Building a Multicultural Union Women's Organization: Lessons from the WILD Experience

See “Trashing Multiculture” by Anner John in Third Force, November/December 1996, published by the Center for Third World Organizing, 1218 E. 21st St., Oakland, CA 94606. Telephone: (510) 533–7583. See also “Square Pegs Find Their Groove — Reshaping the Organizing Circle” by Francis Calpotura and Kim Fellner, available for $2 from the Center for Third World Organizing.

See “Women in Leadership in Massachusetts-Affiliated AFL-CIO Locals, A Report to the Women's Institute for Leadership Development” by Dan Clawson and Dale Melcher, April 1991, Labor Relations and Research Center, Univeristy of Massachusetts-Amherst. According to this study, 32 percent of the members in the unions surveyed were women, and women held 28 percent of top local union offices (defined as President, Vice-President, and Secretary). Women held 51 percent of the union Secretary positions, and were only 14 percent of the local Presidents. This was the case even in local unions where more than half of the union's total membership were women. Women of color held only 3 percent of the top offices, and their leadership was exclusively within local unions where women of color were at least 15 percent of the membership.

Jackson and Hardiman's paper is unpublished but the model is also described in “Multicultural Organization Development,” by Jackson Bailey and Holvino Evangelina , 1988, Center for Research on Social Organization, Working Paper #356, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Jackson and Hardiman's model identifies three organizational levels, or types, with organizational stages within each level. The first level is the monocultural organization, within which there are three stages: The “exclusionary organization” that seeks to maintain dominance of one group over other groups and often seeks to “re-establish white male groups as the superior and dominant groups;” the “club” which also maintains “the privilege of those who have traditionally held social power, [but also] allows a limited number of members from oppressed groups [such as] women and racial minorities into the organization, but they must share the ‘right’ perspective and credentials;” and the “compliance organization” which is committed to removing some of the discrimination inherent in the club by providing access to women and minorities, but seeks to accomplish this objective without disturbing the actual structure, mission, and culture of the organization. The second level is the non-discriminating organization, within which there is one stage: The “affirmative action organization” which is “committed to increasing access for members of diverse groups and increasing the chances they will succeed by removing … hostile attitudes and behaviors, [but] all members of this organization are still required to conform to the norms and practices derived from the dominant group's worldview.” The third level is the muticultural organization, within which mere are two stages: The “redefining organization” which is an organization in transition, going beyond anti-racist and anti-sexist work to “examining all [organizational] activities for their impact on all its members' ability to participate in and contribute to the growth and success of the organization;” and the “multicultural organization” which “reflects the contributions and interests of diverse cultural and social groups in its mission, operations, and product or service delivery” and “members of diverse cultural and social groups are an influential part of all levels of the organization, especially in those areas where decisions are made that shape the organization.”

Ibid, page 5.

Ibid.

“Space and Opportunities — Developing New Leaders To Meet Labor's Future,” p. 7, Needleman Ruth , Labor Research Review #20, Spring/Summer 1993.

Ibid.

Quoted in “Social Diversity and the Necessity of Alliances,” Alperin Davida J. in Bridges of Power — Women's Multicultural Alliances, Albrecht Lisa and Brewer Rose M. , eds., New Society Publishers, 1990.

The results of those dialogues were summarized in a report to WILD by Cheryl Gooding and Pat Reeve titled “Multicultural Perspectives on Women's Leadership Development,” December 1990.