ATTN: ROBERT RUSH
FOR THE GOB							



								  
October 25, 1994

Dear All,
	First, on behalf of the Santa Cruz GMB I would like to 
again thank everyone who participated in  and or supported the 
1994 General Assembly and Action in Santa Cruz. Special thanks to 
the San Francisco and O'ahu branches for their vital last minute 
financial contributions, these really made a difference. If we 
were exhausted at the outset from all the planning and 
coordinating we were soon revived by meeting all of you and 
experiencing the increasing activity of our union. 
	Individually I am writing to discuss my enthusiasm and 
slowly resolving hesitations in regard to the three new ORGANIZING
proposals up for consideration on the November referendum. After 
being torn about these proposals for quite a while I believe I am 
going to vote in favor of all of them, despite the funding issues,
and here is why:

1). We must do something drastic with this union. We must find 
ways to directly support those who intend to do the full time WORK
of organizing,  both  as a way of helping to focus the energies of
this union and to increase the arena of possible involvement for 
membership in actual organizing drives. 

2).  We must utilize every opportunity to train new organizers as 
this is the only way we will become effective. We are not a 
professional business union that will hire outside experts to do 
our organizing for us (besides they'd be too expensive wouldn't 
they?) All we've got are us and so we'd better start doing 
something with exactly who we are right now.

3) Being fiscally conservative can only slow the decline in funds;
organizing stands the chance to replenish this union, and not just
financially but with an influx of energy, membership and 
direction. 

4) Finally, I really think we CAN make these different organizing 
drives "successful"  but only if we view them all as a collective 
effort and not as some sort of "test" of the powers of a few 
catalytic yet isolated folks. 

	Yes, its true that these proposals, the Black/People of 
Color Organizing project, the Poor People's Movement for Survival 
and the Film Worker's Organizing Drive are all big funding 
requests which have already incurred some very condemning letters 
in last month's GOB as well as an interesting response from the 
GEB. As some may know and others may not, the Film Workers 
Organizing drive and the Black/People of Color Organizing project 
were each awarded $1000 as "seed money." While I can see that in 
part the intention for awarding this money is to give these 
projects something to initially work with, a second no less 
significant intention is to discourage union membership from 
voting for these proposals in their current form. Organizers for 
these projects are expected to then "prove" their viability.  Now,
is that the viability of the projects or the organizers...? Are we
engaged in a collective effort to change the world or are we 
conducting lab experiments on "success" -/burn-out ratios for 
overworked, under-funded organizers...? Really, we need to look at
the way we are responding to real efforts by members of our union 
to organize workers. How are we ever going to grow if we are 
constantly responding to organizing efforts with such disdain?  
Isn't it true that part of the reason we are operating with a 
deficit each month is because we are not increasing membership or 
doing any adequate fundraising...? Fundraising isn't done in a 
vacuum.  Successful fundraising usually centers around an 
organizing drive. 
	This doesn't mean that I have no criticisms of these 
particular proposals. All of these proposals should have been 
(will be?) accompanied by more detailed information. But then this
in part a wider problem with the way we as an organization 
communicate and make decisions. We tend to construct things as 
positions before having complex conversations. Voting is a very 
limited form of participation and it is certainly not a 
conversation. It is a yea or  nay decision and if you have a 
problem with something on the ballot you are supposed to vote "no"
to voice your concern; never mind that such a vote might also 
effectively kill the positive aspects of whatever is under 
consideration. 

I strongly believe that at this particular juncture if we do not 
figure out a way to do A LOT more organizing of workers than we 
have been doing, our union will fail no matter what the fiscal 
situation. While this doesn't necessarily mean funds must be the 
method of support, we must ask ourselves what then we do intend to
do as individuals or branches to support these efforts...? What 
resources can we offer; equipment, infrastructure, time? Can we 
make time in our lives to go to these different regions? What 
kinds of organizing aids do we at each branch have access to? Can 
we construct a more lateral fundraising network between interested
GMBs? How can we use these current proposals and the energies 
behind them  to orient, focus and link the different efforts of 
all our union members? These efforts will not be "successful" if 
we as members imagine that we can vote for (or against..?) them 
and then wait and see. Instead we must look at these efforts as 
challenges and opportunites for immediate direct involvement. 	
Perhaps with each of these decisions the question is not "can we 
afford to do this" but rather;  "how can we afford not to"? 


Maile Pickett


Treasurer, Santa Cruz GMB
X342615