By Natalia Salinas, Delegate Assembly, Member-at-Large
I am a union shop steward for the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) and participated in their annual leadership conference on October 11, 2014. The conference theme was “Building a Model Union.” I was impressed and I am not easy to impress. It has been my belief that a union’s primary job is to negotiate workers’ terms of exploitation and, as such, only serves to keep capitalism in place, which in my point of view, has too many problems.
I was delighted to hear that part of NUHW’s plan to build this model union included a commitment to “…ensure that workers are empowered in a member-led, democratic union that stands up for both workers and patients…” They have dedicated many resources to exposing problems in the healthcare system and to improving patient care. The union has been helping us, as providers, advocate for quality patient care and ethical practices within our workplace, rather than solely help us fight cuts to our benefits or pay.
That this is a member-driven/member-led union is important to mention as there has been a trend to shift unions and organizations away from this model. In fact, leading up to our professional organization’s NASW 2014 Delegate Assembly (DA) meeting there was fierce debate about this very issue.
I am ending two consecutive terms as delegate and it was confusing to me why my organization had created such an ineffective process for us to do our job as delegates. The past delegates I had talked to raved about this being a reinvigorating and stimulating process, but this was back when meetings were face-to-face. The past two NASW delegate assemblies were virtual. A few of us delegates started to voice concerns about a lack of transparency. There were debates about whether to eliminate the DA altogether and the issue was creating two definite sides.
Our delegate assembly process ensures that NASW is a member-driven organization and what we found was that those spearheading the effort to eliminate it were a group of NASW Executive Directors (EDs). Why would EDs want to eliminate the DA? This question was answered when we discovered that NASW Executive Directors had been required to read the book The Race for Relevance, plus had a meeting where the authors presented the arguments in their book. The authors vilify volunteer board members and espouse having smaller boards. The authors also write about identifying and “eradicating” dissenters and shifting power to organization staff.
Perhaps some of you have noticed some of these changes in our NASW newsletter. For example, shortly before our NASW Executive Director (ED), Elizabeth Clark, retired she started identifying herself as NASW Chief Executive Officer (CEO). This shift in language may not seem significant, but we must remember that language is powerful. This change was one of various recommendations made by the book mentioned above.
For now, the effort to eliminate the DA was unsuccessful and I am hopeful we will return to something similar to what existed in the past that included face-to-face contact. Our NASW Code of Ethics states that “…relationships between and among people are an important vehicle for change.” As social workers we also value inclusiveness and democratic processes and to shift from a membership-driven organization to a top-down model seems contrary to these values.
Please get and stay informed. Thank you to California Delegate Bart Grossman and Oregon Delegate Gary Smith for their help in writing this article.
Contact me or your delegate representative for additional questions. I can be reached at natie_v2001@yahoo.com.
