Immigration and the Culture of Solidarity
by David Bacon

Published by the Americas Program on June 20,/2011
http://www.cipamericas.org/archives/4938

Editor's Note: This is the fifth and final article of a series on 
border solidarity by journalist and immigration activist David Bacon. 
All articles in the series were originally published in the Institute 
for Transnational Social Change's report Building a Culture of 
Cross-Border Solidarity. To download a PDF of the entire report, 
visit the Americas Program website.


ONE indispensable part of education and solidarity is greater contact 
between Mexican union organizers and their U.S. counterparts.  The 
base for that contact already exists in the massive movement of 
people between the two countries.

Miners fired in Cananea, or electrical workers fired in Mexico City, 
become workers in Phoenix, Los Angeles and New York.  Twelve million 
Mexican workers in the U.S. are a natural base of support for Mexican 
unions.  They bring with them the experience of the battles waged by 
their unions.  They can raise money and support.  Their families are 
still living in Mexico, and many are active in political and labor 
campaigns.  As workers and union members in the U.S., they can help 
win support from U.S. unions for the battles taking place in Mexico.

This is not a new idea.  It's what the Flores Magon brothers were 
doing for the uprising in Cananea.  It's why the Mexican left sent 
activists and organizers to the Rio Grande Valley in the 1930s, and 
to Los Angeles in the 1970s.  All these efforts had a profound impact 
on U.S. unions and workers.  The sea change in the politics of Los 
Angeles in the last two decades, while it has many roots, shows the 
long-term results of immigrants gaining political power, and the role 
of politically conscious immigrant organizers in that process.

Today some U.S. unions see the potential in organizing in immigrant 
communities.  But most unions in Mexico, in contrast to the past, 
don't see this movement of people as a resource they can or should 
organize.

What would happen if Mexican unions began sending organizers or 
active workers north into the U.S.?   In reality, active members are 
already making that move, and have been for a long time.  Yet there 
is no organized way of looking at this.  Where, for instance, will 
the people displaced in today's Mexican labor struggles go?   In 
1998, almost 900 active blacklisted miners from Cananea had to leave 
after their strike that year was lost.  Many came to Arizona and 
California.  In Mexico City, 26,000 SME members took the 
indemnizacion and gave up claim to their jobs and unions.  Many of 
them will inevitably be forced to go to the U.S. to look for work.

Cananea miners and Mexico City electrical workers have a wealth of 
experience and a history of participation in a progressive and 
democratic union. They can help both workers in the U.S. and those 
they've left back home, building unions in the places they go to 
work.  But to use their experience effectively, unions on both sides 
of the border need to know who they are and where they're going, and 
see them as potential organizers.

SOLIDARITY and the migration of people are linked.  The economic 
crisis in Mexico is getting much worse, with no upturn in sight. 
With a 40% poverty rate, the government still has no program for 
employment beyond encouraging investment with lower wages and fewer 
union rights.  And since the maquila sector is tied to the US market, 
it experiences even worse mass layoffs than other Mexican sectors, 
with the waves of unemployed then crossing the border just a few 
miles away from their homes.

Six million Mexicans left for the U.S. in the NAFTA period, a flow of 
people that now affects almost every family, even in the most remote 
parts of country.  Migration has become an important safety valve for 
the Mexican economy and also relieves pressure on the Mexican 
government.  It uses the tens of billions of dollars in remittances 
to make up for social investment cut under pressure from the World 
Bank and International Monetary Fund.  Teachers' strikes, like the 
one in Oaxaca in 2006, mushroom into insurrections because there is 
no alternative to migration and an economic system increasingly 
dependent on remittances.

Economic reforms and displacement create unemployed workers - for 
border factories, or for U.S. agriculture and meatpacking plants. 
Displacement creates a reserve army of workers available to 
corporations as low wage labor.  If demand rises, employers don't 
have to raise wages.  In a time of economic crisis, unemployed people 
are used to pressure employed workers, making them less demanding, 
and more fearful of losing their jobs.

Displacement and migration aren't a byproduct of the global economy. 
The economic system in both Mexico and the U.S. is dependent on the 
labor that displacement produces.  Mexican President Felipe Calderon 
said on a recent visit to California, "You have two economies. One 
economy is intensive in capital, which is the American economy. One 
economy is intensive in labor, which is the Mexican economy. We are 
two complementary economies, and that phenomenon is impossible to 
stop."

To employers, migration is a labor supply system. U.S. immigration 
policy is not intended to keep people from crossing the border.  It 
determines the status of people once they're in the U.S.  It is 
designed to supply labor to employers at a manageable cost, imposed 
by employers.  It makes the laborers themselves vulnerable, 
especially those who come through guest worker programs where 
employers can withdraw their ability to stay in the country by firing 
them.

The economic pressure that produces migration has a big impact on 
relations between U.S. and Mexican labor.  Today, for instance, 
governments and employers on both sides of the border tell unions 
that support for labor supply, or guest worker, programs is part of a 
beneficial relationship.  Any movement for solidarity has to address 
this corporate pressure.   A union alliance with employers on 
immigration policy, based on helping them use migration as a labor 
supply system, creates a large obstacle to any effort to defend the 
rights of migrants.

Instead, U.S. and Mexican unions need a common program on trade, 
displacement and investment, which calls for increasing the security 
of workers and farmers, and reducing displacement and forced 
migration.

ANTI-IMMIGRANT policies were part of cold war politics in the U.S. 
labor movement.  As late as 1986, the AFL-CIO supported employer 
sanctions, the section of U.S. immigration law passed in 1986 that 
essentially made work a crime for people without papers.  They argued 
that that if undocumented workers couldn't support their families, 
they'd deport themselves.

The growth of the cross-border movement coincided with rise of the 
immigrant rights movement.  In the 1990s, as labor activists pushed 
for support for unions in Mexico, they also organized to repeal 
sanctions.  First the garment unions called for repeal, then SEIU, 
the California Labor Federation, and others.  They argued that 
employers used the law to threaten and fire undocumented workers to 
keep them from organizing unions.  Unions trying to organize and grow 
began to see immigrants as potential members - workers who would 
strike and organize.  They therefore opposed the idea of pushing 
Mexicans back across border, because they wanted them to become 
active in the U.S.  They saw immigrants not just as a force on the 
job, but in politics.  As people gained legal status and then became 
citizens, they could also vote and elect public officials who would 
act in workers' interests.

Today, unions criticize the racial profiling law SB 1070 in Arizona 
for the same reason - not just that it leads to discrimination, but 
that it's wrong to make workers leave.

In 1999 the AFL-CIO reversed itself and called for repealing 
sanctions, for amnesty for the undocumented, for protecting the 
organizing rights of all workers, and for family reunification.  The 
federation already had a longstanding position calling for ending 
guest worker programs.

Gradually, unions have seen the importance of workers with feet 
planted on both sides of the border.  This is an important part of 
building a culture of solidarity.  Some unions, like the UFW, have 
gone further and tried to develop strategic partnerships with 
progressive organizations in the immigrant workforce, such as the 
Frente Indigena de Organizaciones Binacionales (FIOB).  It has hired 
Oaxacan activists, fluent in indigenous languages, as organizers, and 
supported indigenous Oaxacan communities in protests against police 
harassment in cities like Greenfield in the Salinas Valley.

OAXACAN immigrants today are an important and growing section of many 
immigrant communities in the U.S., especially the rural areas where 
people work in farm labor.  The FIOB is one of many organizations 
among Oaxacans that people have brought with them from their home 
state, or have organized as migrants on their travels.  Many of its 
founders were strike organizers and social activists in Oaxaca and 
the fields of north Mexico.  Years ago they saw the organizing 
possibilities among people dispersed as a result of displacement, but 
whose communities now exist in many places in both Mexico and the U.S.

For over half a century, migration has been the main fact of social 
life in hundreds of indigenous towns spread through the hills of 
Oaxaca.  That's made the conditions and rights of migrants central 
concerns.  But the FIOB and its base communities today also talk 
about another right, the right to stay home.  Asserting this right 
challenges not just inequality and exploitation facing migrants, but 
the very reasons people migrate.

According to the 2000 census, Hispanic American Indians (the category 
used to count indigenous Mexican migrants) in California alone 
numbered 154,000 - undoubtedly a severe undercount.  These men and 
women come from communities whose economies are totally dependent on 
migration.  The ability to send a son or daughter across the border 
to the north, to work and send back money, makes the difference 
between eating chicken or eating salt and tortillas.  Migration means 
not having to manhandle a wooden plough behind an ox, cutting furrows 
in dry soil for a corn crop that can't be sold for what it cost to 
plant it.  It means that dollars arrive in the mail when kids need 
shoes to go to school, or when a grandparent needs a doctor.

"There are no jobs here, and NAFTA pushed the price of corn so low 
that it's not economically possible to plant a crop anymore," says 
Rufino Dominguez, former binational coordinator for the FIOB, and now 
head of Oaxaca's Institute for Attention to Migrants.  In the 1980s, 
Dominguez was a strike organizer in Sinaloa and Baja California.  "We 
come to the U.S. to work because we can't get a price for our product 
at home.  There's no alternative."

Without large scale political change most local communities won't 
have the resources for productive projects and economic development 
that could provide a decent living.   "We need development that makes 
migration a choice rather than a necessity - the right to not 
migrate," explains FIOB coordinator Gaspar Rivera Salgado, a 
professor at UCLA.  "But the right to stay home, to not migrate, has 
to mean more than the right to be poor, the right to go hungry and 
homeless.  Choosing whether to stay home or leave only has meaning if 
each choice can provide a meaningful future."

At the same time, because of its indigenous membership, FIOB 
campaigns for the rights of migrants in the U.S. who come from those 
communities.  It calls for immigration amnesty and legalization for 
undocumented migrants.  It campaigned successfully for translation 
and language rights in U.S. courtrooms, and protested immigration 
sweeps and deportations.  The FIOB also condemns the proposals for 
guest worker programs.  "Migrants need the right to work, but these 
workers don't have labor rights or benefits," Dominguez charges. 
"It's like slavery."

Today there is increasing interest among U.S. farm worker unions in 
activity in Mexico, much of it concentrating on workers recruited 
into H-2A guest worker programs.  In the past, farm worker unions 
opposed the programs on principle, arguing that the workers recruited 
were vulnerable to extreme employer exploitation, and deportation if 
they struck or protested.  Today unions like the UFW and FLOC argue 
that they can organize these workers to win contracts, better 
conditions, and protection for their rights.  But this comes at a 
price.  Some no longer call for the elimination of guest worker 
programs, which exploit far more workers than those represented by 
unions.  And if unions recruit guest workers themselves, how can they 
then strike or use jobsite actions against the employers hiring them?

While farm worker unions and organizations like the FIOB disagree 
about guest worker programs, they do agree about the rights of 
workers.  "Both peoples' rights as migrants, and their right to stay 
home, are part of the same solution," Rivera Salgado says.  "We have 
to change the debate from one in which immigration is presented as a 
problem to a debate over rights."

For many years the FIOB was a crucial part of the political 
opposition to Oaxaca's PRI government, until the PRI was defeated in 
the elections of 2010.   Juan Romualdo Gutierrez Cortez, a 
schoolteacher in Tecomaxtlahuaca, was the FIOB's Oaxaca coordinator 
and a leader of Oaxaca's teachers union, Section 22 of the National 
Education Workers Union, and of the Popular Association of the People 
of Oaxaca (APPO).

The June 2006 strike by Section 22 started a months-long uprising, 
led by the APPO, which sought to remove the state's then-governor 
Ulises Ruiz and make a basic change in development and economic 
policy.  The uprising was crushed by Federal armed intervention, and 
dozens of activists were arrested.   To Leoncio Vasquez, a FIOB 
activist in Fresno, "the lack of human rights is a factor 
contributing to migration from Oaxaca and Mexico, since it closes off 
our ability to call for any change."

During the conflict, teachers traveled to California from Oaxaca, and 
spoke at the convention of the California Federation of Teachers. 
Solidarity efforts between U.S. and Mexican teachers have barely 
started, but with the vast number of Mexican students in California 
schools, and with many immigrants themselves now working as teachers, 
the basis is growing for much closer relationships.  Mexican 
teachers, members of Latin America's largest union, have also 
organized a leftwing caucus that now controls the union structure in 
several states, including Oaxaca.

During the 2006 uprising, the state government issued an order for 
Gutierrez' arrest, because he'd been a very visible opposition leader 
already for years.  In the late 1990s he was elected to the Oaxaca 
Chamber of Deputies, in an alliance between the FIOB and Mexico's 
leftwing Democratic Revolutionary Party.  Following his term in 
office, he was imprisoned by then-Governor Jose Murat, until a 
binational campaign won his release.  His crime was insisting on a 
new path of economic development that would raise rural living 
standards, and make migration just an option, rather than an 
indispensable means of survival.

Gaspar Rivera-Salgado believes that "in Mexico we're very close to 
getting power in our communities on a local and state level."  He 
points to Gutierrez' election as state deputy, and later as mayor of 
his hometown San Miguel Tlacotepec, and finally to the election of 
Gabino Cue as governor.  The FIOB's alliance with the PRD is 
controversial, however. "First, we have to organize our own base," 
Rivera Salgado cautions.  "But then we have to find strategic allies. 
Migration is part of globalization, an aspect of state policies that 
expel people.  Creating an alternative to that requires political 
power.  There's no way to avoid that."

FIOB presents an important example of another kind of binational 
organizing and solidarity that complements efforts by unions.  It has 
a strong base among communities on both sides of the borders.  It has 
a carefully worked-out program for advocating the rights of migrants 
and their home communities, discussed extensively among its chapters 
before it was adopted.  And it sees the system as the problem, not 
just the bad actions of employers or government officials.

In Conclusion

THE interests of workers in the U.S. and Mexico are tied together. 
Millions of people are a bridge between the two countries, and their 
labor movements.  A blacklisted worker in Cananea one year can become 
a miner in Arizona the next, or a janitor organizer in Los Angeles. 
Who knows better the human cost of repression in Mexico than a 
teacher from Oaxaca in 2006, or an electrical worker who lost his or 
her job and pension in 2009?

Raquel Medina, a Oaxacan teacher, spoke at the 2007 convention of the 
California Federation of Teachers.  She did more than appeal for 
support for Section 22.  She helped teachers from Fresno and Santa 
Maria understand why they hear so many children in their classrooms 
speaking Mixteco.  She helped them see that the poverty in her home 
state, the repression of her union, the growing number of Oaxacan 
families in California, and the activity of those migrants in 
California's union battles, are all related. She connected the dots 
of solidarity.  Educators should go back to their schools and union 
meetings, she said, and show people the way the global economy 
functions today - how it affects ordinary people, and what they can 
do to change it.

The historic slogan of the ILWU (and of many unionists beyond its 
ranks) is "an injury to one is an injury to all."  Today, an updated 
version of it might say, "An attack on a union in Mexico is an attack 
on unions in the U.S."  Or it could say, "An attack on Mexican 
workers in Arizona is an attack on workers in Mexico."  Or it could 
say, "Organizing Mexican workers at carwashes in Los Angeles will 
help unions in Mexico, by increasing the power of those willing to 
fight for the mineros and SME."


David Bacon is a California writer and photojournalist. His latest 
book is Illegal People: How Globalization Creates Migration and 
Criminalizes Immigrants.

The Institute for Transnational Social Change (ITSC) is a hub for 
cross-border collaboration among key worker-led organizations 
(independent unions, worker centers, NGOs, and academics) in Mexico 
and the United States.  The institute seeks to address the needs of a 
low-wage workforce that is often hard-to-reach - migrant workers, 
women in the garment industry, farm workers, miners, and other 
workers in industries dominated by highly mobile transnational 
corporations - and to increase opportunities for cross-border 
collaboration.  The present report is part of a series of 
publications sponsored by ITSC.  For more information about the ITSC, 
contact Gaspar Rivera-Salgado at UCLA, [email protected].

Other articles in this series:
The Hidden History of Mexico/U.S. Labor Solidarity
Labor Law Reform - A Key Battle for Mexican Unions Today
The Rebirth of Solidarity on the Border
Growing Ties Between Mexican and U.S. Labor
To read the previous installments, visit the Americas Program website.


For more articles and images, see  http://dbacon.igc.org

See also Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and 
Criminalizes Immigrants  (Beacon Press, 2008)
Recipient: C.L.R. James Award, best book of 2007-2008
http://www.beacon.org/productdetails.cfm?PC=2002

See also the photodocumentary on indigenous migration to the US
Communities Without Borders (Cornell University/ILR Press, 2006)
http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/cup_detail.taf?ti_id=4575

See also The Children of NAFTA, Labor Wars on the U.S./Mexico Border 
(University of California, 2004)
http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/9989.html
-- 
__________________________________

David Bacon, Photographs and Stories
http://dbacon.igc.org

__________________________________

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to