Poltoy Studies Joumal, Vol. 18, No. 2, Winter, 1989-90

COALITION BUILDING FOR COMMUNITY-BASEDLABOR EDUCATION

Cheryt Gooding and Pat ReeveUniversity of Massachusetts-Boston

tn its 1985 report. The Changing Situation of Workers and Their Untons,the AFL-CtO Committee on the Evotutbn of Work chattenges its affitiates torevitatize a waning tabor movement. The report's authors reassure readers that"the dectine in union membership that occurred in recent years has not beenthe resutt of dissatisfaction of unbn members with their unions."^ instead, theyattribute organized tabor's decreasing numbers to hostitity on the part of taw andpotby nnakers to organized tabor, the dectine of the organized manufacturingsector of the ecorK>my, and the growth of employment in servbe irxJustries andgeographb areas lacking an organizing tradition. The Committee argues, how-ever, that organized tabor can and must devetop new nnodets of organizing,representatbn, cottective bargaining, and leadership devebpment in order torejuvenate an ailing labor nnovement.

Massachusetts tabor educators in pubiic higher educatbn took note of theAFL-CtO's catt to action and its imptications for tabor studies. As two of thosetabor advocates and educators, we are committed to designing educationat pro-grams that not onty meet standards of academic excettence. but atso enabteworking peopte to respond strategically to changes in their work places andcomnnunities. The Changing Situation of Workers and Their Unions corroboratesthe need for this approach to labor education.

tn an effort to design programs that woutd address organized tabor'schanging circumstances. Massachusetts tabor educators corKlucted informalassessnnents of the educational needs of AFL-CIO affiliates in the Comnnon-weatth. An awareness that women were under-represented in their unions tedthe tabor educators to design a leadership development program specifbalty forunion women. Program ptanners recognized that women swiftty are t ecomingthe nnajority of att wori ing people. As such, they require preparation to step intopositbns of teadership at a time when organized talDor is under attack.

The program devetoped to meet this need is called the Women's institutefor Leadership Devetopment (WILD). It departs in three important ways fromlabor studies offered by unions, continuing education, and undergraduate pro-grams in Massachusetts. First, the program is overtly political in its intent toprepare women for union teadership. Second. WtLD is sponsored by an ongoingcoatitbn of tabor organizations and university tabor education programs. Third.WtLD is a fietd-based curriculum that emphasizes both the acquisition of ana-tytbat and technicat skills required to exercise leadership and the apptication ofthose skitts in campaigns designed to improve the position of women in theirunions.

Untons and Publto Poltoy 453

Several challenges confront labor educators who collaborate wrth laborleaders to design educational programs as a means of achieving political out-comes. First, labor educators must stake out their right to enter territory usuallythought of as political and within the sole purview of organized labor. Second,having entered that territory, educators must estabiish themselves as full andlegitimate partners of organized labor in responding to the educational needsof union membership. Third, a coaiitbn must be established to institutbnaiizea working partnership between organized iabor and iabor educators.

information on the history and development of WILD's explicitly political,activist oriented collaborative program, along with reflections on the benefits anddifficulties erKX}untered, may serve as a case study for labor educators wishingto know more about the potentials of this education model.

Through this presentation, the possibilities of a collaborative model becomeclear: WILD's accomplishments are impressive. A contemporary issue emerges,however, that of organized labor's own resistance to its stated goals. The paperconcludes with the strategies being developed by WILD to address this reality.

Two women based in university labor education programs began meetingin 1985 to discuss the lack of educational and support programs for unionwomen in the Commonwealth. Erica Bronstein, Director of the Labor EducationCenter at Southeastem Massachusetts University, and Cheryl Gooding, thenAssociate Director of the Labor Studies Program at the University of Massachu-setts, Boston, were acutely aware that the interests of female union memberswere riot well represented in proportion to their numbers in the iabor movement.In 1980 women held 12 percent of national union governing board positions, butmade up almost 30 percent of union members.^ While no statistics for Massa-chusetts exist, (a symptom of the problem), women are clearly under-repre-sented at the highest level of unions and within regional and statewide laborbodies. Massachusetts statistics reflect national statistics at best.

Faculty women in the labor education programs knew that their programofferings were insufficient to prepare women for greater participation andrepresentation in their unions. University programs offered occasional con-ferences, seminars, and courses for union women. Access to these scantresources was limited, however, to women already enrolled at the University.The vast majority of union women were not enrolled, nor were they likely to bein the future. A lack of time, money, self-confidence, and the teaming skillsrequired for college education acted as barriers to enrollment.

The labor unions were not filling the gap left by university labor educationprograms. Union inaction resulted from a lack of data concerning the actualnumbers and educational needs of union women, a failure to allocate resourcesto obtain that information, and, in some cases, institutional resistance topromoting the interests and agenda of trade union women.

Bronstein and Gooding enlisted the support of women active in the AFL-CIO and the Greater Boston Chapter of the Coalition for Labor Union Women(CLUW), as well as faculty at the Labor Relations and Research Center atthe University of Massachusetts/Amherst. In 1986 they founded the Women'sInstitute for Leadership Development. WILD is an educational collaborative

454 Poltoy Studies Journal

sponsored by five institutions: labor education programs at the University ofMassachusetts at Boston and Amherst and Southeastem Massachusetts Uni-versity, the Greater Boston Chapter of the Coalition of Labor Union Women(CLUW), and the Massachusetts AFL-CIO. A Staff Director is hired, supervised,and evaluated by collaborative members.

Coalition building to promote women's leadership devebpment emerged forpragmatic and political reasons. The labor education programs each had awoman on staff at the Director or Associate Director level. Each of thesewomen was committed to the leadership devebpment of unbn women. CLUW'smissbn incorporated union women's leadership development. In additbn,CLUW's positbn as a membership organization within organized labor extendedthe potential reach and credibility of WILD across the state. The cooperatbn ofthe Massachusetts AFL-CIO was considered crucial to WILD gaining access tounion leaders who had an important role to play in subsidizing and recruitingwomen to WILD's programs.

The coalition was established through a series of relatively informal nego-tiatbns conducted by representatives from each of the five sponsoring organ-izatbns.' Although the sponsors had established working relatbnships in thepast, this was the first time that all five would work together. Frank discussbnswere hekl concerning two issues. Would the AFL-CIO be willing to grant pro-gram planners the autonomy they required in order to develop an organizationalprogram that not only met standards for educational excellence but would havethe affect of politicizing union women? Would labor educators become inappro-priately involved in the daily workings of union governance and electbns forhigh offbe?

Once the concerns of individual sponsors, one of which we represented,had been aired and addressed, each institution agreed in principle to supportWILD. Sponsors also agreed to send an organizational representative to WILD'sSteering Committee, with the understanding that their representative wouldreport back and obtain approval for decisions that entailed further commitmentsof organizatbnal resources. The women who had come together to create WILDnow sat as organizational representatives to the Steering Committee. That com-mittee devebped budget and program proposals for WILD's first year of opera-tbn.

Steering Committee members next directed their energies to articulatingWILD's missbn, goals, curriculum and program format. They set three goals: toincrease the number and also the diversity of women leaders in the Massachu-setts labor movement, and to develop models of empowering leadership and ofleadership development education.

The Steering Committee established two guiding principles for programdevelopment. First, WILD's programs had to be accessible to Massachusettsunion women, regardless of their backgrounds, in temis of location, content andlength of program, teaching methodology, and cost. For this reason, childcareprovisbns had to be made for union women who had family responsibilities.Second, WILD had to present ongoing, not ad hoc, programs that provided

Untons and Publto Poltoy 455

women with opportunities to practice their leadership skills in their unbn localsand the broader labor movement.

WILD's planners had all attended and/or taught in the Regbnal SummerSchools sponsored by the University and College Labor Educatbn Associatbn,the AFL-CIO, and the Coalition for Labor Union Women. The Summer School'sresponsiveness to the needs of unbn women provided WILD's Steering Com-mittee with an important model for women's labor education. Yet, the schoollacked the accessibility WILD's planners sought. The Summer School operatedon a regional basis, rotating among seven states comprising the New Englandregbn. Massachusetts hosted the school once every seven years. Many unionwomen in the Comnrionwealth could rK>t attend the School even when it cameto Massachusetts. Their wof1< and family responsibilities made it impossible forthem to attend a week-long program.

In light of the above, the Steering Committee developed a weekend-bngSummer Institute as the centerpiece of WILD's leadership devebpment program.The Committee recommended the Institute be held on college campuses androtate annually to a different region of the state.

Over the last three years, the Institute has been planned by a diversegroup of trade union women who serve on working committees. These commit-tees develop, implement, and evaluate their work plans in consultation with theSteering Committee. A shared commitment to achieving diversity and multicul-turalism in program planning and outreach guides committee activities.

The Institute curriculum has its roots in the UCLEA Regional SummerSchools and the leadership training series, "Color Me Union!", devebped by thenatbnal Coalition for Labor Union Women. Since its inception, WILD's programshave been evaluated annually by its planners, students, and teachers. Theseevaluations become the basis for program redesign.

Women who teach in the Institute include trained labor educators, experi-enced labor activists, and rank and file women who are new to teaching arnjactivism. These women are targeted, recruited, and mentored by more experi-enced women. Once they've gained experience, they are encouraged to mentorwomen less experienced than themselves.

WILD's Summer Institute offers a three-track curriculum. All participantsselect either a beginning or advanced level leadership development track.Participants then choose a 'major' from among several skill areas, which theyfocus on during the weekend. These include public speaking, negotiatbn,steward's training, and running for union office. Short workshops on issues ofpartbular interest to women workers also are offered, and include topics suchas bargaining for childcare, pay equity, sexual harassment, and balarrcing thedemands of motherhood and labor activism.

Given the sponsors' commitment to program continuity, WILD's work doesnot stop at an annual Institute. WILD's founders knew that the Institute was afirst step toward achieving several objectives. During the Institute, WILD'sSteering Committee and staff encourage women to join CLUW, to meet by in-dustry and region in order to facilitate the later development of Women'sCommittees and regional CLUW chapters, and to consult with labor educators

456 Policy Studies Joumal

about enrolling in college tebor education programs. After the Institute, WILD'ssponsors arKl staff remain in contact with alumnae, providing them with thetechnbai assistance they need to present workshops and create support net-works In their unbns or regbns.

The WILD Steering Committee learns a great deal from evaluatbns byinstitute partbipants and teachers. The Committee recognizes, however, that thisis relatively soft data. In order to evaluate the impact of WILD's programs onInstitute enrollees in measurable terms, the educatbnai attainment and objec-tives of Institute partbipants must be assessed. Similarly, WILD's sponsorsmust determine the nuniber of women currently holding leadership positbns inMassachusetts unbns in order to gauge WILD's progress toward its missbn:increasing the representation by and participatbn of women in their unbns.

Sponsors have sought and received funding for the first of two denru)-graphb surveys of Massachusetts unions and their female membership. TheLabor Relatbns and Research Center at the University of Massachusetts atAmherst, in cooperatbn with the Massachusetts AFL-CIO conducted a surveyof the leadership of AFL-CIO affiliate unions. WILD's sponsors sought informa-tbn about 1) the educational needs of Massachusetts unbns, 2) the degree ofwomen's participation in union leadership and 3) what current bcal leadershipidentifies as barriers to women's participation. Two hundred and two leaderswere surveyed and 46.5 percent responded. Over 68 percent of all respondentsreported "some" or a "great deal" of growth in their female mennbership. Unionleaders were asked what three things they felt would best help these womento become union leaders. Respondents recommended the following:

• More involvement in union activities 54.3%• Skill development 47.9%• More time in the union 38.3%• More encouragement from leadership 34.0%• Providing childcare for union activities 27.7%

Recommendations for action clearly fall into two categories: those which unionwomen can implement without direct intervention by union leadership and thosethat must be addressed organizationally with the full support of existing laborleadership.

Contingent upon funding, union women will be surveyed for their perceptionof the barriers they confront. Research results will guide the devebpment ofWILD's activist-oriented educational programs, as well as inform the AFL-CICand its affiliates about the needs of their female members. Data will also behighly useful to university labor educators seeking to increase the responsive-ness of their programs to trade union women.

WILD's accomplishments go far beyond the development of a highly suc-cessful education program. WILD has succeeded in putting union women'sleadership development on the agenda of organized labor in the Common-wealth. The fact that 90 percent of the women who attend the Institute aresponsored by their unions speaks to WILD's success in organizing support

Untons and Publto Poltoy 457

within organized labor. The decisbn to maintain WILD's high profile has beena deliberate strategy that encompassed a variety of tactbs: publbizing theInstitute and ongoing research activities; cultivating reiatbnships with labor andcommunity press; activating informal networks of WILD alumnae to bbby theirunion leadership; celebrating WILD participants who successfully run for highunion offbes; and continual fundraising and outreach activities.

WILD has also been a vehicle for unprecedented collaboratbn among thethree labor educatbn programs in the state, and between these programs andthe Massachusetts AFL-CIO, the Coalitbn for Labor Unbn Women, and localunions. These partnerships have set the stage for coiiaboratbn beyond WILDand have enhanced the reputatbn and visibility of iabor educatbn programswithin organized labor.

WILD's sponsors have teamed several lessons over the last three years.The first step in developing a collaborative relationship between iabor educationprograms and organized labor is to identify an issue or need, and then todevelop a shared definition of the problem and its solution. The Women's Insti-tute for Leadership Development was created because women labor activistsand labor educators agreed that too few union women represented the needsof an increasingly female rank and file. For that reason, WILD's sponsorscreated a leadership devebpment program that they hoped woukJ 1) empowerand enable women to become recognized union leaders arK) 2) make the labormovement more accountable to working women's issues and needs, by educat-ing women to be their own best advocates.

Steering Committee members learned that a collaborative venture givesrise to hybrid problem solving approaches that differ nrK)re or less from thoseused by sponsoring organizations. Jointly designed and evaluated programsshould take account of, but not be held hostage to, the missbn, constituency,and decision making structure of any one institution. For instance, WILD'ssponsors believe that a serious effort to develop women's leadership within thelabor nrKJvement requires dual emphases on education and activism. WILD'sfounders contend that its educational program must be linked with an actionplan to ensure that there are continuing opportunities for women to find support,build skills, and exercise teadership. In sum, WILD's Steering Committee mea-sures its success by the quality and impact of its educational programs, thelatter being WILD's capacity to foster new leadership among women at all levelsof the labor movement. Although this approach has been adopted by the Com-mittee, it might not be one which an individual sponsor would take in fulfillingits mission and objectives relative to union women.

Successful partnership also requires consensus about program breadth arKJoutcomes. Institutional representatives to WILD, for instance, seek not just tooffer educational programs, but to build the base of women's leadership invisible ways and to take part in shaping an agenda for organized labor that istajly reflective of the needs of working women. Regardless of their commitmentto this agenda, university-based labor educators alone could not take up thischallenge because it falls outside the purview of university policy-making. Byworking in concert with the appropriate policy making organization, (the

458 Poltoy ^dies Joumal

Massachusetts AFL-CIO. m this case), iabor educators can make a contributbnto rebuildirig the iabor movement.

Occasbnaliy the terms of coatitbn buikiing must be renegotiated. Forinstance, WILD's Steering Committee is at a critbal juncture in its programdevebpment. The Committee recognizes that WILD's programs provide unionwomen with opportunities for linking educatbn with activism. But the programcan not dismantle the institutional barriers to partbipation and representatbn thatconfront WILD alumnae back in their unions. WILD's sponsors understand thatunion women are frustrated by these barriers to activism. As a result, the Steer-ing Committee is now considering the problem and possible solutbns. Commit-tee members know that this may well be the nrx>st poiitbally charged activitythat they've undertaken to date. Any attempt by the Steering Committee toaddress institutbnal sexism within the labor nrK)vement will challenge govemancewithin that nrwvement. The Steering Committee understands that it must act withfinesse to avoid jeopardizing WILD's standing and effectiveness within the laborcommunity.

WILD's sponsors believe that bcal unions must be challenged to do nrwrefor unbn women than simply underwrite the cost of their members' Institutetuitbn. Female union members must take the lead in making women's leader-ship devebpment a priority within their locals. WILD's sponsors can play animportant role in lobbying local leaders to support, or at least not oppose, theseefforts. Toward this end, it has been proposed that WILD programs expand toinclude a'training the trainer' curriculum and program. WILD participants wouldbe trained to use the Institute currbulum in their unions as a means of devel-oping the leadership skills of their union sisters. As a result of this program, thegeneration of new leaders will be ongoing after the Institute. In addition, theLabor Studies Program at the University of Massachusetts/Boston nnay accreditthe program as partial fulfillment of a Certificate in Adult Educatbn and Trainingfor those women interested in enrolling in college while organizing in their bcal.

In addition to making bcai leadership more accountable to their femalemembership, WILD's Steering Committee is evaluating the extent to whbh thepoibies and practices of each sponsoring organization encourage or discouragethe educatbnai and leadership development of trade union women. Committeemembers believe that WILD's mission and outcomes may suggest new direc-tbns for the advocacy and educational programs of its five sponsors. Repre-sentatives to WILD now must work within their own organizations to ensure thatwomen's leadership development is an institutional priority and not merely theactivity undertaken by female staff holding a personal commitment to WILD'sgoals.

The collaborative's experience to date will serve it well as it takes on thesenew challenges. Representatives from sponsoring organizations have developeda more sophistbated understanding of one another's organizational priorities andconstraints. This has resulted in improved communication between sponsors anda greater appreciation of the contributions that labor organizations and laboreducators make to building the labor movement.

Untons and Publto Poltoy 459

WILD denfK)nstrates that labor educatbn programs have a vaiuabte role toplay in today's labor nrK)vement. The reach and impact of iabor educators canbe expanded greatly through coalition work with unions and other labor organi-zatbns. Community-based models of labor educatbn such as WILD increase theopportunities for labor educators to meet the educatbnai needs of today's iabormovement.

Cooperation between university labor educators in publb higher educationand labor organizatbns in Massachusetts is especially critbal at a time whenthe state's fiscal crisis threatens the stability of university-based iabor educationprograms.' These programs are an innportant resource for labor organizatbnswhose leaders nrujst acquire the skills required to protect the interests of workingpeople at a time when labor is under attack. Partnerships like WILD lay thefoundatbn for coalitions of labor advocates and labor educators to demand thatstate educatbnai policy makers balance their allocations to business and man-agement schools with support to the educational programs of working people.Such support, combined with appropriate new polbies and practbes within thelabor movement, will foster a far greater teadership role union women in thefuture.

NOTES

1. AFL-CIO Committee on the Evolution of Work, The Changing Status ofWorkers and Their Unions, February 1985.

2. Chaison and Andiappan, "An Analysis of the Barriers to Women BecomingLocal Unbn Officers," Journal of Latx)r Research, Spring 1989.

3. These negotiations were informal. Steering Committee members, althoughaccountable to their institution, had worked previously with one another andtrusted one another. The authors were present throughout negotiatbns.Other representatives included Erica Bronstein, Director of the LaborEducatbn Center at Southeastem Massachusetts University; Date Meteher,faculty at the Labor Relations and Research Center at the University ofMassachusetts, Amherst; Joan Parker, Chair of the Greater Boston Coali-tbn of Labor Union Women; and Nancy Mills, Director of Local 285,Servbe Empbyees International Union, AFL-CIO a Vice President in theMassachusetts Federation of Labor. Laura Gang, a former organizer withLocal 285, was hired during and participated in these negotiatbns asWILD's first staff person.

4. Unpublished data. Survey Research Project of the Labor Relations andResearch Center, the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and theMassachusetts Federation of Labor, compiled fall 1989 for WILD.

5. In spring of this year, the Provost for the University of Massachusetts,Amherst proposed cutting the Labor Relations and Research Center's

460 Polby Studies Joumal

budget by 29 percem as a cost-saving measure. The Provost argued thatlabor studies was not centrai to the mission of a land grant university. TheMassachusetts Federation of Labor played an important role in combattingthis effort to reduce access to higher education for working people. TheUniversity and Center are completing negotiations concerning this matter.