and win. And that's what makes a strong union.

Linda: Specifically, what is your job within the union?

f

Kathy: Basically, I help build the union by organizing and bringing in new workers, teaching them how to ensure a rank and file union, teaching the officers and stewards their jobs-how to fight grievances and organize their immediate co-workers, and helping existing U.E. locals negotiate contracts. One of the hardest parts of my job is fighting grievances. I usually become involved in a grievance only when it gets to top level management. The Union Grievancé Committee and I usually meet off in a room with some company men. The boss is always there trying to get you to make a deal. You're often in isolation, so it's important that the organizers and others in that position know exactly what the workers are saying before going into that meeting. You shouldn't be deducting from your own experience.

Linda: Do you spend a lot of time talking with members?

Kathy: I walk through the shop talking to members if management lets me, and I go to membership meetings. More importantly, it's my role to get the stewards and officers to talk to the members. Too often the officers, stewards, and sometimes the organizers go to the boss on their own and don't represent the people. You have to have confidence that workers can make good decisions if given the right information.

Linda: Some unions have taken strong stands on the FRA and other women's issues. Is that true of the U.E.?

Kuthy: Oh, yes. In fact, since its first convention, the U has been one of the most progressive unions on women's rights. Its policy is right on key in that area.

Indu: You said "its policy". What do you see in the shops?

kathy: The union is only as good as its members, and even though the U.. has a good policy on women, that policy isn't being taught in high school, in the homes....

Linda: Do you feel that's part of your job? For example, do you take some of your experiences in the women's movement and apply them to the organizing you do in the shops?

Kathy: Not as much as I should. And I think part of that comes from my lack of contact with the women's movement. I think I have a good rapport with the women in the shops. All up and down the union, though, there aren't enough women in leadership. The U.E., in that respect, is no different from any other union-from any other institution-in the U.S. And, again, it's because the members that run the union, like the members of any organization today in capitalist America, don't have a revolutionary consciousness about women's issues. I think that my job is to try to take what consciousness there is and take it further. To try to advance women's position in the union--not at the expense of anyone else, but for the betterment of the union. In my union, the members are probably 40% women. So it's extremely important that the union advance for its own selfinterest in the area of women's issues, such as day care and equal pay for equal work. In this district, we're fortunate to have a woman district president, Pearl Jividen. She's a fabulous woman who works

piece rate in the shop and helps the organizers on her own time.

Linda: What would you say the general attitude is toward feminism amoung the women in the shops you're organizing? Is there a tendency to disassociate what they're doing from activities that are considered "feminist”?

Kathy: Without a question, there are those women who will say, "I'm not a women's libber, but..." but I think that's largely the result of the shitty media. around the women's movement. Although it doesn't seem that the media is attacking the women's movement the same way it did in the 60's and the early 70's. I can tell you from my experience that the fear of being lesbian-baited doesn't stop women in the union from speaking out.

Lindu: Do you think that's because your union has been fairly open on women's issues?

Kathy: No, I don't think so. I've noticed recently that there are a lot of lesbians in the shop who are very open. People are learning to accept it. It's not that much of a threat. In that respect, I think there's a lot more uptightness among professional women.

Linda: That's a misconception that's perpetuated by the media that workers tend to be more conservative. On the other hand, there's much more of a common goal among working women which professional women do not always share. There, there's

ક

Photo by Janet Century more of an attitude that you have to make it on your

own.

Kathy: That's true. And it's similar with racism. When white workers learn to struggle with black workers, it doesn't eliminate all the racism you carry with you, but it sure puts a dent in it. The opportunity's always there to join with your black sister or brother or your lesbian sister or gay brother to take on the boss. It's self-survival. Of course, that's not to say that everyone in the shop has a raised consciousness. But I think there's a belief in this country that workers are more racist, more sexist. You have the traditional hardhat. But in the last few years, with companies attacking gains made by workers. more than ever, there's much more racial integration, more male-female unity, and more gay-straight unity. than anywhere else in our society. Because people are forced to take on the boss. It's a common enemy.

Linda: You're speaking of union shops. Wouldn't you say that's much less true of non-union shops

where management tries to divide workers?

Kathy: Yes, no question. In every organizing cam paign, the boss will try to divide the workers: male/female, black/white, skilled workers/produc tion workers. For example, we organized a shop in a rural town in Pennsylvania that was 90% women. The women were fairly militant -real solid trade union women. We got a pretty good reputation. When I began to organize another shop that was predominantly men, the boss baited the union, say ing, "Don't join that union that's a women's union." What he meant was that it was weak, inef fective.

You have to realize, too, that the union is basically a male institution. You take unions that are predominantly women and they have almost all male leaders. A lot of people who get involved in the labor movement and have some ideologies that workers and the movement should be beyond all the terrible things of capitalism find that a hard reality to deal with. A union is generally more progressive because of the nature of the membership-it's a working class institution. But the male hierarchy of the union are not going to be the ones who are going to push for women's issues, who are going to push for day care, who are going to be concerned about adequate medical insurance for pregnancy, or equal pay for equal work, or sexual harassment on the job. You cannot sit back and expect the men to lead that fight. Linda: Then what is the solution?

Kathy: I really don't know, on the whole. But for me, it's pushing and encouraging any sparks of feminism, any rank and file militancy, or any minority taking on leadership. I'll try to support those sparks. But I can do this because my union believes in it. Not all unions support rank and file control.

Linda: Is there a strong push for women to get into leadership?

Kathy: Well, that kind of gets to the root. I've been in situations where a shop was predominantly women, but the women didn't know how to operate politically, for example, how to get all the women together and put only a few up for officer instead of 20 so they don't split the vote. A lot of women, par ticularly the younger women, don't have that political sense when they go into the shop.

Linda: Do you think that the women in the shops should form separate groups? Perhaps that's one area where the women's movement can provide support.

Kathy: That's a very complicated issue because the job lies in organizing the rank and file. Even if women do get into leadership, the basic job has to be done at the bottom-dealing with people on a one-toone basis, and trying to raise their consciousness in the struggle against the boss. And having women in leadership doesn't always mean they will get more for women. We see that happening now. We could have a woman president, and I don't think that necessarily mean more gains for women.

What I hear you saying is that you think there's a need for women's caucuses and even women's unions, but at this point (and I know this runs contrary to lots of feminists within the labor movement) it would be divisive. There just isn't the base there. I think that any proup who is in the minority tends to stick together. That's true of black workers in predominantly white shops and women in predominantly male shops. If anything, we have to learn

(continued on page 12)

October, 1979/What She Wants/Page 9