Asian American Studies 197A
Winter Quarter 2002

Reflection Journal 2

Developing Worker Leadership at the Garment Workers Center
By Gillian Claycomb

In the campaigns at the Garment Worker Center, the workers take a lead role. The organizers at the GWC do just that–they organize, but I think that the energy for the campaigns comes from the workers. The GWC seeks to provide support for workers, helping them claim unpaid wages and receive their rights. They are not trying to form them into unions, or to get them to follow a certain agenda. Since the workers come to the GWC, from the beginning the workers are in the leading role. They are the ones who have taken initiative to make change in their own lives. I think that this type of personal empowerment is a form of leadership, especially when the workers participate in campaigns together.

Cooperation and mutual support are valuable to the campaigns, and to the workers themselves. At the general meeting that Arlen and I attended, each segment was presented and facilitated by a different worker. This gave more people a chance to engage themselves, and to feel invested.

I think that many people at UCLA would be able to appreciate this approach to leadership. It is easy to see the benefits of cooperation like this. However, it is often difficult to run an organization in this manner, and people usually don’t have enough patience to really allow this structure of leadership to develop. So organizations, especially at schools where students don’t have a lot of time to devote to the philosophy of organizing, end up relying on command-style leadership.

Personally, I think that communal leadership is incredibly important for the longevity of an organization or program. For example, last quarter Arlen was not at UCLA, so I had to lead USAS by myself, and since I was also involved heavily in two other student orgs, I didn’t put enough time into carefully running USAS in order to disperse leadership. People didn’t feel really involved in the decisions and day-to-day mechanics of the org, so they dropped out, and this quarter our membership is much lower. At the same time, it is incredibly difficult, because I tried to allow and ask other people to take on responsibility, but people either refused, or did not volunteer. I ended up doing the majority of the work by myself. This is a delicate point in the discussion of leadership, because what do you do if no one else is willing to take on that responsibility? We can learn a certain amount from immigrant community organizers, but there is a point where that ends. Because student activists are not personally bound to the causes. They are not forced to take on the responsibility of the campaigns and can walk away at any moment. Immigrant activists may have more tendency towards natural leadership, because they are more dedicated just by virtue of their situation.

I think that I’m contributing well towards the group’s work in a shared leadership approach. Because I have been willing to take on responsibility in terms of making plans to go to the Garment Worker Center, volunteering there, going to the protests, and getting to know the workers. Also, in terms of leading our political tour, I think that we did a good job of sharing the burden of preparation. This weekend I feel bad because I drove up to San Francisco for the CalSAS conference, so I couldn’t go to help interview Kimi Lee, nor could I go to the Forever 21 boycott on Saturday. Also, last week I got the flu and missed class on Monday, and just missing that one class made me feel out of touch with what the group is doing. Even though Arlen caught me up on what the group is doing, I feel that since I wasn’t able to make plans with them for coming weeks, I took on less responsibility. At the same time, I can see that this is one of the strengths of shared leadership, because the group is still functioning and moving forward. I can still help support and fit myself into the week’s plans, and take on more responsibility again at our next meeting. This is far superior to the command-style leadership, since in that set-up, if the leader is absent, the rest of the group has a harder time determining which direction to move in.