Sign up for the Today newsletter
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
Changing the leadership, structure, or functioning of any US labor organization is no easy task. Activists and experts have long argued about whether dysfunctional unions are best reformed from the top down, from the bottom up, or some mix of the two approaches.
For the past sixty-five years, the main locus of union democracy and reform struggles in the United States has been local unions, which hold leadership elections every three years and are closest to the membership. Thousands of rank-and-file workers have campaigned for more militant unionism by running for and winning local office. Some have had the backing of national networks of like-minded dissidents, including Teamsters for a Democratic Union (TDU) and Unite All Workers for Democracy (UAWD), a TDU-inspired reform caucus within the United Auto Workers (UAW). And in recent years, TDU and UAWD supporters even ousted national headquarters officials from their respective unions, resulting in a major contract win for UPS Teamsters and a historic autoworker strike of the Big Three last year.
Very few modern-day reformers have mounted similar challenges to the status quo in city or state labor federations chartered by the national American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). Representing workers from different AFL-CIO affiliates, these central labor councils (CLCs) may be just as bureaucratic or dysfunctional as the individual unions that belong to them. But structurally, most are too far removed from workplace struggles to generate many electoral challenges to incumbent AFL-CIO officials, at the local, regional, or state level.
As a result, there have been few contested elections, like in the Teamsters and UAW, with opposing slates offering alternative programs for their unions. In AFL-CIO leadership votes, officers and executive board members are chosen by convention or council delegates, the same method used by most national unions. The rank and file has little or no say about who runs AFL-CIO bodies. One notable exception has been the Vermont State Labor Council, which represents twenty thousand public and private sector workers and that in 2019 was taken over by reforming leadership.
In the Green Mountain State, due to its small scale, most state AFL-CIO convention delegates are working members or retirees, not full-time officials. Since 2019, they have cast ballots in several hotly contested elections, which resulted in a mandate for change. Most recently, last September, they elected an all-women leadership team to three top officer positions and made thirty-one-year-old Katie Maurice the youngest state AFL-CIO president in the country — and the only one who belongs to the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Maurice took over last fall from David Van Deusen, a fellow member of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).
In his new book, Insurgent Labor: The Vermont AFL-CIO 2017–2023, Van Deusen describes how a group of local union officers and staff members created a reform faction called “Vermont AFL-CIO United!” five years ago (disclosure: I wrote the introduction for the book). These rank-and-file activists were frustrated by their labor council’s lack of militancy and creativity, plus its inability to aid new organizing, contract campaigns, or strikes.
Fourteen United! candidates got elected in 2019 — taking all the top officer jobs, forming a majority on the executive board and then winning a national AFL-CIO-ordered rerun of the original election. The reformers’ goal was to revitalize a moribund organization through membership education, mobilization, and direct action. They favored greater internal democracy and transparency, independent political action, and more labor support for social and environmental justice.
But inside and outside Vermont, that progressive agenda has proved to be surprisingly controversial. Rather than welcoming and applauding the election results, the national AFL-CIO — then headed by the late Richard Trumka — threatened to remove the reformers from office and put their council under the control of appointed staff members from Washington, DC. As Van Deusen recounts in his book, this trusteeship was averted, and union activists in Vermont have continued to make their state labor council a model for the rest of the nation.
Last fall, a second United! slate won a majority of the seats on the labor council executive board. Van Deusen’s successor, Maurice, hailed the results as an “affirmation of our desire to continue to focus on rank-and-file organizing within the state of Vermont over political lobbying.” New organizing, plus a major affiliation with the long-independent Vermont State Employees’ Association (VSEA), has nearly doubled the state federation’s dues-paying membership since 2019 (although the VSEA did not support the United! candidates last fall and instead backed the building trades slate that lost). Van Deusen reports in Insurgent Labor that state labor council meetings were opened up to all union members, not just elected delegates, and they began to attract their largest turnouts ever. The reformers also worked with building trades unions to pass so-called “responsible contractor ordinances” that require prevailing wages on major public construction projects in multiple Vermont cities and towns.
Vermont became the first state labor federation in the region involved in the “Renew New England Alliance.” This six-state “Green New Deal” coalition is campaigning for the creation of thousands of good union jobs — for workers building affordable housing, installing rooftop solar panels, cleaning up pollution, and slashing the carbon emissions responsible for climate change.
The new leadership’s savvy use of social media, radio shows, and local TV appearances allowed organized labor to reach a bigger nonlabor audience and build stronger relationships with community allies. Within the broader Vermont labor movement, Van Deusen aided rank-and-filers in non-AFL-CIO unions during their fight against a public employee pension cut favored by Republican governor Phil Scott and leaders of the Democrat-controlled state legislature. Labor council organizers used Vermont’s annual May Day rally in Montpelier to build support for the state’s immigrant workers (mainly Latino immigrants employed on dairy farms).
The state AFL-CIO has also been endorsing more third-party candidates for state and local office, hopefully giving Vermont Democrats a much-needed dope slap. “Since 2019, we have strengthened our ties with the Vermont Progressive Party [VPP], which has not only focused on workers’ rights but also championed broader social justice causes, in a political landscape often dominated by powerful corporate interests,” Maurice said. She continued:
The VPP’s role as a party for the working class is not just about rhetoric; it’s about tangible actions. It’s about supporting legislation like the VT PRO Act that would protect the right to organize, about standing up against union-busting tactics, and ensuring that union members have a seat at the policy-making table in Montpelier.
Before his death in August 2021, Trumka had the opportunity to support an exemplary CLC initiative that called attention to the threat of fascism in the United States. In anticipation of then president Donald Trump’s likely rejection of the 2020 election results, Vermont labor council delegates issued a call for “a general strike of all working people in our state” if there was a right-wing coup aimed at keeping Trump in office. AFL-CIO headquarters tried to block any discussion of such a contingency plan in response to a possible constitutional crisis (of the sort that might have occurred on January 6, 2021). After Vermont labor leaders debated the subject anyway, Trumka ordered an official probe of their alleged noncompliance with national AFL-CIO rules applying to local affiliates. In response, then state fed president Van Deusen urged AFL-CIO headquarters to investigate
how the example we are setting in the Green Mountain State could serve as a model for what a more engaged, more member-driven, more democratic, more anti-racist, more pro-immigrant and more organizing centered labor movement . . . could actually look like in other parts of the country.
This tug-of-war had a happy ending, temporarily. Vermont labor reformers got a “final warning” from Trumka shortly before his death, but none were removed and replaced by appointees from Washington, DC. Under Trumka’s successor, Liz Shuler, the national organization restarted its organizing subsidy to the Vermont State Labor Council, and relations with the national AFL-CIO took a welcome turn for the better — until last month.
In a January 22 letter, President Shuler informed the council’s new officers and executive board that she was investigating last fall’s “election process” based on a “protest appeal” filed by an affiliated union. She also directed them to “refrain from any discussion of the investigation . . . with the general public or entities and individuals not affiliated with the Labor Council.”
This attempted gag order is directed at United! supporters who have, in past internal disputes, tried to enlist allies on the AFL-CIO national executive board or keep labor media outlets informed about interference from Washington. Their impressive record of internal democracy and worker engagement should be a source of inspiration for trade unionists elsewhere, not an invitation to further harassment and meddling from headquarters.
Yet this new controversy underlines one of Van Deusen’s main messages in Insurgent Labor: the prospects for making real change rest in the hands of grassroots union activists. To meet the challenges facing Vermont workers, Van Deusen and his reform caucus built on the best of organized labor at the local and state level. They didn’t wait for instructions from the national AFL-CIO, which has consistently been a foe of bottom-up change in Vermont.
Crime
A Vermont postal worker was cited and suspended for allegedly throwing away mail that was supposed to be delivered to other people, according to police.
Natasha Morisseau, 34, of North Troy, was cited on nine counts of petty larceny and five counts of unlawful mischief, Vermont State Police said in a statement. She works as a mail carrier for the town’s United States Postal Service (USPS) office.
Officers were first alerted to the discarded mail on the afternoon of Jan. 23, according to police. Upon finding the mail in a dumpster on Elm Street in North Troy, they determined that none of it was for that address.
Police identified Morisseau as a person of interest and learned that she was a postal employee. They confirmed that she had regularly been throwing away a small amount of mail under her care since at least October 2025, according to the statement.
After searching the dumpster and Morisseau’s mail vehicle, officers found opened and unopened packages, along with several holiday cards, one of which contained money. Morisseau was later cited Feb. 14 and is due to appear March 17 in Vermont Superior Court, police said.
Since Jan. 23, Morisseau has been suspended by USPS, and all recovered mail has been given back to them for delivery, according to the statement. The case has been forwarded to the USPS’ Inspector General for further review.
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
On a typical day, some of the 20 stealth fighter jets based in South Burlington, Vt., take off from tiny Burlington International Airport for training runs near the northern border. In recent months, they’ve flown much farther afield.
The Vermont Air National Guard’s 158th Fighter Wing was deployed in December to the Caribbean, where it took part in the US campaign to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Shortly thereafter, the squadron joined a military buildup in and around the Middle East to prepare for US and Israeli airstrikes against Iran.
Though both deployments had been widely reported, the military remained mum about the whereabouts of Vermont’s F-35A Lightning II jets. Even Governor Phil Scott, technically the commander of the Vermont Guard, said he only knew what he’d read in the news, given that US military leaders were directing the missions.
On Monday, General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the deployments at a Pentagon press conference about the war on Iran. Caine praised National Guard members from Vermont, Wisconsin, and elsewhere.
“In the case of the Vermont Air National Guard and the 158th Fighter Wing, they were mobilized for Operation Absolute Resolve,” Caine said, referring to the Venezuela campaign. “And then were tasked to take their F-35As across the Atlantic instead of going home, to be prepared to support this operation” in the Middle East.
Much remains unknown about the Vermont Guard’s recent missions, including the precise role they played in Venezuela and Iran, where the jets are currently based, and how long they’ll remain.
The Guard did not immediately respond to requests for comment., Its recently elected leader, General Henry “Hank” Harder, said in a statement that the force was “proud of the dedicated and professional service of our Airmen” and pledged to support their families in the meantime.
“We will continue to carry out our commitment to these Vermont Service Members until, and long after, they return from this mission,” Harder said.
Vermont’s three-member congressional delegation, meanwhile, has praised Vermont Guard members for their service in Venezuela but has criticized President Trump’s campaigns there and in Iran, particularly absent congressional authorization.
“The people of our country, no matter what their political persuasion, do not want endless war,” said Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent, echoing similar remarks from Senator Peter Welch and Representative Becca Balint, both Democrats. “We must not allow Trump to force us into another senseless war. No war with Iran.”
Paul Heintz can be reached at paul.heintz@globe.com. Follow him on X @paulheintz.
Tuesday is town meeting day in Vermont. Municipalities in New England and elsewhere are increasingly grappling with major national and international issues at the local level.
JOSEPH PREZIOSO/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
JOSEPH PREZIOSO/Getty Images
If you haven’t lived in certain New England towns, it can be hard to fathom their centuries-old direct democracy-style Town Meetings, where everyday residents vote on mundane town business such as funding for schools, snow plows and road repairs.
These days, voters are also being asked to weigh in on national and international issues, for example, demanding the de-funding of ICE, and condemning “the unprovoked attack and start of an illegal and immoral war against Iran.” It’s all fueling a separate – and fierce– debate on what towns ought to be debating.
“When you have people sleepwalking into an authoritarian regime, it’s up to us to sound the alarm,” insists Dan Dewalt, an activist in Newfane, Vermont, one of several communities where residents scrambled to draft a resolution against the Iran war in time for their annual Town Meeting on Tuesday.
Local resolutions are a uniquely effective tactic, activists and experts say, and they’re being used increasingly around New England and beyond, especially as national politics have become so polarized.
“People feel isolated, helpless and hopeless. And when you hear about other people who are just like you taking a stand and representing something that you believe, that gives you not only hope, but it gives you power,” said Dewalt.
Several other Vermont towns will be considering resolutions Tuesday calling for the removal of the president and vice president “for crimes against the U.S. Constitution,” while many others will vote on a pledge to ” to end all support of Israel’s apartheid policies, settler colonialism, and military occupation and aggression.”
A similar divestment resolution passed 46 -15 in Newfane last year, following hours of heated argument over the plight of Palestinians, the security of Israelis, the “inflammatory” language of the resolution – and whether such problems half-a-world away even belong on the agenda of the tiny town of just about 1,650.
“It’s a Town Meeting for town issues,” Newfane resident Walter Hagadorn declared at a recent Select Board meeting, where residents pressed board members to block any future resolutions not directly related to town business.
“You shouldn’t be subject to hours and hours of people virtue signaling” and trying to “hijack Town Meeting,” Hagadorn said.
Others agreed, suggesting activists host a debate on their issues at another time and place, or stage a rally or protest instead.
But Select Board member Katy Johnson-Aplin pushed back, saying that would not have the same impact.
“It doesn’t work the same way,” Johnson-Aplin said. It’s only when the issue is formally taken up at a Town Meeting that “it goes in the newspaper and it’s recorded that the town of Newfane has agreed to have this conversation.”
University of Pennsylvania political science professor Daniel Hopkins has been watching the growing movement of local communities taking a stand on issues far beyond town lines.
“This is a trend we’re seeing increasingly across the 50 states and in a variety of ways but I think it has taken on a new and potentially more concerning edge,” Hopkins said. “I worry that we are in an attention-grabbing, sensation-rewarding media environment in which the kinds of issues that engage us at a national level may further polarize states and localities and make it harder for them to build meaningful coalitions on other issues.”
Indeed, in Newfane, the resolution regarding Israel became so divisive that some residents decided not to even come to last year’s Town Meeting, according to Select Board vice-chair Marion Dowling.
In Burlington, where a similar resolution was proposed, City Council President Ben Traverse says things got so heated, he and his family were getting harassing phone calls and even death threats. Burlington city councilors voted in January to block the question from going to a popular vote.Vermont has a history of “big issue” resolutions, from the push for a Nuclear Arms Freeze in the 1980’s, to calls to ban genetically modified foods in 2003. Dewalt, the Newfane activist, was behind several of them, including calls to impeach then-president George W. Bush in 2006, which got him invited to talk about it on network TV shows, and quoted in The New York Times.
“I can guarantee you if I stood up on my soap box and made a declaration of the exact same wording, I wouldn’t have had anybody asking me questions about it, he said. “We’re not pie-in-the-sky here about the power of our Newfane Town Meetings, but our actions have consistently had an impact.”
But opponents say activists overstate the impact of their resolutions, and their victory. They say it’s disingenuous, for example, to claim the town of Newfane supported the resolution against Israel, when the winning majority of 46 people was less than 3% of town residents.
“I feel like they’re using the town as a vehicle for their personal messages and that bothers me,” says Newfane resident Cris White. “It’s so junior high.”
Traverse, the Burlington City Council president, also takes issue with what he calls the “inflammatory” language of that resolution.
“The question, as presented, approaches this issue in a one-sided and leading way,” Traverse says.
In Vermont, any registered voter can get a resolution on the Town Meeting agenda by collecting signatures from 5% of their town’s voters. While elected city or town officials have the authority to allow or block the resolution, there is no process in place to vet or edit language.
Traverse says it would behoove city leaders and voters to require an official review to ensure that language is fair and neutral, just as many states do with ballot questions. Traverse says he’s not opposed to contentious, big issue resolutions being put to local voters, but the language must be clear and even-handed.
Exclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
Mother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
Wildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling
Florida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
AM showers Sunday in Maryland
Try This Quiz on Thrilling Books That Became Popular Movies