Vol. 5, No. 2
February 2018

Chicago Women's March 2018

by Helen Ramirez-Odell


More than 300,000 persons were in the Women's March in downtown Chicago on Saturday, January 20, 2018. This year's march had a major purpose -- to get out the vote in the Illinois primary March 20 and in the fall election.

Women and their supporters marched for human, civil and women's rights. They marched for immigrant and refugee rights, health care for all, LGTBQIA rights, equal rights and equal pay. They marched because Black lives matter and for an end to racism, violence, sexual abuse and harassment. They marched for reproductive rights, worker rights, for more women to be elected to office, and for government that is truthful, fair and just. Union women, NOW, Planned Parenthood, ACLU, and dozens of other groups with a cause marched to Federal Plaza after the pre-march rally to urge everyone to vote and get others out to vote for persons who will represent them when they are elected.

One woman wrote that she marched for every girl who was told to give up on her dreams and ambitions, for every mother who was told she must choose between her children and her work, for every American who found Trump's behavior unbecoming of the president, and because less than twenty percent of Congress is female.

Nationwide, in the next ten months, voters will elect persons to 435 congressional seats, 33 senate seats and 36 governorships. Elections in 2018 will determine whether the nation as a whole and Illinois and other states move on a progressive track that benefits all the people or acts to benefit the wealthy at the expense of those who struggle to make a living.
 
..............................................................................................................................................

Always Organizing. Always Teaching. Always Growing.
An interview with Chicago Teachers Union member, Michelle Gunderson

by Jess Kozik
 
Should young teachers care about unions? Michelle Gunderson, a teacher of 31 years, chair of the Early Childhood Committee of the Chicago Teachers Union and member of CORE, the Caucus of Rank-and-file Educators, thinks the answer is yes. I was fortunate enough to be able to talk with her about the importance of unions and its effect on education. Something we focused on and that hit close to home for me was working to engage young adults to support and see the power of unions. When discussing young teachers, I bring up my close friend who is finishing up her degree in art education. Gunderson goes on to say that "[my friend] probably sees herself first and foremost as a teacher, and so when the profession is taken from you, you lose a lot of identity." How do you protect and sustain this identity that so many hold sacred?
 
Teachers are the molders of young minds, minds that are our future. To ensure that the education system is giving students the best it can offer, we have to ensure that we our taking care of the people in these teaching positions. That's where the power of unions come in. Gunderson goes on to explain the specific type of unionism which she subscribes to: social justice unionism. She describes it as being "union work for social justice not only for myself but also for children and families." By caring for those in charge of education, the care for the children increases as well. Most people are familiar with the business union model, Gunderson notes, "which is more the mentality of taking care of problems when they arise, bargaining for good contracts, and a 'from-the top-down' perspective where the union takes care of the workers." Social justice unionism goes much further than this model. Gunderson highlights that "in our model of unionism, rank-and-file run our union. And we use the power of our union and the power of our contract to make our community strong for kids and families."
 
Teaching can be draining, so the support of a strong community can go a long way. Gunderson feels as though she has found her community within the Chicago Teachers Union. She shares that she draws a lot of her own inspiration from Karen Lewis, the President of the Chicago Teacher Union. Gunderson states "She's not just the president of a union. I call her teacher-in-chief cause she's always teaching."
 
Teaching is far from a glamorous job, though, and therefore finding longevity with the profession is often difficult. Gunderson points out that "it can be very demoralizing to teach in Chicago." She believes that "the only way that we're going to keep our union alive and teaching alive is if we are inspired to make it a better place for both teachers and children." Teachers must keep their cups of inspiration and idealism full in order for the education system to improve for all of those involved, as well as society as a whole.
 
Teachers often are forced into the role of the selfless nurturer. The one that gives so much, yet receives so little. But even the most generous, can risk ending up with empty cups. The community support and collective bargaining that comes from unions can work to help preserve the passion and dedication that teachers have towards education. Gunderson believes that "this profession can only be done in a collective way, in a collegial way, and that's what unionism is. Many of the bosses are trying to separate [teachers]  from each other, to test kids and to evaluate [teachers] in testing, and compare us to one another instead of helping us actually congeal as a workforce."
 
Teachers must be nurtured, so they in turn can nurture. Gunderson remains hopeful that young  teachers and those studying to become teachers will find their power and voice in unions, as unions can be what can ultimately help them with what they care about the most, their students.
   
..............................................................................................................................................

Unions Brace for a Supreme Court Ruling

by Amy Laiken
 
The Supreme Court has taken up a case that could potentially result in negative ramifications for unions and supporters of collective bargaining. In  the case, Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Council 31, the court will consider whether public sector unions may require workers who are not union members to help pay for union representation. Such payments, known as fair share or agency fees, are required by the State of Illinois. Collective bargaining agreements cover all employees of a bargaining unit, whether or not they are union members.

Mark Janus is an employee of the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, which is represented by an AFSCME bargaining unit. Janus sued the union, claiming that he should not have to pay fees to a union whose political positions he opposes. In the suit, Janus is represented by  Liberty Justice Center (an arm of the Illinois Policy Institute) and the National Right to Work Legal Foundation, organizations that are known to be unsympathetic to public employee unions. Their argument is that fair share fees violate the First Amendment. Unions argue that basic fairness demands that members of a bargaining unit contribute to the collective bargaining process, through which wages, working conditions, and other forms of compensation are negotiated. They contend that a ruling prohibiting fair share payments would invite "free-loading," or the receipt of services of the union for free, thereby draining the unions of a source of income to pay for representing workers. "The forces behind this case know that by joining together in strong unions, working people have the voice they need to level the economic and political playing field," Illinois' AFSCME President Roberta Lynch wrote on the AFSCME Council 31 website in September 2017.

The case began in 2015, when Governor Bruce Rauner issued an executive order, attempting to stop the state from passing on fair share fees to the union. He also filed a federal suit. A Downstate St. Claire County judge ordered the payments to continue as the matter proceeded through the courts, and a federal judge dismissed Rauner from the law suit due to lack of standing. Mark Janus and two other employees were permitted to pursue the issue. In early 2016, the Supreme Court heard a similar case, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, but with Antonin Scalia's death, only eight justices remained to rule on it. They deadlocked 4 to 4, essentially leaving the lower court's ruling, allowing fair share fees to continue, intact. However, because the ruling was 4 to 4, its opinion was not precedent-setting. A much earlier case, Abood v. Detroit Board of Education was decided by the Supreme Court in 1977, in which the Court held that fair share or agency fees were permissible if they were used for collective bargaining and other union representation, but not for ideological or political purposes.

Numerous amicus briefs have been filed in support of both parties to the case. Those supporting Janus include the Cato Institute, the Atlantic Legal Foundation, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, all of which have Libertarian or conservative leanings. The briefs filed in support of AFSCME include the American Federation of Teachers AFT), the ACLU, National Women's Law Center, and many other organizations committed to civil rights and social justice.

The AFSCME website reported that on February 7, 2018, AFSCME President Lee Saunders and Stephen Mittons, an AFSCME member were joined at a news conference at the headquarters of the National Education Association (NEA) in Washington by Presidents Lily Eskelsen GarcĂ­a, Randi Weingarten, and Mary Kay Henry, respectively of NEA, AFT, and SEIU. "The billionaires behind this case have grown so used to getting their way in America that they haven't even bothered to present any real argument to the court based on merit," Mr. Saunders said.

O ral arguments in Janus v. AFSCME are set for February 26, 2018. Union members will be watching.
 
..............................................................................................................................................
 
Meet WWHP'S New Board Members 

Emily E. LB. Twarog is currently an assistant professor of history and labor studies at the University of Illinois' School of Labor and Employment Relations - Labor Education Program and Director of the Regina V. Polk Women's Labor Leadership Conference. Emily is also the Innovations Editor at the Labor Studies Journal and an Editorial Board Member of  LaborOnline, the online journal of LAWCHA.
 




Gwendolyn Vaughn
has been an employee of Service Employees International union for eight years. Currently, she organizes early childhood educators and caregivers and surrounding staff. Gwen has a special interest in building a universal child care system that works for all families. She works with community organizations to achieve universal child care, the fight for $15, and a union.
..............................................................................................................................................

Correction:  Working Women, vol. 4, no. 11  

"If Words Could Bite" by Jess Kozik
In paragraph 6, it is incorrectly stated that "In 1985, Wells-Barnett married writer and attorney Ferdinand Barnett." They were in fact married in 1895.

..............................................................................................................................................

Like us on Facebook