|
is an
end run around the LMRDA
provision for direct elections.
At this point in the discussion,
the assembled audience of
Carpenters burst into a round of
sustained applause. The issue was
obviously close to their hearts.
Is election by delegates good
enough? In New York, council
officers would be elected by some
150 delegates. McCarron insisted
that this system afforded
democracy enough because
delegates would be themselves
elected in the locals by secret
ballot membership vote.
Not so, was the reply: The
delegate system is no substitute
for direct elections. A
membership of thousands, armed
with the right to vote, cannot be
easily manipulated by the
officers above. But a delegated
body of 150 can readily be
dominated by an officialdom which
dispenses favors and perks to
only 76 lucky delegates. Direct
elections allow the member-voters
to control the officers. Election
by delegates allows the officers
to control the delegate-voters.
Democracy and efficiency:
In this case, it was argued,
democracy must give way to
efficiency. By centralizing power
in the hands of an honest
leadership, you eliminate the
ability of small-time business
agents to exploit members, you
protect insurance funds, you end
corruption.
The problem with seeking
efficiency by undercutting
democracy is that the cure
creates the same kind of evils it
is intended to correct. Once a
centralized authority, even the
most well-meaning and honest,
cuts itself loose from membership
control, corruption and
irresponsibility follow, and not
simply on a low level but at the
very heights. Carpenters may be
willing to arm McCarron with
extensive powers because they
trust him. But who will follow
him?
In one classical case,
authoritarian efficiency
degenerated into autocratic
corruption. While John L. Lewis,
a great labor leader, ruled the
United Mine Workers as an
effective absolute dictator,
sinister forces gathered strength
within the union. When he died,
Tony Boyle assumed his powers and
used them to murder his rival,
loot the insurance funds, and
betray miners' interests.
Strengthen the LMRDA? At
the June 25 hearing and at the
first session a month before,
unionists complained of abuses
which went unresolved in their
unions. McCarron insisted that it
was not necessary to amend
federal law to eliminate
"impediments to union
democracy" because unions
themselves could remedy any
defects. A subcommittee member
asked me whether the labor
movement had any effective
appeals procedures for hearing
the kind of grievances voiced by
members at these hearings.
I said there is no such effective
agency, certainly nothing
resembling what we expect in
normal public
|