Organized Labor

Some of my columns this year have touched on the problem of jurisdictional disputes. Workers in one trade see workers in another on their job performing work they believe is or should be theirs. This transgression, real or supposed, chafes them because it is right at hand, reminding them of itself again and again throughout a working day. They see non-union jobsites usually in passing, on their commutes or weekends, outside of working hours. A quick glance may not reveal that the jobsites are in fact non-union (although the jobsite’s condition often makes this clear on a closer examination). For this and other reasons many union workers are likelier to demand action on jurisdictional matters than on organizing. Their elected agents are obliged to respond.

Business agents therefore waste much of their time on jurisdiction. Members take their own actions. Jobs are disrupted, cooperation damaged, animosities created. Councils are divided — including this one. Wages are undercut. Skill is sacrificed. Union contractors feel themselves restrained from competing with non-union contractors. Non-union contractors claim jurisdictional conflicts as a reason not to unionize. The real necessity of the day, organizing, is made to wait.

The leaders of the trades in Northern California understand this. Representatives of almost all the trades met in Oakland at the end of November to begin discussions on ways of resolving jurisdictional questions at a regional level. Two models have been put forth at the start of the discussions. One is the alliance of the Northern California Carpenters and Laborers and Local 3 of the Operating Engineers. The other is a proposal advanced two years ago by Gerald McKay, an attorney with long experience as a labor arbitrator, for a regional jurisdictional board for the basic crafts — Carpenters, Laborers, Operators, Ironworkers, and Cement Masons. Neither proposal claims to supersede the “Green Book,” the existing national “Plan for the Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes in the Construction Industry….” Both refer to it as a factor in deciding jurisdiction. They provide an intermediate process, though, at a level where local work practices will be known and understood.

The document establishing the Carpenter-Laborer-Operator alliance goes another step and incorporates agreements on four hitherto frequent subjects of jurisdictional disputes – portable tower cranes, Bob Cats, drilling, and forklifts and related equipment. If the other trades do succeed in creating with the Carpenters, Laborers, and Operators a broader alliance or jurisdictional board for Northern California, we can hope that this will help bring about comparable agreements on other jurisdictional conflicts. An intermediate process that decides jurisdictional questions quickly on a job-by-job basis would be useful; agreements that resolve those questions in advance of a job would be more useful still.

The trades have agreed to meet again soon to discuss regional jurisdictional processes. Both the models offered have useful features. I will not discuss them in more detail here, nor other ideas that have already been suggested. Such a discussion would more appropriately wait until the trades meet.

Our rank-and-file readers can and should encourage them in this and wish them success. As several trades leaders have said, we have the opportunity not just to advance our cause in Northern California, but to provide an example for the rest of the country.

As the year ends, I wish everyone safe and happy holidays. I thank all the many both inside and outside of labor who have helped me in this new position. I apologize to any I may have offended; I hope they are few. I apologize for any mistakes I have made through my inexperience here; I hope they, too, are few.

I look forward to serving my sisters and brothers in the New Year. I believe it brings us many opportunities for progress.