America@work boasts on the cover page that it is a source for “Ideas, Info and Ammo for AFL-CIO Leaders and Activists.” I’d like to hear what seminal ideas the editors have contributed to the labor movement. What they have made abundantly clear is they’ll reject any idea, no matter how praiseworthy, if it is critical of the Sweeney team or comes from a known union dissident.
The magazine’s staff sees themselves as cheerleaders, always on the upbeat, even if it means disregarding reality. An example: “The American labor movement, measured by the loyalty and pride of our members, is the strongest in the world and is stronger today than ever before.” So why all the fuss about the critical need for change?
The magazine has made it a point not to carry any news about Iraq, terrorism or homeland security. It would not even include a holiday greeting to the many union brothers and sisters who are in the armed forces in Iraq.
America@work distributes about 165,000 copies to unions in bundles, apportioned to the per capita payments they pay the AFL-CIO. Slightly more than only 1% of the 13 million union members receive copies. Secretary-Treasurer Richard Trumka’s staff wouldn’t tell us what the cost of the magazine was in 2003, but it’s clearly an expensive publication, because its editors specialize in razzle-dazzle layouts and obsessive (and distracting) use of full color in nearly every story.
Since the Executive Council meeting in March will be making important changes in how the AFL-CIO functions, it’s an ideal time to take a hard look at labor’s official magazine. We suggest that the Council appoint a panel of distinguished labor editors selected by the International Labor Communications Association (ILCA) to study America@work over a three-month period and report its recommendations to the Council.