This is kind of a surprise. I bet there is more to the story about Andy Stern's sudden retirement than is being let on. He always seems like a guy who loves power and attention... giving up a position that affords him enormous amounts of both seems out of character.

I guess we can only wait and see if this turns into a Tiger/Jesse scenario, money mismanagement, or corruption scandal.

"Cloistered"? There are approximately 15.3 mm union workers in the U.S.; hardly comparable to a small group of isolated religious adherents, I'd say.

@1, if the 2012 departure date is accurate, then "sudden retirement" would seem to be a bit of an overstatement.

"SEIU is the largest union in the country (reports vary from 1.9 to 2.2 million members)"

This is incorrect.

The answer is the NEA at 2,753,129.

http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/nea-handb…

I'm guessing you're neither, @3...

If you don't like your union, FIX IT! I get tired of hearing members complain from a distance while seats go unfilled at the membership meetings.

@2 True, but 15 million-some members out of a population of well over 300 million sounds pretty "secluded from the world" to me. I wish it weren't so, but it is.

And speaking of demographics, I've been corresponding with SEIU local 775NW's Director of Public Affairs, Adam Glickman. He takes issue with a couple things in the above post, namely my statement about SEIU's organizing numbers and my characterization of their current impact on the immigration debate.

First, fair's fair. When I wrote: "Ironically, since CtW’s beginnings SEIU has basically ceased organizing new workers", I was wrong. In 2007 and 2008, SEIU brought in, through mergers and organization, close to 200,000 workers. In 2009, they chiefly focused on healthcare reform, and only got around 50,000 new workers, which still isn't bad.

His other contention is that my argument that UNITE HERE and SEIU "are too busy duking it out to effectively contribute" to immigration reform. Here, Glickman's dispute is a matter of degree. As he points out their members and staffers still attend pro-immigration rallies in large numbers, and they still give a whole bunch of money to the fight. Both true. But pumping money into a cause isn't quite the same as organizing for it. Neither SEIU nor UNITE HERE have been able, thus far, to contribute in the same way they did before they started smacking each other around. Money and more importantly organizers, have been tied up in the inter-labor battle.

As I wrote to Glickman: "The massive immigration rallies in 2006 were heavily organized by the two unions, working together...In 2000, the two unions worked in tandem to force the AFL-CIO Executive Committee to adopt a pro-immigrant rights resolution for the first time. This victory was hugely significant--a true historical milestone, particularly considering the federation's checkered history when it comes to immigrant rights."

Nothing either union has done since has even come close to matching these contributions to the immigration rights battle.