's integration on the economic side, but multiple political arenas. That's creating a sense of fragmentation," Mr. Reinicke said. As bureaucrats struggle to oversee the changes in the global financial and investment markets, multinationals face a messy web of clashing regulations on everything from taxes to labor to legal topics. Tax nightmare For James Mogle, a partner at Coopers and Lybrand LLP in Washington, that messy web of laws means seven-day work weeks and headaches as he tries to keep government tax collectors out of his clients' hair. Corporations doing business in dozens of nations face a tax nightmare. "With the amount of crossborder trade skyrocketing, it's become a major issue," said Mr. Mogul, refering to the sticky topic of transfer pricing. Sensitive issue Transfer pricing is the price a company puts on goods and services it sells to sister operations in other countries. The issue has always been sensitive as governments have long regarded prices charged by a parent company to a subsidiary, or the reverse, as a way to shift profits to countries with lower tax bases. Now, many tax officials are getting tougher on requiring companies to document their transfer pricing policies and prove they are consistent with the rates charged for similar services or goods by unrelated firms. Complicated process The whole process has only gotten more complicated with globalization as multinationals import components from one country, assemble them in another and then ship them to yet a third. And the fact that many developing nations are still sorting out their tax laws and laying down rules to deal with the influx of new investment makes it even tougher for corporate clients. "It's easy to adopt rules. It's difficult to apply them," said Mr. Mogle, who is an attorney and accountant. "And all the governments are trying to raise more money." From culturex@vcn.bc.ca Tue Apr 29 03:07:51 1997 Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:01:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:01:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Franklin Wayne Poley Subject: Re: bonded labor To: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy united@cougar.com, union-d@wolfnet In-Reply-To: In Canada there is a section of the criminal code which may be helpful in resolving this matter. Section 215, Criminal Code of Canada states that all parties have a "duty to provide the necessaries of life to those in their care". That would extend from soldiers in the care of the military to workfare recipients who are in danger of being used as "Slave Equivalents". The condition of work in workfare is essentially "Do as we say or we may discontinue your necessities of life" which could be challenged in the courts as a section 215 violation. "Workfare with Choice" is another matter. If work is made available to all employable unemployed commensurate with aptitudes/interests/abilities the result will be uplifting to the recipients and to society at large. Further to that I think it would expedite the necessary job creation efforts to set up nation-wide Electronic Job Exchanges. A simple, user-friendly email list is all it takes to list Help Wanted and Jobs Wanted. Public Access would be available to all to the extent that Freenet-like Internet services are available. Anybody with access to an Internet-connected computer would be able to post Help Wanted or Jobs Wanted, free of charge. Creative people acting freely can then develop non-coercive job creation programs. Clearly I am speaking only about one small step in providing a remedy to one aspect of slave equivalency/bonded labour and only for higher technology countries. FWP. On Sun, 27 Apr 1997, Dorothy Kidd wrote: > Nandita Sharma did her masters on slave equivalents at Simon Fraser > University in Vancouver, Canada. She's now studying in Toronto at Ontario > Institute for Studies in Education. You could also contact her through the > National Action Committee on the Status of Women in Toronto. Phone number > (416)932-1718. I'll try and get an e-mail address for you. > By the way. Can we get a copy of the tape to play on Vancouver > Co-operative Radio. Thanks. > Dorothy Kidd. > > On Sun, 27 Apr 1997, Doug Henwood wrote: > > > The other day I recorded an excellent interview with Robin Blackburn on his > > new book, The Making of New World Slavery (Verso), which I'll run on the > > radio this Thursday (WBAI, 99.5 FM, NYC, 5-6 PM). [The interview was > > excellent because of Robin's answers, not the brilliance of my questions.] > > During the interview, Blackburn mentioned that there are some 150 million > > bonded workers and other slave-equivalents in the world. Anyone know where > > I can find out more, and who might be a good interview on the topic to > > follow Robin? > > > > Doug > > > > -- > > > > Doug Henwood > > Left Business Observer > > 250 W 85 St > > New York NY 10024-3217 USA > > +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax > > email: > > web: > > > DISCUSSION GROUPS: Send one word, subscribe, in an email body to Ftr_Cities-request@websightz.com and/or CONSTITUTION-request@websightz.com. ******************************************************************************** From donjprat@mailbox.syr.edu Tue Apr 29 08:50:07 1997 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 1997 10:50:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 10:50:00 -0400 (EDT) From: "Donald J. Pratt" Reply-To: "Donald J. Pratt" To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu Subject: EI in union vs non-union settings Hello. I am interested in knowing if anyone out there is familiar with research relevant to a comparison of employee involvement programs in unionized and non-unionized workplaces. In particular, I am wondering if there is any significant difference in successful outcomes (however you want to define that). WORKER PARTICIPATION AND AMERICAN UNIONS: THREAT OR OPPORTUNITY by Kochan, Katz, and Mower is interesting, but only looks at the unionized situation. Thanks, Don Pratt Sociology Department donjprat@syr.edu Syracuse University =GO RED WINGS!= From aanz@sirius.com Tue Apr 29 21:45:31 1997 Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 20:52:46 +0100 To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu From: aanz@sirius.com (anzalone/starbird) Subject: Re: EI in union vs non-union settings >Howdy Companero! I believe that Albert Lannon at Laney College Labor >Studies program has done some research on teams vs schemes, and a class >was offered at Laney last semester to be taught by the woman who does the >worker team concept for HERE in San Francisco (they struck for two months >before swallowing the team concept). Albert can be reached at (510) >464-3210. I did some dated research on the topic in 1996, and found no >union worksite where the team concept was accepted by the workers >graciously. The union sites that had "cooperation" forced upon them were >always better off however, than the non-union sites that had >"cooperation/team concepts" shoved down their throats. Usually about 1/2 >the workforce lost their jobs. I did find one ice cream place where the >workers claimed they liked the team concept, and no great job >loses/benefit loses resulted. It was a cooperative that the workers >purchased after the pervious owners had wanted to get rid of it (shut it >down). I can dig that old paper out if you would like the particulars and >footnotes. Let me know. Ellen Starbird (aanz@sirius.com). Hello. I am interested in knowing if anyone out there is familiar with >research relevant to a comparison of employee involvement programs in >unionized and non-unionized workplaces. In particular, I am wondering >if there is any significant difference in successful outcomes (however >you want to define that). WORKER PARTICIPATION AND AMERICAN UNIONS: >THREAT OR OPPORTUNITY by Kochan, Katz, and Mower is interesting, but >only looks at the unionized situation. > >Thanks, > >Don Pratt Sociology Department >donjprat@syr.edu Syracuse University > >=GO RED WINGS!= From aaron@burn.ucsd.edu Wed Apr 30 03:22:22 1997 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 05:21:43 -0400 To: a-infos@lglobal.com, Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu, LABOR-L@YORKU.CA From: aaron@burn.ucsd.edu (Aaron) Subject: COLOMBIA - URGENTE: Workers' Leader Disappeared (Esp/Eng) , * El original en espa=F1ol sigue abajo. * Comrades & compa=F1eros/as, I am distributing this partial translation into English since the matter is too urgent to delay any longer. Any improvements and/or extensions of the translation would be appreciated. -- Aaron --------------- Abridged English translation: --------------- ANNCOL NEW COLOMBIA NEWS AGENCY (Agencia de Noticias Nueva Colombia) E-mail: ann.col@swipnet.se =46or the foreign desk: Press release for free disposition, providing the source is mentioned: ---------------------------------------- COLOMBIAN UNION AND COMMUNIST LEADER DISAPPEARED JURIDICAL FREEDOM ASSOCIATION OF COLOMBIA PLEADS FOR URGENT ACTION (STOCKHOLM/ANNCOL) In a communique received at the New Colombia News Agency (ANNCOL), the JURIDICAL FREEDOM ASSOCIATION, a Colombian human rights NGO, reported the disappearance last Thursday of RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO BELTRAN, a leader of the Communist Party of Colombia and of Sintrainagro (the banana workers' union), as well as the desappearence of his five-year-old son RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO ESPITIA. * * * RAMON OSORIO is [the] banana workers' union leader of the Urab=E1 region, in the North of Colombia, a member of the Comunist Party and of the left alliance Patriotic Union. Since 1990, both movements have been practically wiped out physically in Urab=E1 with almost a thousand leaders and militants murdered. Today, no council members from the left movement occupy their places in the councils of Urab=E1 for fear of their lives. In this political environment of terrible persecution of communists and leftists, Ramon Osorio was leading the Plancha 8 in the internal elections of the Unitary Workers Central (Central Unitaria de Trabjadores -- CUT), at the end of October last year. But it was not possible to finish the electoral campaign. HE RESIGNS HIS CANDIDACY In a letter to the CUT leadership on October 21 1996, Ram=F3n Osorio made the following denunciation: "A campaign of terror and physical annihilation is in progress, under which the compa=F1eros PEDRO MOSQUERA and ALIRIO ALZATE of the section of Carepa were murdered last October 15. JOS=C9 ARRIETA and JOS=C9 L=D3PEZ, of the section of Turbo were murdered on October 19 and 20, respectively." DISAPPEARED WITH HIS SON "On Tuesday, April 15, 1997, at approximately 3:00 PM, RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO BELTRAN was with his 5-year-old son RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO BELTRAN ESPITIA in the Municipality of Bello, from which he went to visit the El Poblado neighborhood in Medellin to carry out his duties as a union leader. This was the last time we had news of him, so we fear for his life and physical integrity, since he has long been the target of a strong and systematic persecution by judicial and military authorities, all of them to interfere with his activities as a unionist and as a political leader", says the communique of the Colombian jurists. PEASANT LEADER MURDERED The life of the unionist is one of great dangers. A month ago there occurred the murder at the peasant union headquarters in Bogot=E1 of VICTOR GARZ=D3N, General Secretary of FENSUAGRO. GARZ=D3N was also a Comunist Party leader. Garz=F3n had led the enormous peasant demonstrations in the South of Colombia during August and September 1996 against the fumigation of illegal cultivations. More than 200.000 peasants participated in these successful actions. The Army and its intelligence accused Garz=F3n and other agrarian leaders of actually being guerrilla leaders,an extremely serious accusation in a country like Colombia. About ten peasant leaders and negotiators have been murdered in the last 6 months. FENSUAGRO, to which the banana worker's union is affiliated, has denounced that paramilitary forces have been transferred to the zones where the peasants mobilized last year, spreading horror and death. The JURIDICAL FREEDOM ASSOCIATION of Colombia requests that public opinion address the Colombian authorities as soon as possible to demand that they: a) Respect the life and physical integrity of RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO BELTRAN and his 5-year-old son RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO ESPITIA, freeing them immediately. b) Investigate these facts leading to the punishment of those responsible for these forced disapearances. c) Guarantee the free exercice of union activities, of political opposition and defense of human rights being carried on by members of Andas, Sintrainagro and the C.C.P., and that has been the object of multiple attacks and persecutions. ANNCOL --------------- Original en espa=F1ol: --------------- 1997-04-17 ANNCOL AGENCIA DE NOTICIAS NUEVA COLOMBIA Nyhetsbyr=E5n Nya Colombia. E-mail: ann.col@swipnet.se Para El redactor de las p=E1ginas exteriores: Comunicado de Prensa para libre disposici=F3n, siempre y cuando se menciona la fuente: ---------------------------------------- DIRIGENTE SINDICAL Y COMUNISTA COLOMBIANO DESAPARECIDO LA CORPORACION JURIDICA LIBERTAD DE COLOMBIA PIDE ACCION URGENTE (STOCKHOLM/ANNCOL) En un comunicado llegado a la Agencia de Noticias Nueva Colombia, ANNCOL, La Corporacion Juridica Libertad, organismo no gubernamental colombiano de derechos humanos, dio a conocer el Jueves pasado la desaparicion del se=F1or RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO BELTRAN, dirigente del Partido Comunista de Colombia y de Sintrainagro (sindicato bananero), asi como de su hijo de cinco a=F1os RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO ESPITIA. * * * RAMON OSORIO es dirigente bananero de la martirizada regi=F3n Urab=E1, en el norte de Colombia, miembro del Partido Comunista y la alianza de izquierda, Uni=F3n Patri=F3tica. Dos movimientos que desde 1990 han sido pr=E1cticamente eliminado f=EDsicamente en Urab=E1 con cas=ED mil dirigentes y militantes asesinados. Actualmente no hay ning=FAn consejal del movimiento de izquierda que ocupa su lugar en los consejos de Urab=E1 por temor de sus vidas =46u=E9 en ese clima polit=EDco y de terrible persecuci=F3n contra los comunistas y gente de izquierda que Ramon Osorio encabezaba la Plancha 8 en las elecciones internas de la Central Unitaria de Trabjadores, a final de Octubre el a=F1o pasado. Pero nu fu=E9 posible de terminar la campa=F1a electoral. RENUNCIA LA CANDIDATURA En una carta a la direcci=F3n de la CUT el 21 de Octubre 1996, Ram=F3n Osorio hizo la seguiente denuncia: "Esta en desarollo una campa=F1a de terror y de aniqu=EDlamiento f=EDsico, dentro de la cual han sido asesinados los compa=F1eros PEDRO MOSQUERA y ALIRIO ALZATE de la seccional de Carepa el pasado 15 de Octubre. Los compa=F1eros JOS=C9 ARRIETA y JOS=C9 L=D3PEZ, de la seccional de Turbo fueron asesinados el 19 respectivamente 20 de Octubre". . .. .. . ."Hay una campa=F1a de amenazas y de intimidaciones de los grupos paramilitares y de los Comandos Populares, en la mayoria de las Seccionales en la cual se afirma que los ingresos del sindicato est=E1n destinados a la guerrilla y se llama a los trabajadores a desafilarse de la organizaci=F3n o, a continuar en ella, bajo la condici=F3n de que est=E1 dirigida exlusivamente por Movimientos Pol=EDticos al servicio del Estado y los patronos", afirmaba el dirigente sindical en la carta de renuncia en la eleccion sindical. "LOS REINSERTADOS CON LAS FUERZAS DE SEGURIDAD" Los Comandos Populares es, seg=FAn las ONG colombianas, el brazo armado del partido pol=EDtico Esperanza Paz y Libertad, partido que fu=E9 fundado por desmovilizados de la guerrilla EPL 1991. En un folleto p=FAblico del Partido Comunista Colombiano, PCC, se denuncia que esa guerrilla en realidad nunca se dezmobiliz=F3 totalmente: "El hecho de que adentro del acuerdo hecho p=FAblico s=F3lo se haya previsto la reinserci=F3n de los guerrilleros y no de las milicias populares de EPL, que todas las armas cortas y las mejores armas largas no hayan sido entregadas ni reclamadas por el Gobierno, no fu=E9 una simple OMISION de los negociadores sino una ACCION del Estado muy deliberada y tendi=F3 un manto de duda a las expectativas de distensi=F3n del contexto de conflictos", denunciaba los comunistas en el documento. Una gran parte de los milicianos fueron incorporados en la DAS-RURAL, es decir, las fuerzas de seguridad y de inteligencia en la zona bananera. "Los esperanzados no es otra cosa que la otra parte de la falsa moneda, es decir, actuan con el apoyo del Estado de Terrorismo en Colombia contra los comunistas para erradicarnos del sindicato bananero", dice un dirigente comunista de Urab=E1, que, por seguridad, no queire revelar su nombre. ECO DEL GENERAL BEDOYA Los dirigentes de Esperanza Paz y Libertad que tambien son dirigentes bananeros, no solamente han recibido apoyo por parte del estado colombiano, sino tambi=E9n de la socialdemocracia internacional. El Fiscal de Sintrainagro, HERNAN CORREA, estuvo en Suecia y otros pa=EDses europeos hace medio a=F1o diciendo que el movimiento guerrillero habr=EDa perdido su norte y que actualmente se dedicaba solamente de cometer masacres, secuestros y bandolerismo. Para el dirigente esperanzado, el crecimiento del movimiento guerrillero colombiano tiene su bases en el lucrativo negocio de narcotr=E1fico. Sus declaraciones fueron cas=ED como un =E9co del general Harold Bedoya, jefe de las FF.MM colombianas y un enemigo mortal a las FARC-EP. "La pobreza y los militares no son m=E1s los enemigos del pueblo, como fu=E9 cuando la guerrilla de EPL estaba en activo. Para nosotros es las FARC-EP que nos quieren matar", decia Correa durante una conferencia de prensa en Suecia. En la campa=F1a electoral interna del sindicalismo en Octubre 1996, el Estado colombiano puso todos sus recursos publicitarios, militares y juridicos en favor a los "esperanzados" para segu=EDr derrotando f=EDsicamente a la izquierda urabaense con todos los m=E9todos. Hasta el 1994, la izquierda era fuerza pol=EDtica mayoritaria. En ese a=F1o fueron encarcelados los alcaldes y dirigentes comunistas de los municpios m=E1s importantes de la zona bananera como Apartad=F3, Turbo y Chigorod=F3 por la "Justicia sin Rostro". Todav=EDa estan encarcelados los alcaldes de los dos primeros municipios mencionados, junto con unos 15 dirigentes. Han sido absuelto poco a poco los 120 activistas que fueron encarcelados en febrero y marzo 1994. Pero varios, como el caso del secretario del consejo de Apartad=F3, ALBEIRO BUSTAMANTE, han sido asesinados cuando han salido en libertad. SIGUE LA REPRESI=D3N Ramon Osorio dej=F3 la campa=F1a, pero la persecuci=F3n no termin=F3. "El dia 17 de enero de 1997 el se=F1or RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO habia sido objeto de detencion por parte del Gaula (=F3rgano estatal de la fuerza de seguridad contra secuestro) de Uraba bajo ordenes de la =46iscalia Regional de Medellin. Al se=F1or RAMON OSORIO, asi como a otros directivos de Sintrainagro, Andas (ONG que ayuda a los desplazados) y el P.C.C. se les acusaba de pertenecer a grupos insurgentes y otra serie de delitos", dice el comunicado de La Corporacion Juridica Libertad. El dia 5 de febrero de 1997 Ramon Osorio y los dirigentes sindicales y de derechos humanos MARTHA ZAPATA, ANA RENGIFO, GERARDO NIETO y EUGENIO CORDOBA, que fueron detenidos dentro del mismo proceso penal, fueron dejados en libertad por ordenes de la =46iscalia Regional de Medellin, es decir la Justicia sin Rostro. El dia 27 de febrero de 1997 ocurrio un atentado dinamitero en el municipio de Apartado (centro pol=EDtico de Urab=E1) en el cual varias personas perdieron la vida y varias mas resultaron heridas. Por parte del Comandante de la XVII Brigada del Ejercito Nacional, Gral Rito Alejo del Rio se se=F1alo de manera temeraria e irresponsable a Ramon Osorio y varios defensores de derechos humanos como autores de este atentado, poniendolos con ello en situacion de riesgo. Decia que el atentado seria una acci=F3n por el 5 Frente de las FARC-EP pero informes de la inteligencia del ej=E9rcito m=E1s delante se=F1al=F3 que fueron personas del movimiento guerrillero de ELN que incluso habrian sido detenidos en Bogot=E1. DESAPARECIDO CON EL HIJO "El dia Martes, 15 de abril de 1997, siendo aproximadamente las tres de la tarde (3:00 p.m.) el se=F1or RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO BELTRAN se encontraba en compania de su hijo de cinco a=F1os de edad RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO BELTRAN ESPITIA en el municipio de Bello, de donde se desplazo con destino al barrio El Poblado de la ciudad de Medellin con el proposito de desarrollar gestiones inherentes a su calidad de directivo sindical. Solo hasta ese momento se tienen noticias de su paradero, por lo que tememos por su vida e integridad personal, dado que desde tiempo atras venia siendo objeto de un fuerte y sistematica persecucion por parte de autoridades militares y judiciales, todas ellas tendientes a afectar su actividad sindical y de dirigente politico", dice el comunicado de los juristas colombianos. ASESINADO DIRIGENTE CAMPESINO La vida del sindicalista corre grandes peligros. Hace un mes fu=E9 asesinado en la sede sindical de los campesinos en Bogot=E1, VICTOR GARZ=D3N, Secretario General de FENSUAGRO. GARZ=D3N tambien era dirigente del Partido Comunista. Garz=F3n habia dirigido las gigantescas marchas campesinas en el sur de Colombia durante los meses agosto y septiembre 1996 contra las fumigaciones de cultivos il=EDcitos. M=E1s de 200.000 campesinos participaron en las acciones existosas. El ej=E9rcito y su inteligencia le acusaba a Garz=F3n y otros dirigentes agrarios de ser en realidad dirigentes guerrilleros, acusaci=F3n sumamente grave en un pa=EDs como Colombia. Apr=F3ximadamente di=E9z dirigentes y negociadores de los campesinos han sido asesinados los =FAltimos seis meses. FENSUAGRO, donde el sindicato de banano es afiliado, ha denunciado que paramilatares han sido trasladados a las zonas donde los campesinos se movilizaron el a=F1o pasado, regando horror y muerte. La Corporacion Juridica Libertad solicitan que la opini=F3n p=FAblica se dirige a la mayor brevedad a las autoridades colombianas a fin de que se les exija: a) Se respete la vida e integridad personal de RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO BELTRAN y de su hijo de 5 a=F1os RAMON ALBERTO OSORIO ESPITIA, poniendolos de manera inmediata en libertad. b) Sean investigados estos hechos procediendo a la sancion de los responsables de estas despariciones forzadas. c) Se garantice y libre ejecicio de la actividad sindical, de oposicion politica y defensa de derechos humanos que se ha venido desarrollando por parte de los integrantes de Andas, Sintrainagro y el P.C.C. y que a su vez ha sido objeto de multiples atentados y hostigamientos. ANNCOL ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1997-04-17 ANNCOL AGENCIA DE NOTICIAS NUEVA COLOMBIA Nyhetsbyr=E5n Nya Colombia. E-mail: ann.col@swipnet.se Para El redactor de las p=E1ginas exteriores: Comunicado de Prensa para libre disposici=F3n, siempre y cuando se menciona la fuente: ----------------------------------------------- ASESINADO DIRIGENTE COMUNISTA EN LA ZONA BANANERA DEL LIBRO "CIEN A=D1OS DE SOLEDAD" (STOCKHOLM/ANNCOL) Enoc Mendoza, educador y dirigente del Partido Comunista Colombiano, PCC, fu=E9 asesinado el 7 de Abril a=F1o en curso en el municipio de Ci=E9naga, eje de la zona bananera de la costa caribe=F1a. Su muerte caus=F3 consternaci=F3n en la poblaci=F3n. * * * Mendoza se desempe=F1aba como secretario de Educaci=F3n de la administraci=F3n del municipio de Ci=E9naga, cargo desde el cual ven=EDa impulsando trascendentales programas de beneficio a los educandos m=E1s desprotegidos y necesitados de la regi=F3n. El Partido Comunista del Magdalena, denunci=F3 la invasi=F3n de agrupaciones paramilitares en esta parte del pa=EDs y el departamento del Atl=E1ntico, sin que las autoridades militares y policiales hayan hecho nada para impedirlo. El colaborador de la Agencia de Noticia Nueva Colombia, DICK EMANUELSSON, estuvo una semana con Enoc Mendoza 1991 cuando el peridista sueco hizo un recorrido period=EDstico por la zona bananera, la cual di=F3 or=EDgen al libro legendario "CIEN ANOS DE SOLEDAD", por Gabriel Garcia Marquez. "Enoc Mendoza era un hombre impresionante. No importaba a que finca bananera que llegamos, la gente lo conoc=EDa y lo queria", cuenta Emanuelsson. "Lo m=E1s impresionante fu=E9 una visita en el matadero de Ci=E9naga. Los comunistas y la Uni=F3n Patri=F3tica de la zona, habian luchado durante muchos a=F1os para que cerrara el matadero, que era un infierno de insalubridad, tanto por los que trabajaron en 40 grados sobre cero, rodeado de millones de mosqu=EDtos, como la poblaci=F3n y los barrios alrededores. Salia "rios" de sangre de los animales descuartizados en el matadero". "Los grandes intereses econ=F3micos de la costa atl=E1ntica, tanto del narcotr=E1fico como de los bipartidistas, le querian ver muerto a Enoc y la oposici=F3n de izquierda. En su servicio se puso los sectores armados de derecha", subraya Emanuelsson. En 1928, en la zona de Ci=E9naga, ocurri=F3 la gran matanza de apr=F3ximadamente 3.000 trabajadores bananeros y familares, matanza ordenada por la norteamericana United Fru=EDt Company. Desde esa fecha no era posible de reorganizar el sindicato bananero. En 1988 el bananero y militante comunista Elias Cayetano, hizo un int=E9nto, pero fue asesinado el 19 de Julio 1988, junto con otros tres compa=F1eros del sindicato. Pero a final de 1990, los bananeros hicieron un nuevo intento y lograron, poco a poco, de consolidar las bases y cuando venia Dick Emanuelsson en junio 1991, ya habian m=E1s de 1500 afiliados. "Durante la semana que estuve en Ci=E9naga habia muchos movimientos de paramilitares, tanto en el casco urbano como en las fincas. Enoc estuvo permanentemente amenazado por los militares y paramilatares. Pero nunca se dobleg=F3 ante las amenazas". "El secretario general de la seccional del sindicato, Reynaldo Maiguel, fue asesinado el 14 de Febrero 1994 a las 3.30 de la ma=F1ana por cuatro hombres armados que tumbaron la puerta del sindicalista. Ante sus dos ni=F1os y esposa, fue acribillado por ocho tiros. Era consejal por los comunistas junto con Enoc". El periodista sueco regres=F3 el a=F1o pasado a Ci=E9naga y recorri=F3 por las fincas donde habia estado cinco a=F1os atr=E1s. "La directiva del sindicato bananero estaba preocupado por la invasi=F3n de grupos desconocidos pero armados. En un viaje a un corregimiento pasamos justamente por una finca donde estaban concentrados varios grupos paramilitares que salian por la noche sembrando terror y muerte. No era ningun secreto que esos grupos andaban como Pedro por su casa, sin ning=FAn obst=E1culo por parte del ej=E9rcito y la policia. Los latifundistas acusan a los sindicalistas de ser el respaldo civil a los dos Frentes de =46ARC-EP que operan en la zona de Ci=E9naga y Sierra Nevada. Durante el =FAltimo a=F1o han sido asesinados mucha gente. Entre ellos, el educador Enoc Mendoza". From kettler@bard.edu Wed Apr 30 06:29:05 1997 X-Ident: IDENT protocol sender: kettler@localhost Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:26:28 -0400 (EDT) From: David Kettler To: Labor Research and Action Project Subject: Re: EI in union vs non-union settings In-Reply-To: I have just belatedly seen the Program for the NYU Center for Labor and Employment Law's Annual Conference (May 29-30): Employee Representation in the Emerging Workplace: Alternatives/Supplements to Collective Bargaining. Several of the announced contributions sound as though they should report research relevant to this query. There is a May 1 deadline for pre-registration (and a $200 fee), but information can be gotten by faxing Professor Samuel Estreicher at 212 995 4036. DKettler On Tue, 29 Apr 1997, anzalone/starbird wrote: > >Howdy Companero! I believe that Albert Lannon at Laney College Labor > >Studies program has done some research on teams vs schemes, and a class > >was offered at Laney last semester to be taught by the woman who does the > >worker team concept for HERE in San Francisco (they struck for two months > >before swallowing the team concept). Albert can be reached at (510) > >464-3210. I did some dated research on the topic in 1996, and found no > >union worksite where the team concept was accepted by the workers > >graciously. The union sites that had "cooperation" forced upon them were > >always better off however, than the non-union sites that had > >"cooperation/team concepts" shoved down their throats. Usually about 1/2 > >the workforce lost their jobs. I did find one ice cream place where the > >workers claimed they liked the team concept, and no great job > >loses/benefit loses resulted. It was a cooperative that the workers > >purchased after the pervious owners had wanted to get rid of it (shut it > >down). I can dig that old paper out if you would like the particulars and > >footnotes. Let me know. Ellen Starbird (aanz@sirius.com). > > > Hello. I am interested in knowing if anyone out there is familiar with > >research relevant to a comparison of employee involvement programs in > >unionized and non-unionized workplaces. In particular, I am wondering > >if there is any significant difference in successful outcomes (however > >you want to define that). WORKER PARTICIPATION AND AMERICAN UNIONS: > >THREAT OR OPPORTUNITY by Kochan, Katz, and Mower is interesting, but > >only looks at the unionized situation. > > > >Thanks, > > > >Don Pratt Sociology Department > >donjprat@syr.edu Syracuse University > > > >=GO RED WINGS!= > > From bnissen@indiana.edu Wed Apr 30 07:40:54 1997 Received: from cayman.ucs.indiana.edu (cayman.ucs.indiana.edu [129.79.10.63]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3/CNS-4.0p) with ESMTP id HAA05476 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 07:40:53 -0600 (MDT) Received: from ophelia.ucs.indiana.edu (ophelia.ucs.indiana.edu [129.79.5.204]) by cayman.ucs.indiana.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5/1.13IUPO) with ESMTP id IAA00461 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:40:46 -0500 (EST) Received: (from bnissen@localhost) by ophelia.ucs.indiana.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3/1.8shakes) id IAA08196; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:40:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:40:44 -0500 (EST) From: "Bruce A. Nissen" X-Sender: bnissen@ophelia.ucs.indiana.edu To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu cc: Labor Research and Action Project Subject: Re: EI in union vs non-union settings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 29 Apr 1997, Donald J. Pratt wrote: > Hello. I am interested in knowing if anyone out there is familiar with > research relevant to a comparison of employee involvement programs in > unionized and non-unionized workplaces. In particular, I am wondering > if there is any significant difference in successful outcomes (however > you want to define that). WORKER PARTICIPATION AND AMERICAN UNIONS: > THREAT OR OPPORTUNITY by Kochan, Katz, and Mower is interesting, but > only looks at the unionized situation. > > Thanks, > > Don Pratt Sociology Department > donjprat@syr.edu Syracuse University > > =GO RED WINGS!= > > Don-- You're probably familiar with this source, but there are a number of chapters, most notably one by Kelley and Harrison, in the book *Unions and Economic Competitiveness*, edited by Larry Mishel and Paula Voos. I believe it came out in 1992, published by M.E. Sharpe, if memory serves me well. Bruce Nissen Division of Labor Studies Indiana University Northwest Gary, IN 46408 bnissen@indiana.edu From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Wed Apr 30 14:04:10 1997 Received: from igc7.igc.org (igc7.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.35]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3/CNS-4.0p) with ESMTP id OAA23657 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 14:04:00 -0600 (MDT) Received: from igc3.igc.apc.org (igc3.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.33]) by igc7.igc.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA10840; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppp4-6.igc.org (meisenscher@ppp4-6.igc.org [198.94.4.6]) by igc3.igc.apc.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA10508; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:48:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:48:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970430084819.0fc7d490@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: meisenscher@pop.igc.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, h-UCLEA@h-net.msu.edu, united@cougar.com, OIFAC@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU, can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Urgent Appeal: Daewoo Maquiladora Workers Sender: meisenscher@igc.org > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Emergency Alert support for Daewoo Workers requested > > > The following emergency alert was issued by the Support > Committee for Maquiladora Workers, Craftsman Hall, 3909 Centre > St. #210, San Diego, CA 92103 Phone (619) 542-0826 Fax (619) > 295-5879 The Support Committee for Maquilador Workers is > affiliated with the Coalition for Justice in the Maquiladoras. > > > Emergency Alert > > Workers Take Action Against Sexual and Physical Abuse > in Daewoo Maquiladora > > Workers at the Hyo Seung maquiladoras in San Luis Rio Colorado, > Mexico have filed actions with the Public Ministry and the Labor > Board against sexual abuse, physical beating and multiple > violations of labor law. The plant, which opened just several > months ago, employs 66 workers, and is located near the Mexican > border with Yuma, Arizona about 120 miles east of Tijuana. > > Women workers, who form the majority of the workforce, report > that they have each been subjected to sexual harassment by the > Company President Kwang Beom Shin and Company Directors Mr. Oh > and Mr. Lee, including touching them and offering them money for > sex, with the threat that they will lose their jobs if they do > not agree. When the directors believe a worker has committed an > error he or she is locked up in a "punishment room" where they > are exposed to toxic solvents without ventilation. The company > president regularly enters the women's bathroom to demand the > women hurry to return to work, grabbing them and pushing them. > Both directors and the president of the company regularly insult > the workers, calling them "dogs" and other slurs and stating that one > Korean is worth 10 Mexicans. Workers also report that they are made > to take Korean medicines of unknown contents by the directors. No > doctor or nurse is present when these "medicines" are distributed. > > The three Korean management personnel often are inebriated on the job, > drinking in the plant and offering liquor to minors working in the > plant. On March 3, a 17 year old worker was beaten repeatedly in the > stomach by Mr. Oh, who accused the youth of stealing his wallet. The > worker was then locked in the "punishment room" for one and a half > hours and forced to sign a resignation from the company. Mr. Oh later > found the wallet he had misplaced and nothing was missing from it. > > Workers report they are paid the equivalent of $3.37 per day and > work from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with only one 40 minute break. > Many are forced to work overtime until 10:00 p.m. with only one > additional 15 minute break and without being paid extra as > required by law. Workers are exposed to lead and solvents > throughout the work day without proper protections such as safety > glasses, masks and ventilation. > > Five Hyo Seung workers were unjustifiably fired in the two weeks > prior to March 12 for speaking out against this abuse. Hyo Seung > workers have formed an organizing committee and are demanding all > violations of labor rights be corrected and that the fired workers be > reinstated. > > The Hyo Seung plant in one of seven Daewoo plants in San Luis > which produces remote controls that sell under the brand names of > Daewoo, General Electric, Hitachi, and Sony. Other Daewoo plants in > San Luis produce Daewoo televisions and VCRs. Daewoo is a > Korean-based conglomerate that hopes to commandeer 10% of the world's > electronics market by the year 2000. It has a history of worker abuse > in many parts of the world. In January of 1993, for example, the > International Labor Organization upheld a Pakistani union's complaints > that Daewoo cooperated with Pakistani government officials to try to > intimidate workers on a road- construction project from organizing a > union. Union members reported they were arrested and sent to an > insane asylum where they were subjected to police torture, including > electric shock, having chili powder forced into their mouths and being > forced to sit naked on blocks of ice. > > Urgent Action Requested: > > Please send letters demanding the Hyo Seung maquiladora cease its > sexual and physical abuse of workers, end all violations of workers' > rights and reinstate the workers who were illegally fired. > > Fax to: Soon-Hoon Bae, Chairman & CEO > Daewoo Electronics Corporation of America, > 1055 West Victoria St. > Compton, CA 90220 > USA > The fax number for Daewoo is (310) 763-0447. > > Fax a copy to: Support Committee for Maquiladora Workers > (619) 295-5879 > ********************************************************* > > > From meisenscher@igc.apc.org Wed Apr 30 14:05:32 1997 Received: from igc7.igc.org (igc7.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.35]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3/CNS-4.0p) with ESMTP id OAA23741 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 14:05:30 -0600 (MDT) Received: from igc3.igc.apc.org (igc3.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.33]) by igc7.igc.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA10842; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:50:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppp4-6.igc.org (meisenscher@ppp4-6.igc.org [198.94.4.6]) by igc3.igc.apc.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA10485; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:48:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:48:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970430084807.0fc78e36@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: meisenscher@pop.igc.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, h-UCLEA@h-net.msu.edu, united@cougar.com, pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu, OIFAC@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU, can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu From: Michael Eisenscher Subject: Letter to Nike: Circulate/Sign Sender: meisenscher@igc.org From: Mike Rhodes Subject: New Nike sign-on letter Sender: clr2@igc.org Labor Alerts/Labor News a service of Campaign for Labor Rights Global Exchange has drafted the following sign-on letter to Nike CEO Philip Knight. They are asking for both individuals and groups to sign on. They are especially interested in getting signatures from groups and prominent individuals in the religious, human rights, women, investor, social justice, academic and sports communities. Please print, sign and return the letter to: Global Exchange 2017 Mission Street, #303 San Francisco, CA 94110 Questions? Contact Global Exchange: 415-255-7296 or gx-info@globalexchange.org Nike campaign resources: Campaign for Labor Rights has a frequently updated Nike action packet available in hard copy ($3 to $5 donation requested) and free via email. To receive a copy, contact us at clr@igc.apc.org or (541) 344-5410. The resources section of the action packet has two pages of listings, including the Nike Campaign Document Library: articles about Nike which we can forward to you via email. May, 1997 Philip Knight CEO, Nike Corporation One Bowerman Drive Beaverton, OR 97005 Dear Mr. Knight, We, the undersigned, are deeply concerned about ongoing problems in factories in Indonesia and Vietnam that produce Nike shoes. These problems include inadequate pay, forced overtime, and abusive treatment of workers. The massive recent strikes involving 10,000 workers in Indonesia and 1,300 in Vietnam give new urgency to the need to find a solution. We understand that Nike has taken some actions to address these problems, including creating a Labor Relations Department, hiring the accounting firm Ernst and Young to monitor the factories, hiring former Ambassador Andrew Young to review implementation of Nike's Code of Conduct, joining Business for Social Responsibility and participating in the Presidential task force on sweatshops. However, none of these moves has been adequate to address the root of the problem, which is that Nike is not paying its overseas workers a living wage. The wage in Vietnam of $1.60 a day is not enough for three decent meals a day, let alone housing, transportation, clothing and health care. In Indonesia, the government itself says that the minimum wage, which is now $2.50 a day in Jakarta, covers only 90 percent of the basic subsistence needs of one person. Nike, with its tremendous financial resources, should and must do better. We call on Nike to take two steps: 1. Pay workers enough for them to live decent, dignified lives. In Vietnam that means at least $3 a day, and in Indonesia at least $4 a day. 2. Institute independent monitoring by respected groups that can communicate well with both the company and the workers. For Indonesia, we urge you to immediately hire the Indonesian Sports Shoe Monitoring Network, and for Vietnam, Vietnam Labor Watch. We urge you to take these actions quickly to avoid further trauma to the workers who make your products and further erosion of Nike's good name. If you pay your workers a living wage, and use these respected groups as monitors, we are certain that the company and the workers will all benefit, and that consumers will start feeling better again about buying your products. Sincerely, _____________________________________________ name signed _____________________________________________ name printed _____________________________________________ organization (if applicable) _____________________________________________ street address _____________________________________________ city state/province zip/postal code From RFANTASI@ernestine.smith.edu Wed Apr 30 15:01:21 1997 Received: from sophia.smith.edu (sophia.smith.edu [131.229.64.1]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3/CNS-4.0p) with ESMTP id PAA27487 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 15:01:18 -0600 (MDT) Received: from ernestine.smith.edu (ernestine.smith.edu [131.229.64.154]) by sophia.smith.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA03846 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 17:01:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ERNESTINE/MAILQUEUE by ernestine.smith.edu (Mercury 1.13); Wed, 30 Apr 97 17:01:16 EST Received: from MAILQUEUE by ERNESTINE (Mercury 1.13); Wed, 30 Apr 97 17:01:15 EST From: "RICHARD FANTASIA" To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 17:01:12 EDT Subject: Re: Letter to Nike: Circulate/Sign X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.10) Message-ID: <334270A5C74@ernestine.smith.edu> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:48:36 -0700 (PDT) Reply-to: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Michael Eisenscher To: Labor Research and Action Project Subject: Letter to Nike: Circulate/Sign X-To: labor-rap@csf.colorado.edu, h-UCLEA@h-net.msu.edu, united@cougar.com, pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu, OIFAC@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU, can-labor@pencil.math.missouri.edu From: Mike Rhodes Subject: New Nike sign-on letter Sender: clr2@igc.org Labor Alerts/Labor News a service of Campaign for Labor Rights Global Exchange has drafted the following sign-on letter to Nike CEO Philip Knight. They are asking for both individuals and groups to sign on. They are especially interested in getting signatures from groups and prominent individuals in the religious, human rights, women, investor, social justice, academic and sports communities. Please print, sign and return the letter to: Global Exchange 2017 Mission Street, #303 San Francisco, CA 94110 Questions? Contact Global Exchange: 415-255-7296 or gx-info@globalexchange.org Nike campaign resources: Campaign for Labor Rights has a frequently updated Nike action packet available in hard copy ($3 to $5 donation requested) and free via email. To receive a copy, contact us at clr@igc.apc.org or (541) 344-5410. The resources section of the action packet has two pages of listings, including the Nike Campaign Document Library: articles about Nike which we can forward to you via email. May, 1997 Philip Knight CEO, Nike Corporation One Bowerman Drive Beaverton, OR 97005 Dear Mr. Knight, We, the undersigned, are deeply concerned about ongoing problems in factories in Indonesia and Vietnam that produce Nike shoes. These problems include inadequate pay, forced overtime, and abusive treatment of workers. The massive recent strikes involving 10,000 workers in Indonesia and 1,300 in Vietnam give new urgency to the need to find a solution. We understand that Nike has taken some actions to address these problems, including creating a Labor Relations Department, hiring the accounting firm Ernst and Young to monitor the factories, hiring former Ambassador Andrew Young to review implementation of Nike's Code of Conduct, joining Business for Social Responsibility and participating in the Presidential task force on sweatshops. However, none of these moves has been adequate to address the root of the problem, which is that Nike is not paying its overseas workers a living wage. The wage in Vietnam of $1.60 a day is not enough for three decent meals a day, let alone housing, transportation, clothing and health care. In Indonesia, the government itself says that the minimum wage, which is now $2.50 a day in Jakarta, covers only 90 percent of the basic subsistence needs of one person. Nike, with its tremendous financial resources, should and must do better. We call on Nike to take two steps: 1. Pay workers enough for them to live decent, dignified lives. In Vietnam that means at least $3 a day, and in Indonesia at least $4 a day. 2. Institute independent monitoring by respected groups that can communicate well with both the company and the workers. For Indonesia, we urge you to immediately hire the Indonesian Sports Shoe Monitoring Network, and for Vietnam, Vietnam Labor Watch. We urge you to take these actions quickly to avoid further trauma to the workers who make your products and further erosion of Nike's good name. If you pay your workers a living wage, and use these respected groups as monitors, we are certain that the company and the workers will all benefit, and that consumers will start feeling better again about buying your products. Sincerely, _____________________________________________ Rick Fantasia, Professor and Chair Department of Sociology Smith College Northampton, MA 01063