In 2021 the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), at their convention, passed “Resolution #5: Building Worker Power to Win Democratic Socialism: A Labor Strategy for DSA in 2021-2023” which is supposed to outline the labor organizing strategy of the organization for two years. Filled with aspirational goals like “Socialists must work together across the labor movement to help develop militant, democratic, member-led unions, and to help unify them into a powerful movement capable of challenging, and eventually overturning, capitalism,”1 the goal of this resolution–to engender a more militant and outwardly socialist labor movement in America–has gone largely unrealized. The DSA’s National Labor Commission has retreated into the position of supporting bureaucratic union institutions over the promotion of class consciousness. The DSA’s National Labor Commission’s (NLC) actions are particularly egregious concerning the “Strike Ready” campaign, which while ostensibly promoting rank-and-file efforts for a stronger contract, in reality, serves to strengthen the position of a Teamster leader elected with the lowest turnout in the union’s democratic history.2
On the surface, the NLC’s “Strike Ready 2023” campaign rings all the typical bells of a DSA Labor campaign; however, the destructive nature of the campaign is only visible in its direction to chapters throughout the nation that goes against the democratic principles. Displayed proudly on DSA Labor’s webpage as of June 2023 is a link to the Strike Ready’s chapter toolkit. The first page of the toolkit begins by beating the drum of tailing the working class rather than advancing them further with the line: “Workers are the experts at their job sites and probably already know most of what they need to know about fighting the boss: it’s our job to draw these skills out and support their fights.” While initially, this position may appear to be unproblematic, it quickly becomes so upon further analysis. Resolution #5 resolved that socialists should contest for leadership of bargaining, and when possible, for formal leadership of unions. It also resolved that DSA members should try to politicize the workplace beyond the bread-and-butter and into broader community demands. When the Strike Ready campaign is premised upon a surrender of leadership by DSA members to union leadership, it acts in direct contradiction with what was voted on and approved by hundreds of DSA convention delegates in 2021. Rather than taking the initiative to expand the horizons of union members beyond the confines of the “bread and butter” and into action that builds class consciousness, the NLC has instead limited itself and DSA members to just the “bread and butter”. Ceding leadership from conscious socialists to the established Teamster bureaucracy has made the NLC and DSA a convenient tool for the anti-socialist union bureaucracy.
While the toolkit, resolution, and NLC declare themselves not to be following the marching orders of union leadership, but rather the “rank-and-file” or “workers”, they are marching in lock-step with IBT leadership. This is done without deference to the political position of the actual rank-and-file, the majority of whom are extremely apathetic, more so than at any other time in the history of the Teamsters. The DSA and the NLC, instead of taking advantage of the apathy among the rank-and-file and organizing the IBT for more democratized militancy, completely defer to the IBT’s leadership and went against their resolution to become just another supporter of the General President. Even the Teamsters for a Democratic Union (TDU), which has historically been regarded as the democratic reformist rank-and-file grouping of Teamsters, no longer determines its own politically independent line but rather follows, just as DSA Labor does, the leadership of the established union bureaucracy. Perhaps the best example is comparing the outrage on the signing of non-disclosure agreements between the bargaining teams in the 2013 and 2018 UPS contracts, going so far as to label it a “brownout”, making it a key part of their opposition to Hoffa.3 However, when O’Brien requires the same sorts of agreements to be signed in 2023, both organizations remain completely silent. The probable rationale, however, is that union leadership in the Teamsters are elected democratically, so following their leaders must also mean following the rank-and-file, right?
Was not Sean O’Brien and the entirety of the Teamsters General Executive Board elected in an incredible upset that represented a return of the Teamster rank-and-file to the highest offices of the union? Let’s investigate and compare the TDU and “rank-and-file” Teamsters United campaigns of 2016 and 2021. To appear on the ballot when running for office, the IBT requires the candidates to be nominated by 5% of all delegates at the convention before the election. Delegate elections, while ostensibly democratic, often are uncontested and reflect the desires of local union leadership which is largely static throughout the country. In 2016 there were a total of 1,583 votes cast with the minimum required to gain ballot access being 80 votes. In that election, Hoffa received 1,424 votes and Zuckerman 134.4 Hoffa received 89.9% of the delegates’ votes while Zuckerman received 8.4%. This stark contrast represents the firm loyalty of established local union leaders throughout the country, including O’Brien’s Local 25, to Hoffa. In 2021 there is a much different picture to paint, as Hoffa was no longer running to lead the union. In 2021 O’Brien received 841 (52.2%) while his opponent received 765 (47.5%).5 If 43.8% of locals experienced a radical political transformation between 2016 and 2021 it would have been the headline news at Labor Notes and the like. Rather, the only reasonable conclusion is that the established union bureaucracy split into nearly two even pieces—neither of them good. When the general election came around, and O’Brien won 2:1, it is often neglected that turnout was only 15%. O’Brien only won 2/3rds of that 15%, meaning he was elected by only 9.5% of all Teamsters. His victory was not a militant rank-and-file seizure of union structures, but instead one section of union bureaucracy winning against another. Any claim to a rank-and-file mandate by O’Brien and his supporters falls flat on its face upon the most basic of investigations.
Article V Section 1 of the DSA’s constitution refers to the national convention as the “highest decision-making body of the organization”. It should follow that the highest decision-making body and the body most capable of representing the broad mass of DSA members’ will should supersede all actions to the contrary, or the convention’s existence is superfluous. With Resolution #5, passed in 2021 there are direct calls for “taking initiative to politicize the workplace by going beyond bread-and-butter issues and tying workplace demands to whole community demands and campaigns and building possibilities for experiential solidarity” and that “Socialists in unions should aspire to become activists and eventually leaders in the workplace, including through shop floor organizing, bargaining, contract enforcement and, when possible, contesting for formal leadership”.6 Leaving leadership, bargaining demands, and shop floor engagement with Teamsters to the guidance of the IBT and non-socialist workers at UPS is directly violating the language of the resolution and its overall spirit. The direction provided to socialists both within the Teamsters and outside has been to follow the direction and initiatives launched by the IBT, depriving socialists of the ability to engage independently within the politics of the union. Further disregard for this resolution has occurred in “Solidarity Captain” calls, where the NLC’s leadership and the Strike Ready campaign’s leadership have celebrated its collaboration and mutual support with the anti-democratic O’Brien. This wanton disregard for a key resolution that establishes the labor strategy for the entirety of the DSA represents the betrayal of the DSA’s democracy.
With the collaborationist and anti-democratic nature of the “Strike Ready 2023” campaign on full display, the DSA must abandon this campaign. It must cease its collaborationist position with established union leadership, which while sold to the membership as rather apolitical, in actuality, has compromised the DSA and made it an extension of union bureaucracy against the rank and file. As of now, the DSA is no more than a temporarily useful tool for the IBT and will be discarded along with all of its so-called “gains” as soon as is convenient. To make its gains permanent, and its will unaffected by the whims of bureaucratic anti-socialist leadership, the DSA must engage in labor politics independently, and put forth its uniquely socialist critique. If the DSA continues in its efforts to bring up the rear rather than lead up the front, it will continue to find itself with the illusion of constant movement and advancement while remaining invariably still.
Should the DSA end its collaborationist “Strike Ready” campaign, it must pursue a socialist labor strategy truly in line with what was democratically passed at the convention which entails an expansion of labor organizing beyond the bread-and-butter and into issues of socialism. Rather than the present strategy of directing Teamsters and socialists into purely the Strike preparations, the DSA must begin constructing independent campaigns to build confidence, experience, and connections within a socialist base within the Teamsters to achieve the goals of Resolution #5. To achieve this goal, the DSA should utilize its network of “Solidarity Captains” and their existing connections with the Teamster rank-and-file nationwide to advance socialists in the Teamsters. The existing structure should be utilized to contest organizing, bargaining, contract enforcement, and formal union leadership with DSA members taking leadership in all these efforts. This is to say, the DSA should find a Socialist Teamsters caucus. Only then can the DSA truly say it is living up to its democratic obligations
-Corbin Palakarn
- “2021 DSA Convention Resolutions,” 2021 DSA Convention, July 16, 2021, https://convention2021.dsausa.org/2021-dsa-convention-resolutions/#P1E.
- Mark Solomon, “Low Teamsters Election Turnout May Not Be What It Seems,” FreightWaves, March 7, 2022, https://www.freightwaves.com/news/low-teamsters-election-turnout-may-not-be-what-it-seems.
- “Organizing to Stop UPS Contract Givebacks.” Teamsters for a Democratic Union, 2018. https://www.tdu.org/organizing_to_stop_ups_contract_givebacks.
- “Organizing to Stop UPS Contract Givebacks.” Teamsters for a Democratic Union, 2018. https://www.tdu.org/organizing_to_stop_ups_contract_givebacks.
- “Teamster Fall 2021,” teamsters.org, accessed June 25, 2023, https://teamster.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/IBTSeptMagWeb.pdf.
- “2021 DSA Convention Resolutions,” 2021 DSA Convention, July 16, 2021, https://convention2021.dsausa.org/2021-dsa-convention-resolutions/#P1E.