National Nurses United

these pages, didn't mince words when he said Trumka's remarks amounted to "union leadership for a dead planet" that could easily be mistaken for the "standard flackery" of the oil and gas industry. On Monday of this week, a coalition of AFL-CIO constituency organizations, made up of groups normally supportive of the federa- tion, bucked Trumka's public stance by declaring their own opposi- tion to the pipeline. But many of those outside critics of the AFL-CIO didn't know the half of it. That's because none of them have likely seen a much more harshly-worded letter, obtained by Common Dreams, which was cir- culated internally among the federation's leadership ahead of Trum- ka's statement. The five-page letter, dated September 14th, is addressed to Trum- ka and copied to all presidents of the AFL-CIO's 56 affiliated unions. It was sent by Sean McGarvey, president of North America's Build- ing Trades Unions (NABTU), which represents 14 separate building and construction unions within the federation. In the letter, McGarvey questions top leadership for not taking a firmer position in defense of the union members working on Dakota Access and calls out other AFL-CIO member unions—specifically the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU), the National Nurses United (NNU), the Communications Workers of America (CWA), and the American Postal Workers Union (APWU)—for aligning with "envi- ronmental extremists" opposed to the pipeline and participating in a "misinformation campaign" alongside "professional agitators" and members of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe. Indeed, McGarvey's letter appears written as a direct response to those same unions who just days earlier issued public statements of support for the tribe's efforts to stop the pipeline. After first express- ing frustration for being forced to sit through the "non sequiturs and dubious pronouncements regarding the future of the labor move- ment" from these union leaders during federation meetings in recent years, McGarvey's letter laments their objections to previous fossil fuel projects, including the controversial Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. The letter then continues: "Now, rather unfortunately but I suppose not surprisingly, it seems the same outdated, lowest common denominator group of so called labor organizations has once again seen fit to demean and call for the termination of thousands of union construction jobs in the Heartland. I fear that this has once again hastened a very real split within the labor movement at a time that, should their ceaseless rhetoric be taken seriously, even they suggest we can least afford it. "They have now leaped to join the fray at the insistence of environ- mental extremists and interests outside of the AFL-CIO but I openly wonder to what end? Is it to stand at rallies wearing 'NO DAPL' t- shirts that were manufactured in Nicaragua? Is it to tirelessly and blindly support 'renewable energy' providers who avoid at all costs basic labor law and high road employment practices? Is it to blindly support a politician or politicians who claim to be leaders of a mass movement but in the end are still politicians with personal motiva- tions that may or may not align with dues paying AFL-CIO union members? Shall we in the Building Trades seek to involve ourselves in their matters moving forward? Where does this end? Should we now J U LY | A U G U S T | S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 6 W W W . N A T I O N A L N U R S E S U N I T E D . O R G N A T I O N A L N U R S E 19

• Cover