From: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Subject: Speech from UAW Public Review Board Case No. 1001 Brief
Reply-To: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 21:10:43 GMT


 
     The following excerpts from the Brief in Appeal No. 1001 
which is currently before the UAW Public Review Board was read at 
the UAW Region 1-C and UAW Region 1-C Sitdowner Dinner held in 
Flint on Friday, October 2, 1992.
 
     
 
     The Appeal of Ronda Hauben, Member (local 3000) (Flat Rock, 
MI, Region 1A) vrs UAW International President, Public Review 
Board Case No. 1001 (herein called Hauben vrs UAW Intl Pres) 
testifies to the wonders of the achievements of the Flint Sit 
Down Strikers who succeeded in building the UAW.
 
     On the surface, this case (Hauben vrs UAW Intl Pres) seems 
an amazing travesty of justice and in the sense of the 
Czechoslovakian writer Milan Kundera's book "Of Laughter and 
Forgetting", of "forgetting" the important lessons of UAW 
history. But on more careful examination, this case currently 
before the Public Review Board shows the great achievements of 
the unsung heroes of UAW history.
 
     First a bit of background.
 
     On August 19, 1988, a letter to the editor appeared in the 
Flint Journal called "Union history repeats itself". The Letter 
described events that had occurred at the 13th Annual Pioneer 
Picnic that had been held in Flint on August 6, 1988. The letter 
explained:
 
          "The pioneers were present in good numbers and good 
     spirit. The sharing of memories was vigorous, the happiness 
     of seeing each other contagious. A speech read by one of the 
     Pioneers received loud applause when it opposed "jointness," 
     "partnership" and "commonground".    
 
     The letter continued:
 
          "But just as The Journal reported almost 40 years ago, 
     freedom of speech is not standard within the labor movement. 
     A researcher of Flint labor history was trying to tell the 
     story of how the five Flint UAW locals won cost-of-living 
     adjustments. The chairman cut her off. Similarly, 40 years 
     ago, at a meeting in Flint on Feb. 8, 1948, the same 
     discussion was prevented when Walter Reuther didn't allow 
     Jack Palmer and other advocates of COLA to speak.
 
     After describing how another speaker was given over 1/2 hour 
of time to tell jokes, the letter went on:
 
          "As always, Flint was the heart of the worker's move
     ment. Sadly, that movement is still strait-jacketed by those 
     who prevent free and open debate." 
 
     Another letter to the editor ("13th Annual Pioneers Picnic") 
published in the August 26, 1988 issue of "The Searchlight" the 
local union newspaper of UAW Local 659 (Flint, MI) described the 
same event. The letter explained:
 
          "The next speech analyzed the significance of the 
     victory won in 1948 of COLA in the GM contract and it's 
     connection to the "My job and why I like it" contest. It 
     began with a little of the history of the many efforts 
     toward a labor party, especially in 1947-48. Then the 
     speaker went on to speak about Alfred Sloan's economic 
     mistakes and his call for psychological warfare against the 
     workers." 
 
     The writer continued:
 
          "After about 10 minutes and before it was done, the 
     Chairman cut off the speech saying the speaker's time was 
     up. This was a serious mistake....
 
     The writer describes more of what happened:
 
          "Afterwards a number of people asked for copies of the 
     speech and were concerned that the chair was allowed to cut 
     her off...A younger worker did take the microphone to inform 
     everyone that the situation in the plants is returning to 
     pre-1937 conditions. And she asked that the Pioneers again 
     tell everyone they know how it was they were able to take on 
     and defeat GM...."
 
     In conclusion the writer explained:
 
          "But still the story of the crucial role of the rank 
     and file remains to be told, recorded and accorded its 
     place as the basis of history. At the next annual picnic, it 
     is time the microphone be open to the Pioneers and to those 
     who have a serious contribution to make showing the connection 
     between the battles of the Pioneers in the past and the 
     struggles of today..."
 
     The speech that had been censored at the 13th Annual Pioneer 
Picnic was an account of how the Flint Sit Down Strikers had won 
two great victories, one in 1937 with the victory of their strike 
against GM, and the second, which has been rarely discussed, in 
their victory of gaining the COLA and pattern bargaining in their 
1948 UAW-GM contract. Little known is the fact that in 1946-48, 
GM had begun to try to introduce quality work circles (similar to 
the current QWL and "teams" of today) into its factories in an 
effort to replace the unions won by the sitdown strikes of the 
1930's). Flint workers successfully challenged the corporate 
agenda and instead won higher wages and other union benefits 
which set standards for the US labor movement for the next 30 
years. 
 
     The speech described the debate that went on between Alfred 
Sloan's vision of the postwar years, and the vision of the Flint 
workers. The speech explained:
 
     "But the secret weapon that Flint labor possessed was the 
     uncensored local union newspaper."
 
     Even though the International Union had censored the 
arguments in favor of COLA and campaigned vigorously against 
putting it into the 1948 UAW-GM contracts, UAW members in Flint 
publicly debated their reasons for pressing for COLA in their 
local union newspapers, especially in the "Searchlight" (Chevrolet 
UAW Locasl 659), but also in other Flint local union newspapers 
like the "Sparkler" A.C. Spark Plug's local union newspaper.
 
     In an article in the Searchlight, pioneer unionist Carl 
Johnson, explained why the uncensored local union press was so 
important for UAW rank and file workers. He wrote:
 
     "If the Labor press does not try to give Labor the whole 
     truth, where will Labor get it? This, of course, raises the 
     question: Who is right about Labor's destiny? Certainly we 
     can't rely on the capitalist press to tell us, for it is 
     obvious that their interest is the opposite of Labor's 
     interest. But who from the ranks of Labor? Let them all 
     speak -- that's what Free Speech was intended for. Let them 
     all present their views in a forum. From that the reader 
     will have a fair chance to decide."
          (from "Only More Democracy will Save Democracy" by
          Carl Johnson, Oct 29, 1949)
 
     Johnson felt, quoting "If local union publications...provide 
the ranks with a freer discussion which alone can prepare the 
ranks for the fight which is sure to be plenty tough, then we 
need not worry too much, for American labor proved in 1936 and 
1937 that it can move fast and furiously when it knows where to 
go." Crucial to Johnson's vision, the speech explained, "and to 
the labor movement's was an uncensored press. Johnson called for 
a newspaper which `permits a full range of uncensored opinion'."
 
     If someone, he explained, including the editor, disagreed 
with what was said, they could print their disagreement. But 
articles were to be printed as the writer submitted them unless 
they were judged libelous. (Ibid.)
 
     The speech went on to show how the weapon of this uncensored 
press made it possible for Flint workers to win pattern 
bargaining in the UAW-GM 1948 contract. 
 
     In their book "Changing Alliances" (Boston, 1987) the authors 
Dyer, Salter and Weber, refer to the achievement COLA represented 
as "An enduring pattern of auto bargaining took shape in 1948." 
(pg 41)
 
     And an article by labor history professor Ben Fischer, who 
was a veteran of the CIO, described the important achievement of 
this 1948 period: 
 
     "The 1948 GM-UAW agreement established what proved to be a 
     34-year wage pattern for basic industry....It has called for 
     an annual improvement factor reflecting the overall long-
     term growth in the economy plus a periodic review and 
     adjustment of wages to conform to changes in the cost-of-
     living...in the succeeding era of more than three decades, 
     wage movements in the economy followed a course...often 
     dictated by the GM formula or very strongly influenced by 
     it."
                              ("Fifty Years of the CIO," Labor 
                              Law Journal, Aug. 1985, p. 660) 
 
     Similarly, achievements like seniority, paid vacations, 
classifications, etc. were some of the gains of the labor movement 
of the 1930's and 1940's.  
 
     The speech ended, by summarizing:
 
          "Thus the effort of Sloan and CE Wilson to bring 
     behavioral modification instead of higher wages was firmly 
     and soundly defeated for 40 years by the Flint labor move
     ment. However, it has all reared its head once again and the 
     lessons from how it was defeated need to be carefully 
     studied and built upon. The uncensored press, the commitment 
     to higher wages, and the commitment to independent political 
     action for labor seems to be some of the chief weapons 
     wielded by Flint labor. Jack Palmer, writing in 1947 
     explained "Sometimes, it is advisable to review the past in 
     order to foresee the development of the present and the 
     future." 
 
     The Brief goes on to describe what happened at Mazda when 
the kind of lean production techniques that workers in Flint 
defeated in 1948 were introduced into the heart of union territy.
The Brief then concludes:
 
     Just as that high court ruled in Holden versus Hardy in 
1898, clarifying that workers must be protected by government 
coming in clearly and forcefully on their side if there is to be 
a healthy society, so the Public Review Board can only show its 
support for the present and future health of the members of the 
UAW and of the UAW itself by reversing the decision of the 
International Union dismissing the appeal in the case before the 
Board. As there is no legitimate evidence denying Ronda Hauben's 
appeals, and as there is a strong case in their favor, Appellant 
asks that the irrational decision of the International Executive 
Board be reversed and her appeals granted. 
 
     In a recent dissent by Board Member Weiler, in PBR Case No 
928, he wrote "This appeal raises important issues both about 
what constitutes fair treatment ... and also about the force of 
the Public Review Board's responsibility to ensure a `rational 
basis' in the Union's handling of contract grievances." (pg 15) 
Later in criticisizing the reasons given by the majority for its 
support for the actions of the International Union, Member 
Weiler, in concluding his Dissent explains: "And in my view the 
Public Review Board does the UAW no good in pretending that it is 
rational, in our administration of an internal appeals process 
that is supposed to be fair to the Union members and serve as an 
antidote to litigation over the duty of fair representation." (pg 
18)  
     Similarly as the documents in this appeal before the Board 
show, there has been a long and tortuous effort to fight against 
dangerous workplace conditions in the auto industry. To have the 
International Union side with management in depriving workers of 
their right to health and safety protection, both contractual and 
statutory, regardless of what irrational excuse the International 
Union dreams up to justify its failure, is dangerous enough. This 
case before the Board is case no 1001. Reading through previous 
public review board decisions, one is struck with how rarely the 
Board has the courage to challenge the decisions of the UAW. 
In decision, PRB Case No. 942, the Board wrote that "The UAW 
has, virtually since its inception, been in the forefront of the 
American labor movement in protecting the free speech rights of 
its members." (pg 9) This statement can only encourage the UAW 
International Leadership to continue its policy of censorship of 
the local union press and of hiding the history of the fight 
against such censorship by UAW union pioneers. In the same 
decision, the Public Review Board explains "The healthiest 
societies and institutions are those which allow and encourage 
debate over controversial issues." (Ibid) When the Public Review 
Board supports the International Union, as Member Weiler's 
Dissent in case number 928 pointed out, in its irrational 
activity, it is demonstrating that it has no concern for the 
health of the body whose conduct it is charged with reviewing. 
Thus the decision in this case will demonstrate whether there is 
any concern on the part of the Public Review Board for the health 
and safety of both the members of the UAW and of the body of the 
UAW itself. As Holden vrs Hardy pointed out many years ago, that 
"the whole is no greater than the sum of all the parts, and when 
the individual health, safety, and welfare are sacrificed or 
neglected, the state must suffer." Thus to protect the health of 
the body whose conduct it is charged with reviewing, the Public 
Review Board is duty bound to find in favor of the Appellant and 
rule that the dismissal of the appeal in this case on the 
fraudulent grounds of untimeliness is irrational and that the 
appeal regarding the handling and disposition of Appellant's 
grievance be reinstated and the International Union be charged 
with pursuing that grievance vigorously and also supporting 
Appellant in her efforts to defend her MIOSHA decision against 
any challenge. 
-- 
Ronda Hauben                    email address:ae547@yfn.ysu.edu
Amateur Computerist Newsletter              or
P.O. Box 4344                   rhauben@heartland.bradley.edu
Dearborn, MI 48126
Newsgroups: alt.amateur-comp,sci.econ,alt.activism,talk.politics.misc