An Activist’s Life, by Thomas Leavitt

My original letter, auto-generated by ProgressiveSecretary.Org:

Note: This letter supports a campaign of the AFL-CIO Working Families
e-Activist “Union Voice”. It goes to Congress.

From: Thomas Leavitt
To: Senator Barbara Boxer

Subject: Protect workers’ rights

Dear Congressman Farr:

It has become increasingly difficult for American workers to form and join unions. It is
essential that Congress pass legislation that effectively protects their freedom to choose
a union.

There is now bipartisan legislation (H.R. 3619 and S. 1925) that will guarantee this
right.

I thank you, Congressman Farr, for your sponsorship of this vitally important bill.

Sincerely,

Thomas Leavitt
P.O. Box 7095
Santa Cruz, CA 95061-7095

---

June 1, 2004

Mr. Thomas Van Ness Leavitt
Post Office Box 7095
Santa Cruz, California 95061

Dear Mr. Leavitt:

Thank you for contacting me recently to express your opinion on unions. I appreciate hearing from you.

I share your belief that no one should be forced to join a labor union if they do not wish to do so. Alternatively, persons who do believe in organized labor should not be barred from participating in a union, nor should persons be barred from attempting to organize a union if they so choose.

Thanks for your insight on this issue. I welcome the input.
Sincerely,

Sam Farr
Member of Congress, CA-17

---

[Note: I was surprised by this response - why would Sam Farr, a Democrat in a safe district with a strong labor movement, highlight his support for “right to work” laws… especially when the bill in question has nothing to do with them?

HR 3619 is an AFL-CIO sponsored bill; I did a bit of web research before writing the note below, and didn’t see anything specific in the summaries that supported “right-to-work” or “open shop”, although it may be in there as a restatement of existing law. -Thomas]

“I share your belief that no one should be forced to join a labor union if they do not wish to do so.”

Dear Congressman Farr,

I recently received an email from you, which I believe was in response to an email I had sent re: HR 3619. The statement above, which was part of it, troubles me, as I do not believe that I expressed such a belief, and it is my understanding that the above position is anti-union, in that it effectively endorses “right-to-work” laws and “open shop” requirements.

Can you please contact me and let me know whether this was what the Congressman intended to communicate? I shared this with a union organizer friend of mine, and he seemed to think that there must have been an error on the part of the staffer answering the email.

I left a voice mail with your Santa Cruz office earlier on this subject as well. I can be reached at the email address listed on this form, or at [deleted].

Regards,
Thomas Leavitt

[Surprisingly, I actually did get an individualized email response. I was quite impressed by that aspect of the situation. -Thomas]

June 14, 2004

Mr. Thomas Van Ness Leavitt
Post Office Box 7095
Santa Cruz, California 95061

Dear Mr. Leavitt:

I appreciate your recent correspondence regarding unions.
I want to reaffirm to you that I do support HR 3619, the Employee
Free Choice Act. In fact, I am a co-sponsor of this legislation and
feel strongly that the Republican leadership and the Bush
Administration have tried to curtail unionization activities in the
recent years. I have voted and will continue to vote against anti-
union legislation, such as the effort to take away ergonomic
protections or restrict overtime pay. I believe that unions have
been the driving force in the fight for decent wages, workplace
safety, health and pension benefits and in general, a more
accommodating workplace environment. It is because of the
efforts of unions and union members that America has the highest
standard of living in the world.

Having said that all of this though, I do believe that
workers should have the choice whether or not to be involved in a
union. I do not believe that is an anti-union statement, as you have
suggested, but rather a freedom that should be allowed, as long as
that choice is not forced one way or the other by management.

Thank you for your concern and be assured that I will do
what I can to fight the anti-union sentiments in Congress. I
appreciate your support in this effort!

Sincerely,

Sam Farr
Member of Congress, CA-17

[I still don’t understand why Sam choose to highlight this particular position, in response to my original email, but that all said, I think his record is at least adequate - he’s a solid liberal Democrat, and I’m sure he’d have a 90% or better rating on any union voting record analysis. -Thomas]

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 22nd, 2004 at 11:43 pm, and is filed under Social Justice. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.