This issue of the Journal is devoted to details of the merger proposal. Our last Grand Lodge Convention directed the union to seek out merger or affiliation with other unions. After two years of our merger committee’s efforts, the Grand Lodge Officers approved sending the IBB merger proposal for your ratification. I am not going to recap all of the information you will receive on the merger proposal. Instead, I’d like to take a minute to look at the big picture.

This union was born in 1887 under the leadership of John Wilson. Over the years, it grew and matured until it represented our craft on every major railroad in the United States and Canada. But nothing ever remains the same. Over the last twenty-odd years many things have changed, and for organized labor, mainly for the worse. The Staggers Act deregulated the railroad industry and resulted in the loss of thousands of railroad jobs. And the broader trade-union movement in the United States and Canada has been battered as good union jobs disappeared. Employers sought to take back the historical gains of collective bargaining. Labor’s political influence shrank as its numbers declined. So, more often than I care to remember, we have had to fight defensive battles to maintain our jobs and our standard of living on both sides of the border. And with each retreat, it has been harder to mount new offensive campaigns.

Through it all, BMWE didn’t stand still. Although the rail union craft structure was created generations ago, we learned to work around it, to change and innovate. I am proud of what this union has been able to accomplish during tough times. We have a way of surprising our doubters and critics. Our break-through 1996 National Agreement and our legislative offensive to keep Amtrak funded-at-industry-standard wages and benefits are among the high points of my time in office. And I am also proud that our members had the courage to ‘bite-the-bullet’ in this last round of negotiations to preserve our rules and protective agreements. Just as we know when to advance, we know when to take a side-step to blunt carrier attacks, so that we can fight again another day.

However, there reaches a point where a union’s size does matter. Our dues are relatively high, since every minute we put a union representative in the field, his wages are paid out of your dues dollars. And, we have to foot the bill for not only salaries, but for health and welfare costs which have exploded under the national rail organizations’ health and welfare plan. We understand that there are limits on how high the Grand Lodge dues should go. Our last Grand Lodge Convention made that clear. But the cost of running an international union operation is more or less fixed, even when we have fewer members. For example, we have to spend as much in national handling of our Section 6 negotiations as if we had doubled or tripled our membership size. One way or the other, we must attend conferences, employ economists, healthcare experts, and the like, in order to prepare for negotiations and the possibility of a Presidential Emergency Board.

It is important to understand that we have been running a lean organization. While it is easy to say ‘cut the fat’, we’ve been doing that for so long we’ve begun to hit the bare bones. For example, in my department we have one staffer handling the combined Safety and Education Departments, from FRA rulemaking, to Hazmat training. Another staffer handles the BMWE communications, the Journal, press releases, internal news review, etc. By having two attorneys on staff we cut outside attorney fees considerably. One handles our general work, and the other specializes in labor protection issues (New York Dock, Feb. 7, 1965 Agreement, etc.), and they’ve both got full plates. On the administrative side, I have all of two appointees. And we have a one-man Department of Strategic Coordination and Research. Until recently, my administrative assistant doubled-up as the Cooperating Rail Labor Organization’s representative dealing with our national health and welfare plans. (That changed when the CRLO chairmanship went to another organization). We reduced the number of clerical secretaries, and they are now shared between different sub-departments. One legislative representative handles what used to be two separate state and federal legislative positions.

After we failed to get a general dues increase at the 1998 Convention, we went through a period of furloughs of bargaining unit employees at headquarters. We shifted certain legal expenses to the system divisions and federations. I cut an organizer. I sought certain reforms in our collective bargaining agreement with our headquarters employees.

We have been doubling-up on responsibilities and workload. So, we have been living with austerity pressures for a long time. There is simply nowhere else to cut, unless we begin to eliminate essential services.

This all adds up to new pressures for Grand Lodge dues increases. This merger can go a long way toward relieving those pressures. By combining certain administrative functions, labor costs can come down. And by integrating physical operations, we can eliminate the lease on our headquarters. Further, the much lower cost of the Boilermakers’ health and welfare plans can reduce costs both for the merged international as well as our systems divisions and federations.

But this merger is about more than simply keeping the boat afloat. We have pulled a few ‘rabbits out of the hat’ over the last ten years. But we have run out of rabbits. Financial resources alone cannot "purchase" good results. We get results by mobilizing our membership and our elected officials, by leveraging our numbers into significant legislative clout, and by drawing on outside technical expertise when necessary. We need to counter the carriers’ armies of attorneys and consultants. Ultimately, we succeed because we have our union in our hearts. But . . . it still takes resources--human resources and financial resources--to make those mobilizations happen.

In my opinion, some railroad unions have dropped in size to the point where they can no longer wage a proper fight. They still collect dues and go through the motions, but they have run out of steam. Instead of shaping their own futures, they are stuck playing "me-too" to decisions made by others.

I never want to see BMWE in that spot. Unless we can find a way to enjoy the economies of scale and added strength that a true merger will bring, we risk facing that sort of future.

Still, a merger should be about more than hanging onto a life-raft. It should be about being better able to thrive in the future. And that is why a merger with the IBB makes sense.

The Boilermakers are a stand-up group of trade unionists. They have a history of sticking with a fight for the long-haul. A good example of that is their organizing, in a metal-trades coalition, at the Avondale Shipyards. They outlasted management through years of struggle, and won representation of more than two thousand freshly organized employees. Their willingness to stay in the fight is a fine example for the entire trade union movement and proof, in real life, that the Boilermakers are a union we can join without hesitation.

Beyond sheer survival, the IBB merger would open up new possibilities to win fresh advances. Their expertise in administering health and welfare plans could help us attack the problem of skyrocketing costs that are passed on to us under the new National Agreement. The Boilermakers Pension Plan could accept our members and provide a supplementary pension in addition to our Railroad Retirement benefits, if we can negotiate a part of the economic pie to cover those benefits. And the Boilermakers bring 13 organizers. Added to our two organizers, we would be able to take on large-scale organizing that is beyond us today.

This merger will not be a magic wand that will wave away all of our problems, though it will clearly address immediate financial pressures. The possibilities that this merger opens up will not come to pass without a lot of struggles, and none of these possibilities are guaranteed. But we know this for certain. The merger will preserve a progressive and aggressive BMWE that will be around to fight for you, next year and the next, and for decades to come, as an autonomous division of the Boilermakers. And, it means we would have 150,000 members of the merged organization standing shoulder to shoulder with us in the battles ahead.

Lastly, it’s important to stay grounded in the real world. There might be some perfect merger partner out there that we haven’t even thought of yet. Then, again, probably not. This Boilermakers merger wasn’t the result of some accident. We were drawn to the Boilermakers and the Boilermakers were drawn to us. We saw in each other blue-collar skilled craftsmen that share a common trade-union philosophy. We were drawn by the Boilermakers willingness to bring BMWE into the fold while preserving BMWE’s autonomy and identity. I am for one not willing to wait forever for a perfect merger that may never come. We don’t have that much time. We will grow old waiting for a better opportunity.

Ultimately, this decision will be up to you, and not just any of you. The decision will be made by the members who take the time to vote. This is not the time to sit this one out. You will be deciding the future of your union.

I’ve held union positions from Local Chairman to President of the Grand Lodge over some 30 years. BMWE is too much a part of me for me to see it become a ghost of its former self. I couldn’t stand to see this union on the decline, only to be gobbled up and disappear into another organization. By acting now we don’t have to see that happen. The Boilermakers merger is truly a merger of equals which will strengthen both organizations.

I like that. I’ve had the time to think it through, and I’m convinced that this merger will be good for this union. Take the time to study the materials in this Journal, and especially the information packet that will come with your ballot. Think this through, then vote.

Every member in good standing will be entitled to cast one vote. I will be voting yes. I hope that after your thoughtful review of the question, you will join me in casting your ballot for the merger. Vote yes!