Here is some information from Region D National Oil Bargaining Policy Committee Representative Steve Garey about how our National Oil Bargaining Program originated. His story appeared in the latest edition of the Tesoro Nationwide Councils newsletter. Rank-and-File Input Has Marked Our National oil Bargaining Program for 49 Years As your representative on the National Oil Bargaining Program (NOBP) policy committee, I have been asked to share some of what I know about it. This is timely as we prepare for the next round of national oil bargaining talks which will achieve a 2015 agreement that supports our members’ best interests. The NOB program, the policy committee, and the conferences that support them are an important gift that we have inherited from our fore bearers who created them 49 years ago. The program is a legacy that was passed down to us in 1965 when progressive rank and file unionism was in its heyday. This was a time when union members did not just pay dues. They went to meetings in great numbers. They debated issues and took their voting rights very seriously. They chose their leaders carefully, and most importantly, the rank and file meant to hold those officers accountable to them. They did this by writing into their controlling documents- their constitutions and bylaws- the rules that created and sustained rank and file participation and oversight in the unions affairs. The NOBP is a unique example of this progressive history. While the NOBP as we know it was developed by one of our predecessors - the Oil, Chemical, & Atomic Workers Union (OCAW) - rank and file control was achieved even earlier. In 1936 an earlier union, the Oil Workers International Union, revised their constitution to create an elected rank and file executive board with shared power and oversight over union officers. OCAW was formed 19 years later when this early oil workers union merged with yet another organization in our industry, the Gas, Coke, and Chemical Workers Union. Most importantly, the rank and file control provisions in the early Oil Workers constitution survived the merger talks and became one of the most important characteristics of OCAW in its early years. During those years after the 1955 merger that created OCAW, a wage and policy committee of rank and file members assisted in contract bargaining. As important as rank and file control was, however, there were also problems associated with it which made it difficult to negotiate com-mon issues on a national basis. The earlier bargaining could not be coordinated nationally. National unity was difficult to achieve. Locals often cut their own deals. Some contracts had very good language and some were very poor. The NOB program that we know today was created within OCAW in the mid-1960s in an effort to address those problems. It came about as a result of a strategic compromise between rank and file leaders and International Union officers in an effort to take the very best con-tract language and apply it to all contracts across the country. In 1965, the newly elected president of OCAW, Al Grospiron, went to the policy committee and asked for something earlier presidents had not had--the exclusive right to call strikes on issues of national importance. The committee ultimately granted him that authority, but retained the right of oversight as well as the right to have the final say on any agreement that might be reached. Because the lead negotiator now had this power, the companies could no longer play one local off against another. They could no longer divide and conquer. The first victory came quickly when a common contract expiration date was achieved on December 31, 1966. Shortly thereafter, this grand bargain which became NOBP was written into the constitution of the International Union. It has since survived two more mergers, first PACE and now USW, to remain the best strategy we have for negotiating with the most powerful industry in the world. In summary, NOBP works by retaining the rank and files right to set policy at the conference, the right to chose their policy committee for oversight, and ultimately, the policy committees final say on any agreement the lead officer can reach while giving that officer full strike authority on matters of the national policy as determined by conference. That is the power that the negotiator needs at the table when confronting this industry. Combined, this power sharing has been an effective check and balance strategy that has served us well. Some of our most important gains have come about as a result of this strategy. Common expiration dates were first. Plant closure language, rate retention, pensions, health and safety, and succesorship language are all other examples of our achievements. This system is not perfect. No system is. We still win some and lose some, but I believe its effectiveness over the years is proven. It is a gift to us from the past. It is our responsibility to nurture this gift and use it as effectively as possible. Our best interests as rank and file union members depend upon it. In solidarity, Steve Garey Region D NOBP policy committee rep. President USW 12-591
Posted on: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:07:25 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015