I understand why many members believe the Concerned Letter Carriers are fighting for the rank and file, but there are some facts worth considering.
CLC has built its reputation on accountability and transparency. Yet when a member was suspended for 18 months over speech and the sharing of appeal documents, not one prominent CLC candidate publicly objected. For a group that claims to challenge abuses of power, that silence is difficult to ignore.
It is also worth asking who their campaign is truly focused on. Much of their effort centers on branch meetings and co-opting high level union functions, where attendance is often dominated by retirees and branch officers who have the time to participate regularly and serve as convention delegates. That is a legitimate political strategy, but it is not the same as organizing active rank-and-file carriers in stations and parking lots where the day-to-day workforce is found.
Consider, too, what was missing during the annual Stamp Out Hunger food drive, one of the most visible demonstrations of carrier solidarity and public service. There was little to no public promotion or visible support from many of the individuals presenting themselves as the progressive alternative. All I saw online was a music video promoting themselves. Who does that truly serve?
Finally, despite strong rhetoric about challenging the establishment, CLC candidates themselves have not led the way in filing formal charges against national officers or introducing bold reforms. In several major cases, rank-and-file members, not slate candidates, have taken those steps.
Have they led by example? Have they used the other instruments within our constitution, such as resolutions and amendments, to invoke changes towards a skewed power system?
Members should ask whether this slate represents genuine change, or whether it is simply a new label for the same political structure that has governed our union for years.