The recent charges against former president of the NYC Central Labor Council, Brian McLaughlin, are incredibly disappointing. While most of his alleged embezzlement is not connected to his role as head of the local labor federation, the shocking abuse of power as an elected Assemblyman and community leader is a real black eye for the movement. (I mean, we simply do not need to be represented by the cartoonish villainy of a man who would steal $95,000 from a little league.)
The tabloids, of course, are touting this as a story of a corrupt union boss, the president of the most powerful labor body in the city. The sad truth is that Brian McLaughlin was a weak leader, totally beholden to the building trades who pursued the lowest common denominator agenda that couldn’t unite the various union locals that make up the council to support each other’s strikes and contract fights, or even support the same candidates. This weakness was my greatest complaint about McLaughlin up until now, but I always thought that at least he was honest. But, now, it turns out he’s not even that, and I would be lying if this didn’t shake my faith – if only a little – in a movement that allows itself to be “led” by such men.
The leaders of the Central Labor Council are responsibly talking about more oversight of the body’s officials, which is good. It’s discouraging to read that the lesson drawn by Dennis Hughes, the president of the state federation, is that no labor leader should also hold elected political office. The argument that one “can’t serve two masters” has been made by right-wingers who have been targeting McLaughlin for years. Of course it’s bullshit that the same is never said of corporate lawyers and lobbyists who hold office. Labor leaders, as representatives of the people, should ideally be represented in the halls of Congress, the Assembly and City Hall…ideally as members of a real Labor Party.
Finally, the news that Ed Ott is likely to remain as McLaughlin’s successor is reason for some celebration. I’ve known and worked with Ed for years. He’s one of the sharpest minds in our little movement. What I’ve always appreciated about Ed is his ability, when presented with a dilemma, to lay out the correct stand that the Labor Council should take, the pragmatic position that the council could take and then the lowest common denominator position that the Council would take. My hope is that with Ed finally at the helm, the CLC might finally opt more often to take the idealistic stands, rather than the past of least resistance.