By Paul Pickett, Assistant Chief Steward
Some employee members of WFSE have been discussing whether Ecology should have its own agency-based Local. Over the next few months we will explore this issue in a series of articles.
Last month I shared information about Locals: what they are and what they do. Listed below are many of the issues and how an agency-based Local compares to a geographic Local.
Solidarity. A geographic Local allows Ecology employees to work side-by-side with employees in other agencies. They can learn what they have in common and support each other on solving their problems. An agency-based Local might isolate employees and reduce their power to address systemic issues.
Self-determination. Members in an agency-based Local have greater control over decision-making, including the selection of delegates and financial decisions. Geographic Locals are often dominated by the larger agencies or by cliques of very active member leaders. With the broader range of issues in a geographic Local, issues of concern to Ecology may be lost or ignored.
Access to Financial Resources. An agency-based Local would have its own budget and be able to make decisions quickly about funding for projects. Each Local gets funded at a set amount per member. A Local based on members in the Ecology Lacey building alone could have an annual budget of over $10,000 per year. This could greatly expand the variety of events and projects undertaken. For example, an Ecology Local could pay for speakers or sponsor events.
Legal Responsibilities. A Local has responsibilities under the Union rules and constitution and under federal and state laws, including auditing of books and proper procedure for decision-making. A new agency-based Local will have to develop this expertise to be successful. The broader base of membership and greater experience of the geographic Local helps ensure consistency and continuity for compliance with rules and laws. On the other hand, the geographic Local is more complex and has a larger budget, and compliance may be easier for a small agency-based Local.
Leadership of the Organization. The geographic Local has a larger pool of members from which to find leadership. Finding enough active people to fill leadership positions is a challenge even in a large Local. An agency-based Local might find it even more difficult to get the commitment of time from its members to meet its leadership needs.
Self-empowerment. Because of its smaller size and greater self-determination, an agency-based Local may bring more members into active roles. The large size of the geographic Local is sometimes a disincentive to active participation.
Member Access. The geographic Local allow members to attend Local meetings that are relatively nearby. An agency-based Local based on multiple locations statewide would have the challenge of ensuring access to the Local meetings for all members. Part of the Local budget may be spent paying for travel for members or for telecommunications resources. The agency video-conferencing system would not be available! Meeting might need to be rotated around the state for fairness. On the other hand, geographic Locals are sometimes no more convenient if they represent a large area. In addition, the schedule and agenda of geographic Local meetings may make them relatively inaccessible if the meetings are long, boring, and at an inconvenient time.
Political Clout. The geographic Local can have great influence on politics locally. They are able to endorse with the voice of a diverse membership and mobilize resources in support of candidates and issues. The agency-based Local will have less clout due to its smaller size and narrower focus. However, a Local at Ecology could focus more attention on issues unique to our agency, addressing both traditional labor issues and environmental issues. It would have more freedom to build alliances with environmental groups that support the agency mission.
Flexibility and Responsiveness. A smaller agency-based Local could make decisions and respond to emerging issues much more quickly than a geographic Local. Decision-making in larger Locals is often cumbersome and slow. An agency-based Local could be more nimble in bringing resources to bear on problems.
This discuss may have triggered more ideas and questions in your mind. We encourage you to continue this analysis with your fellow members, stewards, and member leaders. One opportunity is the Bargaining Unit meeting every second Tuesday at noon.
Our next article will look existing agency-based Locals in natural resource agencies to see how they function. ■
No comments:
Post a Comment