are we in or are we out?
I think there are essentually two schools of thought on how to revitalize the labour movement.
The first is to oganize amoung the membership groups or slates of candidates with a mandate for change to run for executive positions within their existing union. "IF you don't like it, change it" is the motto and for the most part it's something I believe very strongly in.
The second is to scrap the old and start fresh. It's a harder sell for proponents of this theory because it requires people to think outside themselves and what they've come to believe is the norm. It's a vunerable feeling because as frustrating as the institution of unionism is it's comforting for trade unionist to know they're still apart of a formula that's survived for 100 years. Trade unionist are not entrepreneurs [a person who organizes a business undertaking, assuming risk for the sake of profit] and in the literal sence really they're not supposed to be. That's why I can understand the need to hold on to the "Devil you know", but reject it just the same.
I look at it like this...if power source empowerment it what you believe in, and your convinced [as I am] that it's the answer, then despite the early leap of faith founding a new union takes it's the most logical of all answers and the wisest use of resources and effort.
I'll use an example from business because it's the easiest example for most people to understand. A firm wants to shake things up and it's board of directors understand they'll have to address a number of key issues in order to stream line thier opperation and secure a better position in the market place. What is going to drive this change more effectively? the internal [micro] desire to imporve the organization? or the external [macro] competition from an aggressive competitor moving into the market and threatening the firms very survival?
The UFCW has had it's opportunity to change...now it's time they got out of the way. 