CPN is designed and maintained by ONline @ UW: Electronic Publishing Group.

Topics: Work & Empowerment

Union Leadership Development in the 1990s and Beyond

Susan C. Eaton
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Reprinted with permission from Workplace Topics, volume 4, number 2. December 1995. Copyright © 1995.

Contents
Leadership Defined
Local Union Leadership Roles
Career Tracks For Union Leaders
The Political Context of Union Leadership
Stages of a Union Leader's Development
Conclusions
Endnotes

Union leadership is fundamentally moral leadership. If leaders do not constantly articulate and act according to labor's core values and vision of social and economic justice, inclusion, human development, and hope, they have little chance of successfully mobilizing their members over the long term. Appealing purely to members' economic self-interest will leave leaders vulnerable to recrimination at any economic downturn or poor contract settlement. More significantly, labor's leaders must constantly strive to organize new workers to broaden the base of the membership, bring in new leaders, and fulfill the mission of the union movement. Since most leaders are elected by current dues-paying members or their representatives, not the unorganized, the fundamental values of labor must be clearly and consciously shared by leaders and followers in order for the scarce resources of current members to be devoted to organizing new workers, and to supporting the new leaders who emerge in these struggles. This paper argues that current leaders need to carry out a virtual revolution in articulating labor's values and vision, in creasing organizing, and consciously developing new leaders for the future in order to not only realize labor's goal, but to ensure its very survival. While most unions are struggling just to train new leaders to replicate and run organizations of the past, the times today demand new leaders who have vision and talent well beyond that required of their corporate counterparts. It is up to today's labor leaders, at every level, to rise to this challenge and to recreate a movement that can contribute to the development of every person's full potential.

I begin with a discussion of the meaning of leadership, arguing that the time for transactional leadership is past and the need for transformational, empowering leadership is urgent. Then I discuss leadership roles within union locals and how service in these roles serves as a stepping stone to leadership at higher levels of organized labor. [1] The focus is on the growing unions in the public and service sectors of the economy, with some examples from the industrial sector. Next I propose a five-stage theory of leadership development within a union, suggesting potential positive influences at each stage and arguing that the earliest experiences are often the most important. This paper is based on a year-long research project involving dozens of local and mid-level union leaders.

Leadership Defined

For purposes of understanding union leadership, few of these studies were helpful. A handful of union leaders attended management training courses in which they learned about Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and took the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator tests. The leadership studies themselves usually did not include leaders of social change movements, or locally elected political leaders of organizations.

A few alternate models of leadership based in real, grassroots social change experience have had an influence on union leaders. For example, Ella Baker, a longtime civil rights organizer, taught the young organizers of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee about developing leadership among the people one was organizing and letting them make the critical decisions about their lives. Similarly, Cesar Chavez was learning in the 1950s and 1960s the lesson of community organizers Saul Alinsky and Fred Ross that "[you] help people by making them responsible." [4]

In 1976, James McGregor Burns made a major contribution to the field with his book entitled Leadership. [5] He argued that leadership was in fact a relationship between leader and follower, from which all parties benefited. Burns believed that followers created leaders, and noted that traditional leadership was "transactional," consisting of an exchange of value. He also described leadership that he called "transformational," which he said occurs "when one or more persons engages with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality." [6] He cited India's great political and religious leader Ghandi as an example.

Burns's definition of leadership can be expanded with contributions from the feminist movement of the 1970s and 1980s, articulated by Jean Baker Miller and others. The women's movement defined good leadership as having, in addition to its relational and transformational qualities, a quality of empowerment. By empowerment I mean both personal feelings of efficacy and actual increased "powers" or abilities to accomplish desired goals, individually and collectively. Empowerment has relevance both within the lives of individuals and within the work place and society as disenfranchised or less powerful groups seek to achieve a greater voice and influence over the events and decisions that determine conditions of their lives. Empowerment is based on a belief that leadership can be developed, and that a leader's legitimate power is "power to achieve things together with others," an inherently more egalitarian notion of leadership than power over or power to dominate. [7]

A modern definition of leadership that is useful to union leaders suggests that leadership is a relationship, that leadership is transformational to both leaders and followers, and that leadership is empowering rather than dominating. This definition is not intended to suggest that leaders never make decisions, never seek control, or always consult and involve their followers in every action. Within this model there is a broad range of possible styles and approaches, depending on the individual and the situation.

How do actual union leaders define leadership? In one Service Employees International Union (SEIU) focus group in Chicago, women described a leader as "someone who someone has faith in," and "someone who connects people to others." In my 1991-92 survey of 80 union leaders, of whom 85 percent were women and 15 percent were men, there were significant differences between male and female union leaders in defining leadership. Women were more likely to use words like "care," "love," "listen," and "empower," as well as "delegate, teach, involve," and "getting the group to do something." Women spoke about "guiding the organization" and "having a long-range vision." Both men and women talked about "motivating" as a role of leaders, but only men used the words "give direction" and "make decisions" in their definitions, even though female leaders carried out those leadership roles as well.

Some understandings of leadership were more participatory than others. For example, the Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers' (HUCTW) 1991 letter to new employees says, "We organized our union at Harvard around a single idea: that every employee should have the opportunity to participate in making the decisions that affect his or her working life." [8] A female Steelworkers local president defined leadership as "making the decisions to put coalition-building as a number one priority; accepting all views and opinions without limiting input; and moving the group forward for the benefit of all affected."

In sum, this paper will use a broad definition of union leadership that includes elected leaders who have a clear leader ship role and are accountable to a particular base, staff leaders who exercise leadership through their structural positions, and worksite leaders (whether elected, appointed, or volunteers) who take responsibility for representing and furthering the goals of the union with their co-workers. Leaders are understood to exist in relation to their followers, and to exist in an organizational context, not a vacuum. Of course, a person's life experience of class, culture, race, and other important identities in our society will affect his or her understanding of leadership and how it is exercised. For example, growing up in a Catholic Church tradition, where leadership and organization are both highly hierarchical, clearly is different from the experience of growing up in a southern black Baptist church tradition, where the local lay leadership often organizes the community's religious practice.

Local Union Leadership Roles

Local Union Presidents

An unpublished study of California union locals conducted by Marshall Ganz and Scott Washburn in 1985 showed that the 1.8 million union and association members employed 7,000 full-time staff and officers. [10] Approximately one-third were full-time local officers, another third of these were business agents or paid staff representatives (who constitute another type of local union leadership role), and about one-third were clerical and administrative staff. It is not clear how representative these figures are because they probably over-represent public and service sector workers compared to a national survey. However, they are the best data available. On this basis, one can hypothesize that for the 16.6 million union members in the United States, there are approximately 21,645 full-time local officers and 21,645 business agents or union representatives. This amounts to one paid officer or non-clerical staff member for each 386 members, an estimate that roughly agrees with the formulas for staffing used by many unions. [11]

Stewards

Stewards tend to have significant longevity on the job and as stewards. The average length of work experience was 17 years for the women and 21 years for the men in one study by sociologist Pam Roby, and their average length of steward experience was just a few years less. [15] This study found that 65 percent of male and 70 percent of female union activists were over 45 years of age, suggesting that people become active on the job early in their careers and stay active for a long time.

Career Tracks For Union Leaders

Local Union Leadership Experience

Some of today's union leaders have combined several of these routes to the top. For example, John Sweeney, who was president of the SEIU at the time he was elected President of the AFL-CIO, joined SEIU Local 365 as a cemetery laborer while working his way through college. His first job for the SEIU was as Local 32-B's contract director after finishing school and working as a staff member for the ILGWU. [20] As another example, Richard Trumka, who was president of the United Mine Workers (UMW) prior to being elected Secretary-Treasurer of the AFL-CIO, was raised in a mineworking family. After completing law school and working in the coal mines, he was elected president of the UMW in 1982 on an opposition slate against the incumbent Sam Church. [21] As a final example, Bob Wages, president of the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Union (OCAW), is a third-generation oil worker who was elected president of his local at age 19, but went to college and law school at night while working full-time. His first job as a lawyer was with the union. He later advanced to chief counsel, then to assistant to the president, and finally was elected president of OCAW in the fall of 1991 at the age of 42. [22]

Female and Minority Union Leaders

Prior to October 25th, the AFL-CIO Executive Council had only three female members, two of whom are women of color, and two African-American men. [23] Importantly, action taken at the AFL-CIO Convention in October enlarged the Executive Council from 35 members to 53 members. Ten of the 18 new seats on the Council were set aside for women and minorities.

While Bureau of Labor Statistics data from 1980 suggest that women held 12 percent of all national governing board seats, a 1980 CLUW report, a 1985 update focused on the 15 unions representing 80 percent of women, and my own research in 1990-92 have shown that the numbers of elected national union leaders who are women have increased barely at all. Women have made limited progress on the appointed and staff levels, and at local levels. But there are still relatively few women national officers. [24]

Minorities have also made little headway, with women of color the most under-represented. Although increasing numbers of men and women of color hold regional and state offices, their paths to top leadership roles are as yet unclear. For example, Henry Nicholas, a national officer of AFSCME, had served as president of the National Union of Hospital and Healthcare Employees until part of his union merged with AFSCME, part voted to join the SEIU, and part, notably District 1199, became an independent union. Dennis Rivera is the current president of New York City's District 1199, and is a prominent Puerto Rican leader.

Today, many European immigrant groups are integrated into American society and the vastly inclusive middle class. However, the new immigrant groups from southeast Asia and from Central and South America remain largely unorganized. It is important for the labor movement to determine why so few of these immigrants work with union representation. Some unions (ILGWU, ACTWU, CWA, SEIU, District 1199, and a few others) have made concerted efforts to organize recent Latino, Caribbean, and Asian immigrants. Although these efforts have not been successful on a large scale, New York City and Los Angeles are areas in which immigrants have won leadership positions. In New York City, immigrant leaders can still be found, particularly in the service and health care industries, where strong local and regional leaders from Puerto Rico and the West Indies have emerged along with African-Americans. In Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego, Chicanos and Mexican Americans have been elected local leaders in the Hotel and Restaurant Employees Union (HERE) and the SEIU, among other unions, and there is at least one immigrant leader of a Carpenters' district level. An advocacy group for Asian-Pacific Americans in labor has formed at the national and local levels with AFL-CIO support. However, there is no massive organizing drive under way for the new immigrants, the AFL-CIO's innovative Los Angeles-based California Immigrant Workers' Association (CIWA) project notwithstanding. This issue must be addressed by those unions that hope to grow in the future by appealing to immigrant workers.

Political Backgrounds

At the same time, ideologically motivated participants in the labor movement have decreased. [26] Although there is still a critical, self-defined "left" presence in the labor movement [represented, for example, by Labor Notes writers and activists, New Directions (UAW) and Teamsters for a Democratic Union (TDU) activists, and the Association for Union Democracy (AUD)] it is relatively small and struggling, especially within industrial unions. There is less red-baiting in unions now than there was ten years ago, and less reason for it because few communists are left to attack.

During the 1960s, young left-liberal activists ceased viewing labor as a social change movement. George Meany's support of the Vietnam war, and the triumph of business unionism generally, caused many liberals to instead view labor as a conservative force. According to Donald Ephelin,

When I joined the UAW in 1948, Walter Reuther talked about making a better world not just for our members, but for poor people, for kids, for people around the world. It was like joining a crusade. When I think of a twenty-year old kid now, I wonder why they would want to join the labor movement unless they had some problem on the job. There's no sense of social vision. [27]

And Marshall Ganz recalls that young people and civil rights organizers joined the Farm Workers Union in the 1960s and 1970s because "they thought it wasn't a union like other unions—and it wasn't." [28]

Many "left-liberals" have become active in the growing unions of the service and public sectors, where there appears to be more willingness both to hire from the outside and to incorporate new ideas. In addition, social service unions that represent teachers, healthcare providers, and welfare and social workers provide a natural base for rank-and-file people whose caring and concern about social issues translate naturally into their interest in union leadership. These activists come from both working-class and middle-class backgrounds, and their unions represent both low paid and professional workers. Examples are the SEIU, AFSCME, District 1199, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), and the American Association of University Professors (AAUP).

The Political Context of Union Leadership

Unions also must act as participatory, voluntary associations that depend on the active involvement of their members. At the same time, however, unions must be disciplined organizations with a unified strategy and tactics for long-term battles with powerful employers. This tension suggests why loyalty is valued as highly as competence in many unions, particularly among long-term staff and leaders. But it poses real challenges for union leaders.

Local Leaders

Quite often, local leaders previously have served as paid staff members, especially in large locals. The patterns of service differ, quite naturally, in various kinds of unions. In the building trades, it is common for full-time "business managers" to be elected, and frequently candidates for this position are individuals who previously have served as uncompensated officers. In industrial unions, local presidents are often elected at the shop or plant level, usually after serving as stewards or members of bargaining or grievance committees. In many service and public-sector unions, local union presidents are elected from the rank-and-file, but there is frequently a professional staff member, perhaps an executive director, who directs the day-to-day operations. [30] This is typical of social service worker unions and professional unions like the National Education Association's state-wide affiliates. Some such unions have combined these roles by creating an elected president or elected "executive secretary" or "executive director," with this person frequently coming from a staff position.

Because the appointed staff often serve as de facto leaders at the worksite and frequently disseminate the union's message to most of its members, they may be perceived as a political threat by some elected leaders. Consequently, a few unions prohibit their staffs from maintaining an active union membership in the local for which they are working to prevent the possibility of running against the current leader. However, this policy is rare among unions that recruit staff from within because such a prohibition would, in effect, make renunciation of membership the price of a staff job. More commonly, local unions permit the staff to maintain membership and expect that on occasion there will be challenges. Some unions simply rely on staff loyalty to ensure that there will not be divisive challenges to power.

In cases where the union representatives also serve on the elected executive board, the chief local union leader has considerably less control over their work performance than he or she would if they were appointed. This can create serious tensions among leaders, because the staff typically have more membership contact than the chief union leader. This explains why loyalty and knowing the rules of the game are highly valued among union staff, and why union staff sometimes are hired based on their willingness to support the existing leadership.

Stages of a Union Leader's Development

There are five stages of a union leader's development. My research suggests that the earliest stages are most important in terms of shaping a new leader's ideas of what the organization values and expects from its leaders. A leader may go through these stages over a short time or throughout a lifetime of work. In addition, sometimes the cycle is repeated, as when going from a worksite leader to a staff or full-time elected leader, or from a local to a national leader. Rarely are these stages consciously addressed either by the leader going through them or by the other leaders and staff who are responsible for organizing the newer leader's experience. There are important exceptions, however. Of course, generation, class, and ethnic or racial background have a critical impact on a leader's experience at each of these stages. Nonetheless, each leader will encounter these stages of leadership at some time, and her or his development as a leader will be profoundly influenced by the union's responses at each stage.

For most, it is difficult to disentangle the five stages. They are not discrete steps in the career development of union leaders, and each represents a complex interaction between informal and formal learning experiences. For example, my research suggests that people's leadership style, values, and beliefs are shaped early, especially by the circumstances of their recruitment into leadership and by their initial experience in the union. It is difficult, though not impossible, to reverse those early experiences if they are negative.

Stage One: Entry into Leadership

My father, he was an organizer of bakery drivers in the '30s and organizer and later chairman of the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen in the '40s through retirement in 1973. I helped him with his filing and typing from the age of l2.

The women that organized our local encouraged me. But my mother and her ongoing activism in human rights, raised me to get involved.

After family influences often came teachers. For female leaders, teachers sometimes presented an alternate role model. Nancy Mills, former executive director of SEIU Local 285, says:

Social justice was a family legacy—to make the world a better place for humanity was a privilege and an obligation. . . but as I watch my daughter grow up I realize how important teachers are and what an influence they can have. Miss M. . . took an interest in me and encouraged me... She encouraged my activism and sharpness. . . Miss T. . . invited us to her home. . . She showed me that I could do things differently, and encouraged my more creative and quieter side. Both were significant, because they showed that women could do things differently. They were the antithesis of my mother in some ways. They were independent unconventional women. [31]

Most future leaders are recruited by a fellow worker, union leader, or union staff member to take on the role of a shop steward or workplace leader. The female leaders I surveyed were motivated to seek leadership positions by one or more individuals (e.g., union officials or staff) who had encouraged them, taught them, or pushed them to take a leadership role. For most men and women, having a mentor clearly made a difference. This and other research suggest that the most common and effective mode of leadership development is encouragement and recruitment by current union leaders. [32]

Aside from an individual who recruited them, leaders seemed to have been mobilized into leadership by an organizational and personal experience in which injustice was challenged. Female leaders were particularly likely to describe seeing terrible conditions that inspired them to become involved because of their desire to help others. On many occasions they were "reluctant leaders," i.e., the only ones who were willing to assume the responsibility. Sandy Felder, the president of SEIU Local 509, is perhaps a typical example. She went to a worksite meeting called for her social workers' local and found that no one else was there. The union representative talked with her about the problems and asked her to bring some people to the next meeting. She did, and they elected her steward. Fifteen years later, she became president of the local union.

Women were more likely than men to become leaders in order to help others rather than satisfy their own ambitions for a position of influence. For example, having to endure poor working conditions with co-workers, or being exposed to others' dissatisfaction with the union, made women want to become active. This was also true of men, although male leaders were more willing to admit to wanting to win political office. For example, Edward Fire, now the secretary-treasurer of the IUE, described his first run for local president: "Once I got a taste of being vice-president, and functioning as president occasionally when he was out of town, I knew I wanted to become president." [33]

Seeing bad conditions was not usually enough to motivate people to take on leadership roles, however. It was more important to have a successful experience in which the union was able to improve working conditions (e.g., through access to training, negotiation of better job security, or resistance to insensitive managers). Finally, organizing campaigns or strikes served to bring many into leadership.

Recruitment and Hiring into Union Staff Roles. Entry into union staff jobs is the critical next step to leadership for experienced rank-and-file activists. Non-elected staff jobs are filled either by hiring from within the union (the most common method) or from the outside. In my experience, the people hired often are not representative of the membership because they are selected for continuity, not change. Both individuals and unions may be required to devote extra efforts if women and minorities are to gain the skills and experience needed to qualify for a staff position (although it is not clear they are less qualified than currently hired candidates), as well as to gain access to and credibility for those jobs.

Extra effort may take the form of apprenticeship or intern programs within a union, or extensive volunteering by the individual. The HUCTW encourages activists, for example, to use vacation days to spend a week with the union organizer in their area to get an idea of what the union is doing. Even if they don't apply for jobs, a larger purpose is accomplished: increased commitment to and understanding of the union's role. Among its several training courses, the AFL-CIO Organizing Institute now offers programs for people who want to become part of the labor movement through organizing, and these programs serve to identify a group of diverse people who are potential staff organizers. About half are from currently unionized groups, and about half are students or recent graduates. Because of targeted recruitment, a majority of the trainees are women and persons of color. [34]

Another way to increase the entry to staff jobs is to help people move through issue training and specialization, for instance in health and safety. Many unions have expanded their health and safety programs recently, and do a good job of training activists on particular issues. The UFCW, ACTWU, AFT, HERE, IUE, UK, AFSCME, and SEIU, among other unions, employ lost time organizers for organizing campaigns as another way of introducing people to staff work. This means the union pays the lost wages of a union member who takes a short leave of absence to work for the union. It provides valuable experience and connections to the organizer, and valuable support to the organizing drive. It also allows the union to train and test new staff, some of whom are retained for more permanent jobs. Importantly, the practice does recruit talented new staff from the rank-and-file, many of whom resemble their co-workers in terms of race and gender. [35]

Finally, where specialized training is needed before hiring, unions can sponsor scholarships to schools or other training programs for their activists. The Harvard Trade Union Program trains 35 rank-and-file activists and staff each year with an exceptional program of economic, political, historical, and organizing classes. Many unions now offer scholarships to University and College Education Association (UCLEA)-AFL-CIO schools for working women. Of course, unions must ensure that they are not discriminating in their hiring and training practices. For instance, apprenticeship-based promotion patterns may have a discriminatory effect by mirroring employer discrimination.

Early life experiences had a strong influence in shaping leaders' values and orientation to labor. Regardless of life experience, people entered union leadership roles in several ways. Some wanted to be leaders, some wanted to act on their values and beliefs, and some wanted to help others. In these cases, the union proved to be a good forum. Some were impressed by collective experiences at union events. And many of the leaders were urged, pushed, or pulled into leadership roles by another person, usually someone close to them who already held a leadership role in the union.

Stage Two: Orientation to the Union

Orientation expresses the values and vision of the union, without which it is difficult to build a shared sense of community, identity, and common goals. Members and leaders should receive orientation soon after their first exposure to the union. Some locals hold stewards' training annually that serves as their orientation—but many unintended impressions may already be internalized if a steward waits nearly a year for this program.

Today, high-quality videos and brochures can be produced with relative ease. These should provide a sense of the union's history and a description of the present membership and goals of the union. The future vision of the union—where it is going—is especially important in these days of union defeats and poor public image. It is important that orientation materials emphasize the past and current contributions of women and people of color. For new leaders, effective orientation materials welcome them and focus on the importance of their role in the local. An orientation period, whether for new leaders or new staff, ideally should be designed so that it includes some mentoring and/or a networking component. Labor history deserves inclusion. Professor James Green of the University of Massachusetts has developed an excellent history of the United Mineworkers Union that emphasizes the values of the current leaders and their continuity with the past. [36]

There are logical times in a union's contract cycle to conduct new leader orientations—for example, after a new contract is negotiated, when new leaders are elected or appointed, or when there is a major program or structural initiative emerging from a local, central body, or national office. Orientation should include an acknowledgment of leaders' family and other outside commitments. The person conducting the orientation can express support for leaders' multiple responsibilities and ask how the union can help them to be active. Given the unequal division of household labor in most homes, female leaders especially could benefit from such an offer of assistance. [37] Just raising the issue acknowledges the stress that union, family, and job responsibilities create for working parents, and the ensuing discussion might provide the union with some good ideas.

Orientation for new union staff leaders is just as important. Very often there is no formal orientation program for staff, or they are sent to a training program months after arriving on the job. The first days and weeks on any job can feel like a series of tests in a complex initiation rite. With their heavy focus on seniority and "paying your dues," unions must be especially cautious to avoid isolating their newly hired staffs. Such neglect occurs less often if a mentor or supporter has helped bring the new person on board, but this is true less often for women and minority staff than for white male staff. In dealing with women and minorities, union leaders must be especially sensitive to cultural differences. As a positive contribution, orientation can promote teamwork, feedback, egalitarian attitudes, and a mentoring system. The culture of the union and the extent to which it values its "people" resources are evident from the earliest days on staff.

A number of unions have developed special programs that could serve as models for staff orientation. At SEIU in 1988, the staff developed a new employee orientation notebook to cover both staff policies and procedures, and to introduce the people, leaders, and stories of the union. A supervisor and a lead staff worker were asked to review the notebook with new staff, and the evaluation has been generally positive. [38] Putting the extensive materials and notebook together made people realize how much the long-term staff had absorbed of the culture and stories of the union, and how much they had to share with a newcomer. The UAW for years sent new staff for two weeks to Solidarity House, the headquarters in Detroit. Training taught them how to dress, think, and act like UAW representatives. Finally, District 1199 in New York negotiated a new member orientation period that is conducted by retirees and emphasizes the history of the union. This superb idea could be expanded to orient new leaders as well.

Stage Three: Training

Training for union leaders is very uneven. Some kinds of training, like basic steward training and grievance and arbitration training, seem to be well developed, sometimes even with sharing of materials between unions. How often training classes are given and how effective they are in equipping leaders with basic skills in contract administration are issues that have not been well studied, although in all likelihood there is substantial variability in effectiveness. But training for new organizing, for top leadership responsibilities, for managing internal conflicts, and for developing strategy for struggles with employers is relatively rare.

It is important to distinguish formal training from the day-to day, informal, experiential learning that occurs from the time that members take on their first leadership role. A good part of this informal learning is role modeling—most local leaders learn from leaders in positions above them. For example, most stewards model themselves on the union rep's way of doing things, and most union reps model themselves on the local leader's style. Few of these lessons have been formalized.

The Significance of Union Education Programs. A union education program reveals a great deal about the organization's important values and beliefs. For example, the ideological orientation of UAW leaders values labor education in its own right and as a principal function of the union, as well as a way to create a strong union culture and build a political base. Thus, in 1970 the UAW built Black Lake, a labor education center in Northern Michigan for union members and their families. The union holds extensive training sessions there for staff and local, regional, and national officers. The UAW allocates substantial resources to education and the union has bargained for training funds as well. The jointly administered training funds enable local union leaders to spend four weeks in the PEL program in order to learn about the industry and their roles as union leaders. According to Donald Ephelin,

I found myself trying to explain to 400 or 500 local union leaders at the end of bargaining what we had done and why it was good for them, after we were buried in data about the company, the economy, and the future. I wanted them to learn about all these things for themselves, so they could make better judgments on the contract being pro posed and on the future of the industry. [39]

Thus, UAW leaders found that their goals of building a strong, unified culture and ensuring political support could be met through conscious, planned leadership development. At the same time, the training provided a testing ground for new leaders and staff who gained competence and understanding of the union and the industry.

Marshall Ganz recalls trying to put together training programs for the UFWA job reps when the union had just won first contracts. Planning involved identifying the value system of the union and incorporating it into the training program.

I got training materials from all the other unions, and they were all about processing grievances. We wanted our stewards to do more. The) had a series of leadership responsibilities, including promoting the programs, recruiting other leaders, organizing the unorganized, and so forth. Of course it included processing grievances. But the) also had broader union-wide responsibilities, such as to help with political action. We did not want to define the essential business of the union as defensive—reacting against company violations of the contract. We did want to define the positive role of the union in making a better world, including all these aspects. [40]

Finally, an alternate and less frequently practiced approach to steward education is built around the concept of the steward as organizer, or "leader of leaders," at the worksite In this training, stewards spend time discussing the values of the union and their role in strengthening the union by taking initiative on the job. Grievances are discussed, but with the goal of keeping management honest rather than building the union around individual problems. One example is the HUCTW training for its activists that emphasizes problem-solving and organizing skills. One activist who was trained by HUCTW described her ability to serve as a problem solver:

I learned that I had been making assumptions when I should have been asking questions. I needed to get more information. I didn't need to answer it alone. No one person has the absolute correct answer. Afterwards, I worked differently. I asked people what they thought, and I understood they had different perspectives . . I had more confidence to take an active role in the process, exploring what happened . . I learned that leaders offer ideas, not direction. [41]

Formal Training Programs. A variety of formal programs provides skills training that is useful for union leaders at all levels. Individual unionists in major cities may take advantage of university labor education programs that provide adult education, evening classes, and even college degree credit. Two excellent programs are at Wayne State University in Detroit and the University of Massachusetts. Regional headquarters of unions can hold regional training sessions for union staff and officers, and often the national union holds national or regional staff training as well. Many of these sessions are conducted at the George Meany Center for Labor Studies, which also offers a wide variety of its own union skill-building classes and a college degree program to members of all AFL-CIO unions.

Additional sources of training purport to develop skills that are of value to union leaders. The American Arbitration Association offers skills training, but not in leadership. The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service has provided joint training for union leaders and managers. There is also the ten-week, high-quality Harvard Trade Union Program. With respect to organizing skills, the community organizing tactics of the Midwest Academy in Chicago and the Industrial Areas Foundation training classes have proved very valuable to some. Finally, independent consultants and labor educators can be helpful, although they are usually employed by very large locals or by national unions themselves.

The challenge for such multi-union and national programs is to integrate the formal skills training they offer into the daily experiences of the trainees, thereby creating a much more powerful learning experience. Some are seeking ways to do this. For example, the Meany Center is considering a pilot "leadership certificate" program that will combine a series of week-long classroom training sessions spread out over several years with a mentoring and field experience component for enrolled leaders. One difficulty of integrating training with field experience from outside the union, or even from outside the local, is that truly applying what has been learned in the classroom may cause trainees to question and possibly challenge the way local unions are run. Some of these challenges may not be well received by incumbent leaders and staff of the local.

Training Local Union Leaders. Local leaders receive the least formal and informal training among all types of union leaders. There is a real need for courses that teach local union administration. Far too often, it seems, the retiring/defeated local union leader simply walks away and leaves the new leader without guidance on administrative matters until assistance arrives from the district/national office.

Leadership development and training at the worksite are incredibly demanding. They require a major time commitment on the part of the local staff and leadership, and a never-ending effort to find and develop worksite leaders. This means more than sponsoring an annual steward training class, which most unions do. That class is vitally important, for it conveys the messages and skills the union wants the stewards to have. But many stewards are appointed or elected in-between these classes, and many others are at a more advanced level than "one class fits all" can accommodate. In addition, stewards require the same kind of ongoing "guided experience" that staff need—i.e., a key role in the union, access to the tools needed to succeed, and feedback on their performance.

Most union education departments have developed specific materials for their members and industries. Yet steward training in most locals is not very exciting and not very well developed. Done well, training gives confidence as well as skills, and it can help change attitudes as well as provide knowledge. Training is viewed not simply as an "event," but as an ongoing process that requires continual time and effort.

International union offices publish materials on the duty of a steward. The stimulus for this training is, in part, findings of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that stewards are official representatives of the union, and that the union can be held fiscally responsible for any breach of duty of fair representation committed by a steward. Thus unions, if only to protect themselves from lawsuits, are motivated to make certain that stewards know what is in the contract, can file grievances in a timely manner, provide help whenever a member is legally entitled to representation, and know when to consult a paid staff representative, who is expected to know more and to represent the union on a professional level.

Many unions recognize the critical nature of worksite leadership because the steward is the most immediate symbol of the union to most members, and represents the union's best chance to involve and communicate with members who rarely attend regular meetings. Therefore, unions have established a variety of steward training programs and often conduct steward recognition and awards ceremonies. The unions of the future must invest in new, challenging, and time-consuming steward and worksite leader training programs.

Training for Female Leaders. All women, and especially minority women, request training programs more often than men. [42] Some speculate that because women have less self-confidence, they need more reinforcement and certainty before taking up new tasks. Deborah Tannen finds that women are more accustomed to asking for help than men, who tend to see such requests as a sign of weakness. [43] Unions will have a hard time developing female and minority leadership if they are not open to developing all leaders. If the local and its leaders have a closed culture and a "service" rather than "empowerment" approach to handling worksite problems, they will be unlikely to identify, recruit, train, and sustain female leaders.

Excellent multi-union efforts are held in various states and regions. The most notable is the joint UCLEA and AFL-CIO summer school series for union women. These week-long training programs are organized around the needs of workplace leaders and are held once a year in each of four regions. The summer schools have trained more than 4,500 women in the 15-plus years since their founding. They generate tremendous energy, confidence, networking, and support for rank-and-file leaders, particularly those from unions where women and minority leaders are rare.

Most women come to the schools as first-time participants, and minority women make up one-third to one-half of the participants. Each school carefully evaluates its classes and plenary sessions, thereby compiling records that are useful for studying women's participation in their unions. Ninety percent of the participants are sponsored by a local or a national union. Although this training can only accomplish limited skills enhancement (it only lasts a week and does not provide much follow-up), these schools are making a great contribution to women's leadership development and could be expanded dramatically.

In 1986, a group of creative and dedicated female unionists and labor educators crafted a coalition with the Massachusetts AFL-CIO to create an annual weekend training and leadership development program called Women's Institute for Leadership Development (WILD). Now in its eighth year, WILD has a full-time staff director and a multicultural board of directors. [44] WILD's leaders seek ways to carry on training during the year with a more intense focus on some local unions that want greater in-depth leadership training work. Both the UCLEA and WILD programs offer training opportunities for leaders that ensure team teaching and diverse leadership roles so that training knowledge can be shared.

Other formal training programs, both those within individual unions and those sponsored by university and the Federation training centers, focus on the development of minority leadership, particularly for African-American men and women. The lessons of WILD and UCLEA, as well as the University of Michigan program for female and minority trade unionists, have demonstrated that developing and implementing these programs requires a tremendous commitment of time, effort, and attention from the trainers and leaders. And although the planning and leading of such programs develops leadership skills and support networks among more experienced unionists, the cost in time and energy often goes unrecognized by the participating union or university.

In sum, unless one has a culture in which education and training are prized, admired, and respected as activities at the core of the union's work, education will often be unrecognized, unrewarded, and undervalued. Learning will occur whether or not it is planned, but it may not be in accord with union goals and values. Even a union like the SEIU had only two full-time national education staff in 1989, and few locals felt they could afford their own trainers. Changing the culture will be difficult unless the value of the training is clear.

Stage Four: Work Experience and Advancement The most common union approach to mastering a union role is to learn by doing, without much help or encouragement from anyone, and without formal training. While many of today's top labor leaders acquired their leadership skills this way, it is certainly the hardest way to learn. It is particularly difficult for those without a mentor or a support network.

The best training consists of experiential learning, or guided work experience that incorporates diverse responsibilities to expand the leader's capacities. Trainees should be exposed to a variety of leadership styles so that the new leader does not think that there is only one way to do things. Each person needs to see leaders she or he can imagine becoming. The most powerful learning comes from real struggle and from success. But union leaders must also learn from failure, and imagine better ways to do things. Formal training is most helpful if it is tied to a real work assignment, if it is prepared for and followed up, and if it incorporates the experience of those being trained. Good supervision is essential. Unions must do more to train trainers.

Sometimes a crisis provides an unexpected opportunity for training. A strike or an organizing drive that requires intensive energy and commitment can provide new leaders with an opportunity to contribute a vitally needed service and to get immediate recognition and feedback for doing so. Eliseo Medina, an SEIU leader in San Diego, describes leadership development in his locals as a continuous process arising from the work of the union, namely organizing, bargaining, and monitoring and administering the contract. For each activity, new talent and skills are acquired. [45]

In existing units, often a new "campaign" is needed—whether around a contract issue, a bargaining unit concern, health and safety, or something else—if the membership is to be activated and leadership experience is to be provided. AFSCME Local President Donnene Williams said of HUCTW,

It's easy to get involved here. If you want to do more, you can. If you want to do a little, you can. If you want to do a lot over a short time, you can. If you want to do a little over a long time, you can. We have something for everyone. [46]

Sometimes members do not realize they are being trained. According to HUCTW organizer Kris Rondeau,

I've learned to do some formal training at first, partly because people expect the organization to give them some thing. They don't see the meetings one-on-one as training. . . For me, leadership development and training is an intensely personal experience between the teacher and the learner, where the learner also teaches. [47]

Rondeau describes a process of meeting with each staff organizer and their leaders, to talk about their recent experiences and set the next goals they want to reach. Then they arrange experiences so they can get those skills and meet those goals. This is what I call guided experience.

An Apprenticeship Model. Formal and informal training should be combined with on-the-job experience that provides appropriate and increasing challenges for the developing leader. This approach to training may be viewed in the context of a great labor tradition—the apprenticeship program. Harvard education professor Howard Gardner points out that learning is heavily "contextualized" in apprenticeships; that is, the reasons for each learning activity are clear and the product is important. Also, the learner has the opportunity to work with a master, both to create personal bonds and to observe someone who excels at work. There are clearly defined steps to competency and interim steps of accomplishment. The goals are clear because real work is involved and produced. This in itself creates an exciting and motivating environment. Peers and others of varying levels of mastery can help, and the apprentices can instruct each other. [48] Gardner's most compelling argument is that apprenticeship provides the best kind of learning for certain complex skills. Extremely diverse responsibilities are involved in union leadership, including administrative, entrepreneurial, financial, participatory, legal, and political. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to capture all of these skills in a formal training program. But with close supervision and immediate feedback, and with an understanding that it takes years to develop leadership skills at a highly sophisticated level, the apprenticeship model is very powerful and attractive. In addition, union leaders can benefit from a commitment to lifelong, continuous learning.

The apprenticeship model can serve at many levels—from steward to local president to staff to regional officer. The problems of application are most acute at the top of organizations, where apprenticeships are seldom served for what appears to the person to be the right length of time and in the right atmosphere. [49] Also, it is rare for anyone in the labor movement to have extensive experience with contemporary management practices or supervisory skills. This problem has received more attention in recent years at meetings of chiefs of staff of major unions during discussions of administrative and managerial issues including training, strategic planning, and budget decisions. The SEIU has set up a special department called Local Union Services to work with high-level local officers on administrative issues.

Learning About Union Politics. Ideally, each staff member should have a staff development plan. This concept is more difficult to implement with elected leaders, who are sometimes reluctant to request development or training for fear of exhibiting weakness or vulnerability. A key lesson of any work experience is learning about union politics. Lois Gray quotes the leaders she interviewed as saying that "women lack the political know-how and stick-to-it-iveness required to line up support for themselves and other female candidates." [50] Many union women say they don't like politics. One senior union staff member says: "I tell them they're in the wrong place. Unions are political institutions."

Politics is not all a matter of skill. The playing field is not the same level for everyone. Teamsters leader Clara Day described some of the obstacles:

I think what makes the most difference is that networking with the leadership of any job, who most times are male and white. There is the stopping by the bars, or the stop ping by the card game, and they get to know these people, or they get to feel responsible for the ones they stop out with or the ones they drink with or play cards with. And I guess it's deliberate, but not necessarily, working for the friends. [51]

Future union leaders will need to learn how to win elections if they are to be successful. One issue that has not been addressed systematically by unions is how to provide leaders with the skills and support to learn the political rules of the game. Many learn through informal routes.

Union and Family Commitments. An important issue in work experience and advancement is integrating family commitments with job and union commitments. Most female activists are also mothers, but sociologist Pam Roby's study showed that only 25 percent of female stewards in her sample lived with a partner and children, while 66 percent of male stewards did. In other words, the presence of a partner or children reduces women's level of participation. Roby also found that women handled increased union responsibility by cutting back on their sleep or housework, while men usually cut back on recreation (Knights of Columbus or watching TV, for example). [52]

In the absence of a domestic revolution that produces greater sharing of family responsibilities between partners, unions have to provide concrete support for female leaders. The efforts to provide child care at meetings and conferences, to schedule meetings at times that do not interfere with family activities (e.g., during working or lunch hours), to make union activities more family-oriented, and to win more paid release time are all important endeavors. These efforts have not resolved all of the problems for women, but they can help tremendously. Nonetheless, given the amount of volunteer work members do for the union and other community organizations, it is clear that time in itself is not the major reason why women have not reached higher leadership positions. [53]

In sum, getting experience in diverse aspects of union work is very important. It is also important for new leaders to become more visible by assuming broader leadership roles in the labor community or in the community at large. Taking responsibility for leading a meaningful activity, whether an organizing drive, contract campaign, strike, or political campaign, also is essential to developing confidence, skill, and a positive reputation. This in turn can lead to other opportunities. Seeking and performing management roles within the union, however contradictory it may seem, teaches one how to lead staff. Of course, these leadership opportunities are more likely to occur in growing unions than in shrinking ones.

Nearly every leader taking on a major new responsibility feels unprepared, often for good reason. This is especially true of national leadership roles. Changing the culture that requires leaders to appear invulnerable and infallible is an important step. Simply serving as a local union officer or staff person may not provide sufficient training to lead a national union. It is hard for top union leaders to ask for help because they are supposed to know how to lead and to hide any weakness. In fact, by the time they are president, they have usually conducted training for others over a period of years, even if they have had no training themselves. This brings us to the last stage of leadership development, "passing it on."

Stage Five: Passing It On

Once in a leadership role, many leaders consciously strive to train and develop other leaders. When asked what they were currently doing to contribute to the training and development of new leaders, the 80 leaders I surveyed gave a variety of responses. Many described engaging in formal training of leadership skills with the committee members and local members who were their constituents. One UAW Vice President summarized the excitement of helping others succeed:

Educational conferences—educating—recruiting—watching and listening and being there to show them to the right door—the biggest thrill is watching that door open and they walk through it. Yes!

Leaders can do many concrete things to nurture and develop less experienced leaders. A Steelworker described delegating responsibilities so that new leaders could prove to themselves that they could do the job. The connection with organizing re-emerged when a UFCW rep said that he "formed volunteer organizing committees" to develop leaders. One AFT leader said that she had established a union master's degree program for local members in educational leadership that included developing the skills required to be a worksite leader. Another had established an education scholarship for members. Some leaders talked about being mentors to less experienced members, while several leaders spoke of giving up their positions in the union so that others could assume leadership roles.

A valuable form of "passing it on" is to participate in and then to lead a strategic planning process. In my conversations with Michael Maccoby, he described the AFT's Futures Committee as a place where union leaders from around the country and from many different divisions were challenged to think through the overall goals of the union in light of the situation in schools, universities, public institutions, and healthcare facilities, and from the perspective of a diverse membership. They learned to evaluate the threats and opportunities present in the union's environment, and to estimate objectively their strengths and weaknesses. In the process, participants were forced to articulate the values and vision of their union, and to take ownership of its future. When this experience is repeated at regional and local levels, the skills to conduct the planning are learned by the leaders themselves, and the membership around the country is strengthened by coming to support a common mission and goals statement.

While "passing on" their leadership skills, union leaders often encounter problems that are due to a lack of resources, time, and guidance from leaders above them. When asked what types of support they needed to continue their own leadership development activities, my respondents made many emphatic requests for more training for themselves, particularly in planning, communication, motivating people, time management, and interpersonal relations. Some listed problems with reading, or with resistance from other union leaders. A few wanted bargaining and legal skills, and public speaking and public relations were high on their lists. And some admitted to needing more confidence and emotional support, which are not directly provided by training classes, but can be part of an overall leadership development program. Almost no one thought he or she needed training in organizing, in the values and vision of the labor movement, or in the problems of the current economy and his or her industry. At every stage and level of leadership, unionists can help those a little less far along in their development. A culture of "continuous learning" will support leadership development at all levels.

For current union leaders to create and support programs for new leadership development at a time when they have extremely pressing demands on them will be a difficult and courageous choice. It often means challenging custom and practice. Yet leaders at every level can contribute to revitalizing their unions and organizing new members. These activities go hand-in-hand. Raising the priority for organizing new immigrants, service workers, and professionals alongside unorganized white-collar and blue-collar workers will bring unions closer to realizing their vision and values, and simultaneously generate new leaders for the future. Innovation, creativity, and boldness on the part of current leaders can bring to life new union cultures and programs for leadership development.

Conclusions

The labor movement should be one of the most exciting places for idealistic people of all ages to invest their energies for progressive social change. The movement has a solid membership, a significant resource base, a long and proud history of championing workers' rights, and many committed, talented leaders and members. For each union leader interviewed for this study, I have names of six or seven others who were considered exemplary by their members or fellow unionists. Today, however, an air of hopelessness, pessimism, and defensiveness pervades many unions, whose members and leaders are suffering from the recession and the loss of dreams and benefits built over many years. The only way out of this despair is to strive for a vision of hope that reflects labor's highest values, to organize new members who desperately need representation and collective voice, and to welcome and support the new leaders that new organizing drives will produce

Endnotes

a. This paper is based upon Discussion Paper 92-05 of the Center for Science and International Affairs at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. The research on which this paper is based was supported by the Bunting Institute of Radcliffe College and a Harman Fellowship at the Center for Science and International Affairs, Kennedy School of Government, both at Harvard University. The George Meany Center for Labor Studies and the Coalition for Labor Union Women also provided research opportunities. The author is grateful to Rose Batt, Harvey Brooks, Marshall Ganz, Charles Hecksher, Thomas Kochan, Michael Maccoby, Hal Stack, and Ken Young for comments and suggestions.

1. I have confined my remarks to local leadership roles to be consistent with the focus of the other papers in this volume. Readers interested in a broader analysis of union leadership positions, including national union leadership roles, should consult my Discussion Paper cited in footnote a.

2. Michael Maccoby, The Leader (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1981). See especially Chapter 10, pp. 219-237 as well as the individuals' profiles.

3. Judy Rosener, "Ways Women Lead," Harvard Business Review, November-December 1990, pp. 119-125, and the many responses in the following issue.

4. Cletus Daniel, "Cesar Chavez and the Unionization of California Farm Workers," in Melvyn Dubofsky and Warren Van Tine (eds.), Labor Leaders in America (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1987), p. 361.

5. James McGregor Burns, Leadership, (New York: Harper, 1976).

6. Burns, p. 20.

7. See Jean Baker Miller, A New Psychology of Women (Boston: Beacon Press, 1986), and also Judith V. Jordan, et al., Women's Growth in Connection: Writings From the Stone Center (New York: The Guilford Press, 1991),especially Chapters I and 11.

8. From the "New Employee Packet" provided by HUCTW staff December, 1991.

9. Philip L. Quaglieri, America's Labor Leaders (Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1989), p. 16.

10. Marshall Ganz and Scott Washburn, "Union Leadership Project." 1985. unpublished paper in the author's possession.

11. In some unions the staff are also elected members of the local leadership, but in many unions they are appointed. Both situations are represented in these estimates. In SEIU locals, we estimated that one full-time staff member could be supported for every 500 members, but this was in low-dues local unions. In higher-dues unions, the ratio could be more like one per 400. However, this is a complex equation that must realistically include per capita taxes, negotiation expenses, communications. and many other items, and my figures represent a rough estimate at best.

12. These include the United Food and Commercial Workers in many areas. where the union rep goes to stores and talks directly with workers, and some of the construction trades. But even in these circumstances, job-site reps or worksite leaders are becoming more common.

13. Sociologist Pam Roby's study suggests that male stewards represent about 100 workers each, and female stewards about 180 workers each. See Pamela Roby and Lyna Uttal, "Trade Union Stewards: Handling Union, Family, and Employment Responsibilities," in Barbara Gutek, Ann Stromberg, and Laurie Larwood (Eds.), Women and Work: An Annual Review. Volume 3 (California: Sage Publications, 1988). pp. 217-219.

14. The basis for this estimated percent is presented in my Discussion Paper mentioned in Footnote a.

15. Roby, p. 224.

16. John Dunlop (1990) describes a similar progression, p. 18.

17. Lois Gray, "Women in Union Leadership Roles." Interface. Department of Professional Employees. AFL-CIO, Washington, D.C.. Volume 17, Number 3. Summer 1988, p. 8.

18. Gray, pp. 7-9.

19. See Gray, pp. 7-9, as well as Quaglieri, and Dubofsky and Van Tine.

20. Quaglieri, p. 217, and personal discussions with John Sweeney.

21. From author's interviews and Kim Moody, An Injury to All: The Decline of American Unionism (New York: Verso, 1988), p. 237.

22. From personal interviews with Bob Wages, December 6, 1991, and January 24, 1992, and from the biographical information sheet provided by his office.

23. Lenore Miller is President of the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union (RWDSU). Gloria Johnson, who is African-American, is Director of Social Action for the International Union of Electrical Workers (IUE) and is the president of the Coalition of Labor Union Women (CLUW). Linda Chavez Thompson, the first Hispanic woman on the Council, is vice president of AFSCME and an officer in the Labor Coalition for Latin American Advancement (LCLAA). The seats that Johnson and Chavez Thompson hold were created in 1980 and 1991, respectively, to ensure representation of women and Latinos. The African-American men are John Sturdivant, president of the AFGE, and Gene Upshaw, president of the Federation of Professional Athletes.

24. See Coalition of Labor Union Women Center for Education and Research, "Absent from the Agenda: A Report on the Role of Women in American Unions," mimeo, 1980; and Naomi Baden, "Developing an Agenda: Expanding the Role of Women in Unions," Labor Studies Journal. Winter 1986, Volume 10, No. 3, pp. 229-249. See also Susan Eaton, "How More Women Can Become Leaders of Today's and Tomorrow's Unions," in Glenn Adler and Doris Suarez, eds., Union Voices: Labor's Response to Crisis (New York: State University of New York Press, 1993), pp. 171-217.

25. I owe this analysis to Marshall Ganz and his extensive interviews and research on this subject.

26. See Hans De Witte, "Why Do Youngsters Join a Trade Union?" Working paper, Higher Institute of Labor Studies, Katholieke Universiteit, Leuven, Belgium, 1993.

27. Telephone interview with Don Ephelin, April 27, 1992.

28. Interview with Marshall Ganz. April 26, 1992.

29. Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, as Amended, Section 401 (a) (b).

30. In some cases having two "leaders" creates conflict, as might be expected. One of my case studies explores such a conflict that occurred at SEIU Local 285, which after a 10-year struggle with structure and role definitions has reorganized its leadership structure so there is an elected president and an appointed staff director. In the process of restructuring, considerable leadership tension emerged and one female leader ended up leaving the local. In AFSCME, the presence of a significant number of female local presidents is balanced by women's relative absence from district council director jobs, where 50-60 percent of union resources and power rest.

31. Interviews with Nancy Mills, December 13, 1991, and January 23, 1992.

32. This finding is verified in Helen Elkiss and Ruth Needleman's unpublished notes on a workshop conducted at the University of Illinois on "Barriers to Union Participation" in December 1988. The other motivating factor was dissatisfaction with current working conditions

33. Fire quoted in Quaglieri, p. 97.

34. Interview with Richard Bensinger, March 1992.

35. The steward or worksite leadership level is where the demographics of the leadership is most likely to represent the workforce. Pam Roby's study found that in three rare cases where statistics were kept, the percent of women in membership and in steward roles compared at 2 percent female stewards and 7 percent female members in one local, 55 percent female stewards and 68 percent members in another, and 86 percent stewards and 92 percent female members in a third. These statistics, along with my own and other studies, suggest that there are many female stewards already active in union locals. This suggests that unions need to do very specific work to find out why the numbers of women leaders drop so dramatically in union-wide office and on staff.

36. Jim Green and Pat Reeve at the University of Massachusetts and Hal Stack at Wayne State University are among the excellent labor educators who can provide guidance and resources on developing an orientation and other training programs.

37. Arlie Hochschild. The Second Shift (New York: Avon, 1989). See also Roby and Uttal, pp. 217-219.

38. Interview with Mary Ann Collins, Organizing and Field Services, SEIU, April 1992.

39. Interview with Don Ephelin, April 26, 1992.

40. Interview with Marshall Ganz, April 20,1992.

41. Interview with HUCTW activist Ellen Carey, March 25, 1992.

42. Barbara Wertheimer and Anne Nelson, Trade Union Women: A Study of Their Participation in New York City Locals (New York: Praeger, 1985), p. 154.

43. Deborah Tannen, You Just Don't Understand (New York: William Morrow, 1990), p. 65.

44. For more detail on the formation and founding of WILD, see Cheryl Gooding and Pat Reeve, "Coalition-Building for Community-Based Labor Education," Policy Studies Journal, Volume 18, No. 2, Winter 1989-90, pp. 452-460. Or you can contact WILD at (617) 983-2624.

45. Eliseo Medina, quoted from SEIU Leadership meeting, October 1991.

46. Interview with Donnene Williams, January 3, 1992.

47. Interview with Kris Rondeau, October 1, 1991.

48. Howard Gardner, The Unschooled Mind (New York: Basic Books, 1991), pp. 123-124.

49. See several essays of international union secretary-treasurers in Quaglieri for commentary on the "second banana" syndrome.

50. Gray, p. 9.

51. Clara Day, "Black Women in the Labor Movement: Interviews with Clara Day and Johnnie Jackson," Labor Research Review, Volume 11 (Spring 1988), p. 84.

52.Roby and Utall. pp. 225-235.

53. See Wertheimer and Nelson, and Roby and Uttal.

Back to Work & Empowerment Index