"We are in need of cash for sure this drive, but our BAI Buddy numbers are down to a trifle."
—Andrea Katz, December 18, 2013
This fund drive is supposed to end tomorrow, but look at the pledge figures, and bear in mind that they are only pledge figures.
It may surprise you to see the 7 - 8 slot figure for yesterday: $1,650
A thousand of that came from one of Hennelly's unions and
was to be earmarked for the shameful severance debt, but
Haskins—clueless and dishonest as ever—immediately called
it a "matching fund." Hennelly, equally loath to level with the listeners, said nothing to correct him.
Does anybody here really think this money will go to the
laid-off staffers? Does anybody here believe that this drive
will not be extended? Does anybody believe the ship hasn't taken on too much water?
For that matter, does anybody believe that the $1,000 from the union wasn't, in essence, buying air time on WBAI?
Yes, they are liars. Andrew Phillips failed, because he tried reforming the station to deliver to the audience of Europe/UK/Australian style progressives, while in fact, the progressive scene in the US is very different, and the real audience of BAI might fancy itself "progressive", but it is not. The strongest unionized trades in the US today are the public employees and firefighters, along with employees of nuclear reactors and railroads, with arguable the strongest unions in the US being the Police Benevolence Association. To date, BAI programming does not appeal at all to the real unionized labor in the US, still generally well paid and in the middle class, instead BAI is the shriveling voice of the left wing lunatic fringe, radicalized students, who dream of reforms to benefit themselves, everyone else be damned, and the increasingly alienated and aging intelligentsia, which is far removed from any real labor relations and organizing, and which gets preyed upon by the likes of Nulls and Blosdales. If BAI adopted WABC's model and went commercial, they would likely succeed.
ReplyDeleteWhat Robert Hennelly conveniently leaves out as he pitches to sell WBAI out to the unions is the fact that they have in the past made efforts to stifle great programs at WBAI. You now bring up another interesting point, namely the union involvement in some of the very forces and situations that WBAI currently aims its arrows at.
DeleteUnions in the US were at one time much stronger than the Unions in the USSR, where Unions were written into the Soviet State much in the same way that Courts are written into government in the US. Of course, today, US still HAS labor unions and in the Post-Soviet Russia, they are no more. While the Unions were enshrined in the USSR, they did not do, what we think labor unions are supposed to do - they did not negotiate labor contracts or look out for employee welfare, instead, they were the communist party's monitors in the workplace and a way to liaise with the labor organizations overseas and donate money to the communist causes outside the eastern block. American labor unions did what they were supposed to do - they fought for better wages and labor conditions for their members. Unlike the Marxist ones, American labor unions divorced themselves from left wing politics and stuck to labor organizing and relations. Partly this was done to survive in the Cold War, and partly it was the Stalinist-Soviet own chauvinist-colonial mindset. Essentially, in the FDR era, there was a communist contingent in the labor movement, a faction of which was affiliated with the Soviets. There was a bigger disagreement in the labor movement at large, as to whether unions should participate in political revolutions or stick to labor relations. The political left unionists may have prevailed, had it not been for the Soviet labor bosses, who knew nothing, nor cared anything for the American worker, and only saw the labor movement in the US as an extension of the Marxist-Leninist revolutionary goals. This may have passed unnoticed in the era of the New Deal and labor organizing in the US, but then the political left faction obeyed the will of (Stalinist at the time) Moscow, and tried to send the money raised fro the union dues to Moscow for whatever solidarity/charitable causes. Once that came to light and partly of the Leftists own arrogance at being caught with their hand in the cookie jar, the Marxists were thrown out of the American labor movement and American labor movement bought itself a new lease on life. To those who might question the worthiness at kicking the reds out, here is a simple and verifiable fact: In the late 1970's (USSR at its conservative height) the coal miners in the US and USSR were represented by sister labor unions. In the US, a coal miner punched in and was on the clock getting paid as he changed into work clothes, went down in the mine, worked, came back up, showered, changed, and then punched out as he left the mine yard, and went home. In the USSR, the coal miner only started getting paid when they started actual work. They changed, showered, descended and ascended out of the coal mine on their own time. It took about 2 hours per day, showering taking longer than you would think to wash off the coal dust. The Soviet authorities kept the details of the American contract suppressed, and when it came out in the open, the Soviet leadership pleaded that the economy in he USSR was not developed to the point, where they can compensate their coal miners like the Americans.
ReplyDeleteIn light of that, I think that the BAI's support of labor is on the level of the 1930's Marxists - they only care about what unionizing can do for the proletariat - the minimum wage works and the illegal immigrants, and disregard the rest of the organized labor, the wages of the BAI's own laid off workers be damned. Somehow Hennelly does not report on any actions that the BAI paid staff union is taking or not taking, and it should be picketing and suing the hell out of Pacifica. Actually, now that I think about it, I will mention the BAI situation to an activist shop steward I know... Lets kick some dust!
The question that I have is, which programming at BAI did the Unions stifle. Also, are we talking about the actions of the local unionized paid staff or the actual Unions outside the BAI shop controlling he programs on the radio station? Also, at what Union-backed forces and situations does the BAI aim its slings and arrows?
I am talking about outside Union—the staff had unanimously voted against joining any union (NABET was the one in question). Here's one instance where a great show came close to never airing—as it is, there was only one broadcast on one of the three stations (WBAI), so, thanks to AFTRA/SAG many people missed out on this extraordinary broadcast. This link takes you to my BlueBoard post on this.
Deletehttp://www.listenerforums.net/cgi-bin/issues2/issues2config.pl?page=1;md=read;id=196617
I am talking about outside Union—the staff had unanimously voted against joining any union (NABET was the one in question). Here's one instance where a great show came close to never airing—as it is, there was only one broadcast on one of the three stations (WBAI), so, thanks to AFTRA/SAG many people missed out on this extraordinary broadcast. This link takes you to my BlueBoard post on this. Links don't work from the comments area so you will have copy and paste it into your browser.
Deletehttp://www.listenerforums.net/cgi-bin/issues2/issues2config.pl?page=1;md=read;id=196617
This is the standard cold war narrative it is pure BS and about 60 yeqars out of date. The AFL removed the cold war era "anti" clause from its constitution in the late 90's recognizing that this kind of thing was really an anti labor tactic of the extreme right. For a more balanced assesment I suggest the works of Ottanelli, Lewin or Meyer. Also Labor historian Josh Freeman has written a great history of the TWU ("In Transit") that forthrightly deals with the importance of the CP in the founding of the union, (BS aside the reality is that the CP started this union), and the close relationship of ALL its early leadership, (including Quill) to the CP.
DeleteAnon, not a BS, my family were coal miners in Vorkuta, USSR, and were in contact with the International Brotherhood of Mine Workers in West Virginia across the Iron Curtain. Nothing standard about it. CP WAS thrown out of the American labor movement, whether you like it or not, just like the Russian coal miners started the riots that brought in Yeltsin and put the CP in Russia out of mainstream and into marginalized underground, where it belongs. CP may have started the movement, but it no longer controls it and has presence in it. And it is good.
ReplyDeleteno matter where you say your family is from cold war BS is cold war BS and about 60years out of date
DeleteAnon: With respect: Perhaps it's my limitation, but it seems to me that rather than presenting counter-argument or counter-evidence you're simply presenting an argument from authority, with statements like 'that's cold war BS' and 'it's 60 years out of date', and a list of suggested readings (without even hinting at the arguments and evidence presumably presented therein). Those are characterizations you fail to support, or so it seems to me. If you have a case to make, why not make it, however briefly, rather than claiming the mantle of Correct Authority – if such arguments were compelling I suppose we'd all be genuflecting before the Pope, saluting the Commander-in-Chief, or both – neither of which postures appeal to me, for one, however convinced the presenter may be as to the validity of the Authority claimed.
Delete~ 'Indigo'
Chris, I don't have password to get on that bulletin board. Can you either post or tell me why the outside union interference and what show(s) it affected at BAI? Also, why didn't BAI workers want Unionization? In the name of volunteerism or for some other reason?
ReplyDeleteAssuming that you are referring to the so-called BlueBoard...
DeleteThe username is poster
The password is enternow
The paid WBAI staff—which numbered 25 at that time—weighed the option and concluded that joining a union would not benefit them. The mindset was very different in those days, we all had a healthy emotional investment in WBAI, knew Lew Hill’s mission goal, and concurred. It was the reason why most of us came to the station.
There were times when we didn’t have enough funds on hand to give everybody their full pay, but it was always just a matter of a few days. The way we worked it, those who could not wait never had to, some were willing and able to wait the few days for all or part of their salary. It was an unwritten agreement that we all understood and gladly honored. Times have really changed.
Let me know if you have trouble logging on that board. Ironically, one of the major programs AFTRA/SAG tried to stop (but succeeded in limiting to one airing on one station) was broadcast in an abbreviated form this morning at 5. It is apparently a new series in which Tony Ryan airs material from WBAI's own archives.
Anon, would you care to enlighten me how the communists getting kicked out of the UAW in 1947 is BS? Bridges and ILWU getting kicked out of CIO is also Cold war BS sixty years out of date? CP USA wasn't dancing to Stalin's tune one the eve of WW2? You wouldn't be trying to deceive the public, would you? I have nothing further to say to you, especially since I have the first hand knowledge of the particulars of the case I mentioned in the previous post, and you don't. I have spoken with left wing activists in the US, who may have thought themselves Socialist, and their ignorance is astonishing. Their views are informed by their ideology and their reaction to their experiences in the US. They knew nothing of the world outside the US and had no knowledge of working with the representatives of the public and private sectors to bring about the changes they were trying to work. There was a reason, why they were on the radical fringe - they were incompetent to do any real work on the situations they were trying to change, and your ignorance sounds quite familiar.
ReplyDeleteChis, I read the Blue Board posting you referred to. This is bizarre! Were the actors forbidden from giving the pro-bono performances or was it someone from the Union's leadership opposing to Pacifica or the specific show? Was it as a result of the Pacifica Staff not joining the Union? Did the Union give an explanation, and how did it play out in the end?
ReplyDeleteWe had already recorded the actors when the union learned of the project. The sent letters to each of the participating members forbidding them to do this pro bono. We received a letter demanding that we sign a contract with the union. I don't recall the amount they demanded, but it was way beyond our means. Bob Nemiroff and I both spoke to AFTRA officials, trying to reason with them, but they were adamant. That's when I decided to go to the newspapers with it. They loved the story—veiled tabloids that they are—and the result did not make AFTRA look good. I understand, but don't know for certain, that some of the actors also protested. Anyway, we were given a one time-on station permission. It was really a shame, because that program deserved to be heard.
DeleteI don't know if our earlier decision not to go union had anything to do with it, but it sure occurred to me. As for personal animosities towards Pacifica, that is of course possible, but I think it probably was more a lack of flexibility.
In 1961, I called the President of the American Federation of Musicians and explained that I was going to New Orleans for the purpose of recording what was left of the original jazz musicians. I noted that these were older musicians and some of them would undoubtedly no longer have paid-up union membership.
The Assistant to the President overwhelmed me with his understanding and gave me carte blanche to record union and non-union members together or separately, because of the historical importance. That was so unusual that the head of the black union down there had to call and get verification. I produced 13 LP albums and, as it turned out, they gave several of the retired performers a renewed career, so they re-joined the union. Flexibility and the capacity to reason—AFTRA didn't have it, the AFofM did.