GENTECH archive


FW: GE CEO Jack Welch's infamous quote: "Ideally, you'd have... (fwd)

 Let's keep the real info coming....
 Here's a nice summation of the WTO goings-on by a prominent trade
 union activist from Boston. Amongst other things, it has a bit more
 rounded perspective on the property destruction that went on than
 some of the posts I've just been reading. Definitely worth a read.
 -Eric Odell
 Jeff Crosby  (   December 6, 1999
 I went to Seattle with 15 members of unions in the North Shore Labor
 Council, from the area between Boston and New Hampshire in
 Massachusetts.  Eleven were from IUE Local 201 at the GE plant in
 Lynn and Ametek Aerospace in Wilmington (my union local, of which I
 am President).  Contrary to the musings of Robert Reich and others
 that the primary loss of jobs in the United States through NAFTA and
 "free trade" would be unskilled work, both GE and Ametek aircraft
 engine work are headed to Mexico, Russia, China, Brazil, and other
 countries.  The engineering and planning work is going as well.
 Company documents had been leaked to us showing that GE Aircraft
 Engines is not only in a two-year, all-out push to ship work
 overseas, but is demanding that all their vendors do the same.  At a
 meeting in Monterrey, Mexico, earlier this year, GE told assembled
 vendors (over 70 companies) that they would move to Mexico or get cut
 off from all GE business.  "This is not an informative meeting", they
 told the smaller companies.  "We expect you to move, and to move
 In a presentation called "Why Mexico?", GE told Ametek and the other
 vendors: average manufacturing worker makes $6 a day, unions are
 "friendly", and environmental regulations are not a problem.  It was
 a cold-blooded plan to destroy our own livelihoods and prey off
 people at starvation wages.
 Ametek has not been a bad place to work.  We have 290 members there.
 We build everything from cable attachments to aircraft engines to
 thermocouples and other aerospace work.  The Wilmington, Ma. plant
 had won awards as "supplier of the year" from GE, and the "Lux" award
 as the highest quality Ametek plant within the Ametek chain.  We had
 multi-skilled the workforce through a union-company negotiation, and
 brought in state training money to increase the skill level of the
 We thought we were doing everything right, and so did Ametek.  And
 now we were going to be thrown on the street.  One GE worker in our
 group has been laid off 11 times.
 So we were pissed.  After 7 or 8 years working on trade issues in our
 local union, it was not hard to sign up 11 people for the trip.  Some
 great trade unionists from other unions in the Council came along as
 well (SEIU, AFGE, AFSCME).  All of us paid our own way and looked to
 have some fun as well as do some serious protesting.
 My impressions from a week in Seattle:
 1. The group learned a lot
 With help from our International Union, we built a float, a barge
 representing GE CEO Jack Welch's infamous quote: "Ideally, you'd have
 every plant you own on a barge".  Again with the help of the
 International Union, we did 15-20 interviews, especially with media
 in the Boston area about our issues.
 We talked with lots of students, farmers from Japan, people from
 India, professors from Boston College, steelworkers from Ohio,
 environmentalists of various stripes,  church activists, as well as
 anyone who happened to be seated next to us on a plane or in the
 airport, and the waitresses and cabbies that we met in Seattle.
 A year's worth of political discussion was compressed into 6 days:
 the role of the different movements, the role of the folks from other
 countries, the question of violence and civil disobedience, etc.
 Anyone who missed Seattle missed a great chance to build up their
 core of leaders and activists in their union or other group.  Trade
 unionists in the US don't exist in a vacuum, and we see ourselves
 more clearly when we see ourselves in relationship to others.
 2. The Kids Are Alright-and have much to teach us.
 The labor movement basically piggy-backed on the courage of the young
 environmentalists and anti-sweatshop and church activists.
 Without the direct action, which disrupted the WTO, the labor march
 would have received a 90 second clip on the nightly news, with some
 voiceover like, "A bunch of inefficient union workers from the
 rustbelt marched for a return of the bad old days.  Fortunately the
 WTO delegates largely ignored these bits of road kill on the way to
 the new economy.   Although they are hopeless Luddites, it is true
 that something must be done for the losers in the new world economy
 who are too old and hidebound to run a computer...."
 Then again, without the tens of thousands of union members, it would
 have been easier to write off the young protesters as flakes, people
 who aren't worried about basic issues like having to earn a living. I
 guess the ideal mix was summed up in the now-famous sign carried by
 one kid in the Tuesday march: "Teamsters and Turtles, Together at
 The decision by the AFL-CIO not to plan direct action was a mistake.
 The literature and petition the AFL-CIO used for Seattle was mostly
 unreadable and unusable, with no edge.  Despite some heroic efforts
 by union folks in Seattle and other places, the AFL-CIO campaign was
 reminiscent of the "old" AFL-CIO's campaign against NAFTA-remember
 "Not This NAFTA"?  If we had run a campaign against the Congressional
 "Fast-track" vote with "not this fast-track", we would have lost that
 one, too.  Did anyone really try to bring people to Seattle under the
 slogan, "We demand a working group"?
 This is a period when on certain issues, massive, non-violent direct
 action is in order, as the demonstration in Seattle shows.  Every
 member who went on our trip reports that support for the
 demonstrations, even with the disruptions, is overwhelming.  And not
 just from other workers in the shop, but family and other friends,
 regardless of what they do for a living.  "Since we came home, we're
 being treated like conquering heroes," marveled one of our group.
 Perhaps the AFL-CIO was driven by policy advisors in the Washington
 who didn't understand how angry people are about this issue.  (The
 polls were there for the reading-or they could have asked people in
 the field).  Perhaps they did not want to embarrass Gore.  Perhaps
 Sweeney had an agreement by Clinton to ask for enforceable labor
 standards.  Perhaps they thought that most people would be turned off
 by civil disobedience,  or something else,  I don't know. There were
 plenty of people in the labor movement pushing for the labor movement
 to join in the Direct Action-we lost.
 Clinton's commitment, prior to the demonstration, to support a
 "working group" to review the effects of the agreements on labor was
 not taken seriously by anyone outside of Washington.  It was  blown
 away as meaningless by Clinton's own trade negotiator Barshevsky as
 soon as Sweeney signed on to the administration's letter on US trade
 goals at the WTO.  Clinton himself left the "working group" in the
 dust when he came to Seattle and proposed at the last minute that
 enforceable labor standards be included in talks for the next WTO
 round.  With his record of duplicity (remember the NAFTA side accords
 on labor rights?) this has to be seen as a sop to bail out Gore more
 than anything else-although of course it's good he said it, and
 indicates strength on our part.
 I did an interview on a "Trade Watch" program by NPR and others, on
 the same show as Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Cleveland.  He
 predicted that both Democratic candidates would start moving towards
 the labor movement on trade during the primaries, and that the
 eventual candidate will pick a running mate that has a strong
 pro-labor and environment record on trade agreements.  Sounds likely
 to me.
 For our part, we have to just keep doing what got us here, and not
 put our hopes on any of the presidential candidates.
 In Seattle, we were, in a sense. bailed out by the kids.   The
 Steelworkers-hats off to them-- and Longshoremen  (ILWU) did a great
 job, with the Longshoremen shutting down all West Coast ports!  The
 Teamsters made a major effort to mobilize for Seattle as well--those
 were the unions that went all out, as far as I could tell.  (Of
 course the local Seattle and Washington unions did as well.)
 3. The Fair-trade movement is an internationalist movement..
 Even some of the mainstream commentaries noted this.  I was proud
 that the AFL-CIO rally had speakers from Mexico, South Africa, the
 Caribbean, China, France, etc.    A Ford maquiladora worker got a
 huge response at the AFL-CIO rally when she shouted, "Long Live the
 Zapatistas!"  It reminded me of a day in January of 1994, after our
 bitter defeat on the NAFTA vote, when a member of our local union's
 Legislative Committee came into the union hall, all pumped up.  He
 had a newspaper story of the Chiapas rebellion, which had just broken
 out: "Man, these guys really hate NAFTA!"
 There could be no mistake that this was not a Pat Buchanan crew. This
 makes building alliances easier, both within the US and across
 borders.  We've come a long way from thinking that the answer is just
 to "Buy American."
 There will still be issues.  I am told that even some of the third
 world unions are not in favor of enforceable labor standards in trade
 agreements, like many of their governments. This will have to be
 worked out.
 4. Whose "violence'?
 If you were not there, think for a moment about what you did not read
 about: the number of injured police, buildings being burned, etc.
 Virtually none of this happened. I only read about "firebombs" when I
 got back to my hometown newspaper.  I never read or heard a word
 about that when I was in Seattle, and I was there through Thursday.
 Some union folks were pissed off about the anarchists breaking
 windows downtown, feeling that it was getting all the media coverage
 and our message was getting lost.  I heard nothing but respect for
 the direct action folks.
 For some reason, the role of the faith-based organizations was nearly
 blacked out in the press that I read.  Church services and marchers
 of thousands got little ink.  They often focused on canceling third
 world debt, or workers' rights-groups like Preamble or Jubilee 2000.
 The development of a powerful faith-based movement in support of
 workers rights and a just international economy is a key story of the
 '90s, and was very evident in Seattle.
 Denouncing the violence of the protesters, in my opinion, only plays
 into the media game of putting the blame on the demonstrators.
 The endless gassing and firing of plastic projectiles and rubber
 bullets into crowds of non-violent demonstrators made no sense to me
 at all.  Tear gas will make you move along temporarily, but it won't
 generally make you go home, especially if you have come to a
 demonstration with the intention of getting arrested in civil
 disobedience. Most of the financial losses reported by merchants were
 from lost business, and the main reason nobody wanted to go downtown
 was because the cops were gassing everywhere and hundreds of
 scary-looking automatons were blocking off the streets.
 The cops also had a few innovations since the '60s, like guns that
 shoot 2-inch chunks of wooden dowel at people.  One of these dowels
 broke a window a few inches above the head of SEIU staffer with us-he
 snatched it up and kept it as a souvenir.
 Perhaps most important, any focus on the alleged "violence" and
 "rioting" of the protesters takes the focus away from on the
 corporations who are trashing continents, not a few plate-glass
 5. So what has changed?
 Usually when something goes right, we suffer from euphoria and
 overestimate our gains.  And the corporations always have more
 resources than we do in the effort to define what has happened, and
 they make up some of their losses.  So there is a second "Battle of
 Seattle" that is now underway.  The first was in Seattle.  The second
 is the battle for public opinion over what Seattle means.  The first
 thing we need to do is address this second battle with every means at
 out disposal.
 As has been pointed out in many other places, everyone is talking
 about the WTO.  Add this to our victories on Fast-Track in Congress
 (twice), and the collapse of the talks on a Multi-lateral Agreement
 on Investment--we are driving the agenda.
 I was optimistic about public support for the anti-WTO
 demonstrations, but even so I was amazed at how broad it was.  A
 Seattle cabbie, picking his way through the gas, told us, "Good.  You
 can't just lie down."  A programmer for Fidelity financial services,
 of all companies, who happened to be seated between two of us on a
 flight from Philadelphia to Boston, told us:  "You were there? Great.
 They were protesting in Italy, too."  At a church-community coalition
 dinner in which we are involved, it was a main point of discussion.
 Speakers used it as an example of how you can change things through
 action.  The head of the local community health center bumped in to a
 couple of us at lunch and told us, "Hey, congratulations on Seattle."
 What's great is that for most of the demonstrators in Seattle, this
 was not a one-time thing.  They are already organized, and have
 already been working on trade, labor and environmental issues for
 years, and return to their organizations energized for more.
 At least for a moment, and I am hopeful that it will last, the "There
 Is No Alternative" (to quote Margaret Thatcher) crowd is back on
 their heels.  And the "There Must Be An Alternative" crowd (our side)
 is on the offensive.  The stereotypes of the "selfish generation" of
 young folks, and of the labor neanderthals, both took direct hits in
 So now back to work.  Catch up on your union grievances, catch up on
 your schoolwork, catch up on your sleep.  Then take advantage of the
 presidential elections, the debate over Most Favored Nation status
 for China, and whatever else comes along to broaden the coalition and
 deepen our roots.
 Congratulations, everyone.
 Jeff Crosby  (   December 6, 1999

For MAI-not (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other MAI sites please see