Benedicto Martínez Orozco is the nationally elected co-president of the Frente Autentico del Trabajo (FAT, the Authentic Labor Front), one of the few independent workers' organizations in Mexico. FAT's members are unions, workers' cooperatives, and peasant and community organizations. Robin Alexander is the Robin Alexander is the director of International Affairs for the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE), which is focusing on international solidarity for workers. The UE has relationships with unions in several countries, but its closest relationship is with FAT, with which it operated educational and exchange programs. Both groups will be present on a panel on immigrant workers at Bard College, NY on Wednesday, April 26 from 6:00 - 8:00 pm.
In this interview, they share their perspectives.
Founded in 1960, FAT has had a large influence due to its principle of creating independent and democratic workers' unions under adverse conditions. For example, FAT was a founding member of the National Workers Union, which represents one- and-a-half million members. FAT was also a founder and active participant in RMALC (The Mexican Action Network Against Free Trade), a network of more than 100 Mexican organizations that oppose NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and have worked in the past few years to analyze the impact of neoliberal policies and to create positive proposals for change.
Mariel Fiori: What have you learned from your contact with other workers' organizations about the conditions of workers in the U.S. compared to Mexico?
Benedicto Martínez Orozco (from Mexico City): I have been to several states in the U.S. and Canada, and I have had the opportunity to meet and speak with different representatives of union organizations. In terms of the problems and the practices that companies employ, it is very similar everywhere you go, with a few small differences. But in the United States, or at least as I see it, legal violations do not occur as blatantly as they do here – flagrant things like violations of the Constitution itself. But other problems, like the lack of freedom in collective bargaining in North Carolina, we wouldn't have here, so to speak, because to have a legitimate collective contract among workers themselves is practically impossible. Every time it is proven that the bosses choose the union. So a group of workers propose their own representation, a popular assembly like ours, well, obviously they don't like it. And it is not seen favorably by businesses or the government.
MF: How do you see the condition of Mexican workers in the U.S.?
BMO: It is a depressing situation because it is not easy to be in a country that is different culturally, to be alone, often to leave behind a family. There is family disintegration in the case of Mexico, and there are quite a few problems and obstacles that unfortunately have been increasing in the past few years due to the lack of work, to the politics of the state itself, where no one cares much to support the generation of jobs within the country. People believe that large companies will bring jobs, but that has not been shown to be the case. So we have the countryside in Mexico abandoned after NAFTA. People have to live, they have to find a way to get an income, and one way is to emigrate, risking their lives, first of all, to cross [the border], with hundreds of deaths on the way. This is not pleasant for any country or society. We cannot accept it, and I believe that it is a problem that should be of concern to our governments, as is finding a way of legalizing [their status]. It is a serious problem, and union organizations have to assume it as their problem because, in the end, there is a deteriorating effect of salary conditions. We all ought to propose policies and seek protective alliances, such as International Solidarity, so that this will not continue. I hope we can achieve it someday.
MF: How are immigrant workers involved in unions in the U.S.?
Robin Alexander (from Pittsburgh, PA): It depends a lot on what part of the country. We have always had the policy that immigrants are welcome in our union. They have the same rights and obligations, and we do not ask if a person is documented or undocumented. It can be seen for example in the success we had in Chicago with our union brothers and sisters, who principally were Mexican immigrants, and with much support from people across the country and even other parts of the world. But I would like to add that in this country there is a certain rejection by some politicians and media of immigrants, and this sometimes affects our members as well. That is why we value our relationship with FAT, because the training has really helped. By coming here, the members can talk and exchange ideas. This gives them another perspective and helps them to understand that the reason why most people come here is because of the impact of neoliberal policies. It is not because they want to leave their country, much less their families.
MF: Can undocumented workers really be members of a union?
RA: Of course they can. The problem now is that the laws have changed here in the U.S. and undocumented workers have fewer rights than they had in the past. But despite that, there is always more power being inside an organization. For example, in the situation in Chicago, no one asked if those people struggling were documented or undocumented, and in the end they won.
MF: How does joining a union benefit an immigrant?
BMO: The worker's tool for struggle is the union. Being in a progressive union organization gives him the guarantee of a voice and a vote, to be a protagonist in his struggle. I know that there is a lot of fear. When I have been in the United States and talked to immigrants, I found out about the fear because they have no papers and their conditions are very disadvantageous. There needs to be a campaign to incorporate them and stop this trend. We also need to be concerned about discrimination against women who work and earn less than men. It is a social problem we all should fight.
