National Postal Mail Handlers Union
Comes Out Against the War and Occupation of Iraq
On Saturday, August 28, 2004, at its quadrennial national convention in Boston, 330 delegates of the National Postal Mail Handlers Union (division of Laborer's International Union of North America, AFL-CIO) passed what is believed to be the first anti-war resolution in the national union?s history.
The NPMHU represents over 50,000 postal Mail Handlers and is the nation's third principal postal union (after the American Postal Workers Union and the National Association of Letter Carriers). Mail Handlers are lower paid postal workers and they perform many of the heavier loading and unloading functions, primarily in larger mail facilities.
Prior to its 2004 convention, neither the NPMHU, nor its international union (LIUNA), had taken any stand against the war and there was no indication such a position would be taken in 2004. In addition, the NPMHU has a disproportionate number of veterans in its ranks (due in large part to the hiring preferences given to veterans and disabled veterans by the U.S. Postal Service) and there was concern as to what position a number of the veterans would take on any anti-war resolution.
One month before the August 22-29, 2004, convention proposed resolutions were due and these were to be reviewed and either recommended or rejected by the convention's Resolutions Committee. Three anti-war resolutions were submitted, but none were recommended by the committee. This meant that, in order to be successful, a rejected resolution would have to be brought up from the floor during the convention.
The convention opened with quite a number of anti-Bush, pro-Kerry, comments and with many patriotic messages that were a noticeable part of the programming. At one point all veterans in attendance were asked to stand (veterans appeared to be 40 to 50% of the delegates) and at another point the names of hundreds of union members currently serving in Iraq were scrolled across the huge movie screens that were utilized all during the week?s proceedings.
During the first few days of the convention a number of opponents of the war got together, assessed the situation, and agreed that under these conditions the proposed resolution that stood the best chance for success was the following (which was later amended and numbered ?Resolution 18?):
The National Postal Mail Handlers Union calls for a rapid end to the war and occupation of Iraq. The war and occupation were undertaken based on false claims of the anti-worker Bush administration and have resulted in the death of over 900 American troops and over 10,000 Iraqi civilians. The war and occupation have cost U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars which could be redirected to pay for badly needed social needs such as jobs, education, housing, and health.
On the next-to-last day of the convention several anti-war delegates distributed to all delegates copies of an article from the July 25, 2004, New York Times entitled "Democrats Lean Left and Oppose the War." That article included a survey of Democratic Party Convention delegates and reported that 93% of Democratic Party delegates, 85% of Democratic voters, and 59% of all voters "did not think the war with Iraq was worth the loss of American life and other costs."
On the final day of the convention the agenda moved to the resolutions that were not recommended by the convention's Resolutions Committee. The maker of the above quoted resolution moved to the microphone. He read the motion and quoted from the previously distributed "Times" article that ?Nine out of 10 of the Democratic delegates gathering in Boston? during the Democratic Party Convention thought that "the United States should not have gone to war in Iraq" and that "the gains from the war were not worth the loss . . ." He then commented on the false claims the Bush administration made in going to war, mentioned that much of the discussion of the convention's previous days had criticized the anti-worker practices of the Bush administration, and pointed out that when he and other delegates from the New York area returned home they were planning to take part in a big New York City Central Labor Council protest against the Bush administration. The speaker also commented on the tragic loss of lives, both U.S. and Iraqi, and on how the billions of dollars being spent on war and occupation could be better used for jobs, education, housing, and health needs. He concluded by pointing out that he believed that the deep anti-war sentiment among Democratic Party convention delegates was similar to the sentiment among Mail Handler delegates and he urged all delegates to vote their conscience and oppose the war and occupation.
Mail Handler National President, John Hegarty, then commented that the convention Credentials Committee had no major objection to the resolution now on the floor other than that it did not specifically mention support for the troops currently serving. He asked if such wording could be amended to the original proposal and it was so agreed. Discussion then ensued on the amended resolution as well as on a substitute amendment that was also offered. Every speaker, but one, got behind the amended resolution. Several veterans spoke and one woman veteran from Virginia offered especially moving words on how she strongly opposed the war, supported the troops, and was therefore behind the amended proposal. Another speaker, a local president, said that the resolution hit all the right notes for him -- it opposed the war, took appropriate shots at the Bush administration, and expressed support for the troops. After a number of other speakers spoke in support of the amended resolution, and with long lines forming to speak for it, the question was called and the resolution was overwhelmingly passed.
- In hindsight, several observations are offered. First, it became clear during the week that opposition to the war and occupation in Iraq (and to the related loss of lives and human suffering) is deep, widespread, and often very personal (as in the case of one national officer who had a son serving in Iraq, a daughter-in-law who was Iraqi, and was deeply opposed to the war and wanted to get the troops home safely).
- Second, it was clear that there is tremendous anti-Bush sentiment among many workers and a realization that the money being spent in Iraq could be far better used meeting basic social needs.
- Third, it became clear that many veterans oppose the war and are willing to speak on this.
- Fourth, it was also made clear from the week's events that appeals made to people's class interests and basic sense of right and wrong resonate strongly with many workers.
- Fifth, it became apparent, that when the issues are ones that people know first hand and can speak on, many union delegates, even in the sometimes intimidating setting of a union convention, will come forward to speak on what is right.
- Finally, even in situations where it is not at all clear beforehand that the sentiment will be to oppose the war, the simple act of raising and connecting together some core human, political, and economic issues can lead to the expression of collective and very clear anti-war sentiment.
The final amended resolution -- Resolution No. 18 "On the war and occupation of Iraq" - which was passed on Saturday, August 28, 2004, at the NPMHU Convention, reads:
While the National Postal Mail Handlers Union offers its full support for the American troops currently serving in Iraq, the NPMHU also calls for a rapid end to the war and occupation of Iraq. The war and occupation were undertaken based on false claims of the anti-worker Bush administration and have resulted in the death of over 900 American troops and over 10,000 Iraqi civilians. The war and occupation have cost U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars which could be redirected to pay for badly needed social needs such as jobs, education, housing, and health. |
