Three unions bolt CT AFL-CIO after failure to oust leader – CT Mirror

Report on the Disaffiliation of Building-Trade Unions from the Connecticut AFL-CIO and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A significant restructuring has occurred within the Connecticut labor movement, with three major building-trade unions disaffiliating from the state’s AFL-CIO federation. This development, stemming from an unsuccessful leadership challenge, impacts over 10,000 workers and raises critical questions regarding the state’s progress toward several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This report analyzes the schism’s effect on SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

Impact on SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

The departure of the unions directly challenges the promotion of sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all, as outlined in SDG 8. A fragmented labor movement may weaken the collective power necessary to advocate for workers’ rights and protections.

Background of the Dispute and Disaffiliation

The core of the issue was a failed attempt to replace the current president of the Connecticut AFL-CIO, Ed Hawthorne. Following the withdrawal of the challenging slate, three unions initiated their disaffiliation:

• The Connecticut Laborers District Council
• The Operating Engineers
• Pipefitters Local 777

The Connecticut Laborers District Council formally disaffiliated on October 1, signaling a definitive break from the state federation’s central leadership.

Implications for Worker Advocacy

This division within organized labor could undermine efforts to advance policies that protect and enhance workers’ rights. A recent point of contention was the gubernatorial veto of a bill that would have provided jobless benefits to striking workers. The AFL-CIO leadership strongly condemned the veto, highlighting a fraught relationship with the state administration. The departure of influential unions could diminish the collective pressure exerted on policymakers to support such pro-worker legislation, thereby affecting the achievement of targets under SDG 8 concerning labor rights and safe and secure working environments for all workers.

Relevance to SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

The building-trade unions are central to the development of resilient infrastructure, a key component of SDG 9. The disaffiliation highlights pre-existing tensions regarding the federation’s support for infrastructure projects that generate union jobs.

Historical Tensions over Infrastructure Policy

Past disagreements centered on the perception that the broader, public-sector-dominated federation did not adequately support initiatives crucial to the building trades. A notable example includes:

1. An unsuccessful push to reintroduce tolls to fund major infrastructure projects.
2. A significant $1.5 million lobbying effort by the construction industry and trade unions to support the initiative.

These events underscore the specific focus of the building trades on securing large-scale projects that ensure employment and contribute to the state’s infrastructure goals.

Current Projects and Union Involvement

Despite the internal conflict, the building trades maintain a working relationship with the state administration on key projects that align with SDG 9. This includes project-labor agreements on major state-funded construction and the expansion of the State Pier in New London, which is vital for the development of the off-shore wind industry—a critical component of sustainable industrialization and clean energy infrastructure.

Challenges to SDG 16 (Strong Institutions) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals)

The schism represents a challenge to the institutional integrity of the state’s primary labor federation and fractures a key partnership for advancing workers’ collective interests.

Institutional Effectiveness and Inclusivity (SDG 16)

SDG 16 calls for effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels. The inability of the Connecticut AFL-CIO to resolve internal leadership and policy disputes, leading to the departure of major affiliates, raises questions about its institutional effectiveness. The conflict suggests a failure to accommodate the diverse interests of its member unions, particularly the distinct priorities of the building trades versus public-sector unions.

Fractured and Future Partnerships (SDG 17)

The AFL-CIO is, by its nature, a partnership designed to achieve common goals. The disaffiliation marks a breakdown of this partnership, potentially hindering the labor movement’s ability to act as a unified entity. However, statements from the AFL-CIO leadership express optimism that collaboration on common goals will continue. The need to “find a way to work together” reflects the core principle of SDG 17, which emphasizes that multi-stakeholder partnerships are crucial for achieving sustainable development objectives. The future ability of these separate entities to collaborate will be critical to their continued influence.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
   • The article’s central theme is the functioning and internal conflicts of labor unions, which are fundamental organizations for promoting decent work. It discusses issues like workers’ rights, job creation, and benefits for striking workers. The text mentions the unions’ commitment to “fighting for workers’ rights and advancing policies that improve the lives of working people.”
2. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
   • The article explicitly mentions the building trades unions’ focus on infrastructure development as a means of job creation. A key point of contention was the lobbying for “infrastructure projects that produce construction jobs,” specifically through tolls. It also highlights the “expansion of the State Pier in New London, which has been important to off-shore wind projects,” linking infrastructure to sustainable industry.
3. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The article details a conflict within a major civil society institution, the Connecticut AFL-CIO. The “failed effort to oust Ed Hawthorne as the president,” the subsequent “split,” and the disaffiliation of three unions highlight challenges related to governance, representation, and inclusivity within the organization. The entire narrative revolves around the strength and effectiveness of this labor federation.
4. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals
   • The article explores the complex relationships and partnerships between different unions, the larger AFL-CIO federation, and the state government. The disaffiliation represents a breakdown of a civil society partnership. Conversely, it notes the “cordial relations” between the building trades and the governor’s administration, and ends with a hope to “find a way to work together,” emphasizing the importance of collaboration to achieve common goals.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Under SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth):
   • Target 8.8: “Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers…” This is directly relevant to the unions’ core mission. The conflict over the governor’s veto of a “bill that would have provided jobless benefits to strikers” is a specific example of a fight to protect labor rights.
2. Under SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure):
   • Target 9.1: “Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure… to support economic development and human well-being…” The unions’ lobbying for tolls to “pay for infrastructure projects that produce construction jobs” and the support for the State Pier expansion for “off-shore wind projects” align directly with this target.
3. Under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):
   • Target 16.7: “Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.” The article’s focus on the leadership challenge, the complaints from building trades about being dominated by public-sector unions, and the eventual split are all related to the perceived lack of inclusive and representative decision-making within the AFL-CIO.
4. Under SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals):
   • Target 17.17: “Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships…” The article illustrates the dynamics of these partnerships. The conflict between the AFL-CIO president and the governor shows a strained public-civil society relationship, while the building trades’ “cordial relations” with the administration show a more effective one. The disaffiliation itself is a failure of a civil society partnership.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For Target 8.8 (Protecting labour rights):
   • An implied indicator is the status of legislation protecting workers. The article mentions the governor’s veto of the “bill that would have provided jobless benefits to strikers.” The success or failure of such legislation serves as a direct measure of the protection of labor rights.
2. For Target 9.1 (Developing infrastructure):
   • The article provides both qualitative and quantitative indicators. It mentions specific projects like the “expansion of the State Pier in New London” and the push for general “infrastructure projects.” A quantifiable indicator is the amount of money spent on advocacy: “The industry and the trade unions spent $1.5 million lobbying for the tolls.”
3. For Target 16.7 (Inclusive institutions):
   • Indicators of institutional strength and inclusivity are implied through the events described. The “disaffiliation” of three unions representing “more than 10,000 laborers” is a clear negative indicator. The existence of a “challenge slate” against the incumbent leadership also indicates dissatisfaction with the institution’s responsiveness.
4. For Target 17.17 (Effective partnerships):
   • The state of partnerships is indicated by the relationships described. The “split” and “disaffiliation” indicate a breakdown in partnership. The “cordial relations” between the building trades and the Lamont administration is a positive indicator. The public criticism of the governor by the AFL-CIO president (“he chose corporate CEOs”) is a negative indicator of the public-civil society partnership.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: ctmirror.org