In September, Vice President Kamala Harris met with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters in hopes of securing a major union endorsement. Despite emphasizing her role in securing an expensive pension bailout in the American Rescue Plan, the union ultimately decided not to endorse Harris or Trump, marking the first time since 1992 that they did not support a Democratic candidate for President. The controversial non-endorsement has sparked debate within the union, with some members criticizing the decision to overlook the pension rescue and Trump’s anti-union stance during his first term.
While many local Teamsters councils have come out in support of Harris, citing the pension issue among other factors, the executive board decided to stay neutral due to conflicting surveys of Teamsters membership and a lack of important commitments from Harris during their meeting in Washington. Despite Harris and other Democrats’ efforts to rescue troubled pension funds that were facing insolvency, some members still preferred Trump over Harris, leading to a divided opinion within the union on who to endorse for the presidency.
Teamsters President Sean O’Brien’s decision not to endorse has put the union at odds with its local bodies that have chosen to support Harris. Some local leaders believe that endorsing Harris and other Democrats is crucial to maintaining union strength, while others feel that the non-endorsement was a missed opportunity to show support for those who helped rescue the pension funds. O’Brien’s relationship with Trump has also raised questions within the union about his motives for seeking and accepting a speaking slot at the Republican National Convention.
Despite the internal division within the union, some members believe that staying out of the race was the right decision. One member in Washington state supports Trump and believes in remaining neutral in national politics, while others feel that endorsing Harris was necessary to safeguard the union and protect union rights. The phone survey of rank-and-file members showing a preference for Trump over Harris has also been met with skepticism by some local leaders who question the validity of the results.
The lack of a union endorsement may have implications on the election outcome in key battleground states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. The union’s decision not to endorse means they will not be putting resources into the presidential race, potentially benefiting Trump. However, the autonomous joint councils are still actively engaging in get-out-the-vote efforts for Harris, with leaders like Bill Carroll in Wisconsin leading the charge. Despite the division within the union, many members are still committed to supporting Harris and other Democrats to protect union rights and strengthen the organization.
The impact of the Teamsters’ non-endorsement on the election remains uncertain, but the lack of unity within the union has raised concerns about solidarity and strength. While some argue that the non-endorsement was a missed opportunity to show support for those who rescued the pension funds, others believe staying neutral was the right decision to avoid alienating members who may prefer Trump. As the election approaches, the Teamsters’ internal debates reflect the broader political divisions within the labor movement and the challenges of navigating relationships with both major political parties.
