SEIU's War On Everything...

Well, that's pretty much how it seems of late, if one were to read the latest from BeyondChron's Randy Shaw...

When 2009 began, SEIU was generally recognized as the nation’s most powerful union, and Andy Stern was likely the best-known and most politically prominent U.S. labor leader. Barack Obama’s election appeared to usher in a new era of labor union growth, with SEIU and its Change to Win Labor Federation poised for tremendous gains.

But SEIU chose a different course. A week after Obama’s inauguration it put its third largest local, SEIU-UHW, in trusteeship, spawning a year long fight with its former leadership, who now operate under NUHW.

By April, SEIU had intensified raids against UNITE HERE, creating a bitter war with its once closest union ally. SEIU failed to force UNITE HERE to surrender and affiliate with SEIU, and its raids triggered angry denunciations from fellow labor leaders and the effective demise of Change to Win.

Now, rather than repairing its relations with labor, SEIU is escalating the fight. Its protest last night of longtime allies like John Burton, who has done more for labor and SEIU than any living politician, shows that SEIU is clearly feeling a siege mentality.

SEIU’s decision to withdraw funding from the California Democratic Party in response to Burton’s support for NUHW typifies the union’s self-destructive strategy. SEIU’s state employees depend on Democrats to protect them in Sacramento, so defunding State Party campaigns to elect Democrats is self-defeating. And when I suggested to Burton that he could probably make up the funds by calling the many international labor leaders who have criticized Stern, he replied that he had “already started calling them last week.”

And while SEIU withdraws funding from the Democratic Party and battles the labor movement, the campaign for the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) – once among SEIU’s top priorities – seems forgotten. The Center for Union Facts and other anti-EFCA forces have used SEIU’s blocking of worker elections in California as a prime argument, and even sympathetic politicians are reluctant to wage war on behalf of a divided labor movement.

I personally cannot believe that SEIU is going to try to pick a fight within the CA Democratic party with John Burton. This is a larger-than-life figure for the CA Donks, and he is notorious for holding a grudge against those who, in his perception, have slighted him. Either SEIU thinks they are so large and powerful that the CA Donks will come crawling back, or SEIU's leaders are just so Beltway-centric that they don't know who are the movers and the shakers out here in California.

Myself, I'm betting on the latter, with a pretty good garnish of the former to top it off.

But of course, SEIU pissing off the entire labor movement is old news. Evidently the Purple Plague has found themselves a new and enticing target: Boy Scouts.

In pursuit of an Eagle Scout badge, Kevin Anderson, 17, has toiled for more than 200 hours hours over several weeks to clear a walking path in an east Allentown park.

Little did the do-gooder know that his altruistic act would put him in the cross hairs of the city's largest municipal union.

Nick Balzano, president of the local Service Employees International Union, told Allentown City Council Tuesday that the union is considering filing a grievance against the city for allowing Anderson to clear a 1,000-foot walking and biking path at Kimmets Lock Park.

"We'll be looking into the Cub Scout or Boy Scout who did the trails," Balzano told the council.

Balzano said Saturday he isn't targeting Boy Scouts. But given the city's decision in July to lay off 39 SEIU members, Balzano said "there's to be no volunteers." No one except union members may pick up a hoe or shovel, plant a flower or clear a walking path.

"We would hope that the well-intentioned efforts of an Eagle Scout candidate would not be challenged by the union," said Mayor Ed Pawlowski in an e-mail Friday. "This young man is performing a great service to the community. His efforts should be recognized as such."

Balzano said Saturday the union is still looking into the matter and might cut the city a break.

"We are probably going to let this one go," Balzano said .

Oh, that's nice. SEIU "might cut the city a break." How magnanimous of them.

This is a 17-year-old kid who has put in 200 hours of his own time to try to clear a path which has fallen into disrepair, and SEIU can only say they are "probably going to let this one go."

But that's not to miss the full-on threat that the SEIU thug made farther up in the article:

"We'll be looking into the Cub Scout or Boy Scout who did the trails," Balzano told the council.

If one of my kids was doing this kind of volunteer work on a public parkway and someone from SEIU publicly proclaimed in a city council meeting that they would be "looking into the Cub Scout or Boy Scout who did the trails," that SEIU leader would then very quickly find himself and his thug compatriots looking into the barrel of my deer rifle.

SEIU seriously needs to check itself.

Sinking Ship, Meet Escaping Rats

We've been hearing about the "brain drain" that has happened ever since UHW became Zombie UHW, with the lion's share of that experience going over to the NUHW side.

However, the SEIU "drain" just keeps going unplugged. The Plague has most recently lost Josie Mooney to the CA State Employees Association CA School Employees Association (thanks to an alert reader!), and it rumour now has it that they are preparing to move the Zombie UHW deputy trustee, Kim Evon, down to Tyrone Freeman's infamous SEIU Local 6434, which has proven to be the shining gate to unemployment.

Now, with all this shuffling around and people in very high positions going on to greener (or at least drier) pastures, you would think that the Zombies would make sure that they keep the long-term employees who stayed through the trusteeship transition around, if for no other reason than they are familiar voices and names that the members would recognize, and further that they are the familiar voices and names that the managers would recognize in the event of necessary representation activities.

But of course, for SEIU, all that was predicated on two things: 1) Taking the SEIU Loyalty Oath, and 2) Doing anything and everything that Thug Regan and Esquirol Medina tells ya to do. Dissension in the ranks is not to be tolerated, see? Rats such as this need to be tossed off the ship even if they may want to stay on until the last, final moment.

And so we come to the case of Greg Tegenkamp, a long-term Zombie UHW field rep and organizer who goes back to the Local 250 days, but who decided to stay on with Zombie UHW instead of leaving in protest when the trusteeship was imposed. As matters evolved, he was being asked to do more and more things that he felt were not in the interests of the people he was charged to serve as a field rep and organizer.

It took being required to partake in the Fresno IHSS fight - and the process of SEIU phone banking in that effort - to bring matters to a boil for Mr. Tegenkamp, as he relates in his E-mail to Thug Regan:

__________

May 31, 2009
Dave Regan, Trustee
United Healthcare Workers West, SEIU
560 Thomas L. Berkeley Way
Oakland, California 94612

Dear Mr. Regan:

This letter is to inform you of my decision not to participate in the Fresno Home Care Blitz and to help you understand the reason for my decision, First, I must tell you a little about myself and my involvement in the labor movement.
(snip)
In 1997, I started working for Local 250, one of the few Unions whose vision inspired me to apply. ‘When I started, Local 250 had around 30,000 members and today, it has close to 150,000, with about 100,000 in the former jurisdiction of 250. When I started, we were at the early stages of changing from a business union to a member-driven union. Martinez Kaiser, one of my facilities, had only two stewards. Walnut Creek had about a dozen, but one really controlled everything. I received upward to 20 calls a day from members, on average. At the time of the trusteeship, these facilities had about 30 and 50 stewards respectively. I now receive less than 10 calls a week from members. Some facilities are better organized than others, and there remains a vestige of the old servicing model in some. In Southern California, the transformation started later and the growing pains have been hard, but real progress was being made and people were getting past the feelings that the North was imposing its ways on the South.

UHW before the trusteeship, was a vibrant organization that really did put members first and did really believe in Union democracy. For two years prior to the trusteeship, we all know the International and UHW were engaged in an internal dispute about policy and direction of the Union. No matter how that dispute is framed and no matter what side one may have been on in that dispute, one thing is indisputable: the International Union spent an unprecedented amount of resources attacking one of its Local Unions. I have been active in the labor movement for over 30 years and I have never seen anything like it. Some of the glossy mailers sent to our members' homes and even sent to non-members who we were attempting to organize were worse than anything I had seen from union-busting law firms. To this day it is hard for me to fathom how someone who is the leader of a large international union could endorse such action.

Nonetheless, I did not resign from UHW upon trusteeship, as many of those who I admire did. I knew there would be chaos and I knew there would be confusion, mistrust and anger among our steward leaders and members. I feared that representation of our members would suffer and I chose to stay in order to do what I could to avoid this from happening. I did not quite know what to expect from the trustees, but I hoped they would accept me for my contributions and in return I would keep an open mind and perhaps, in time, through their actions, they would earn my trust.

I suppose I hoped for too much. What I see is some of the stewards and staff least respected by members being promoted to positions of authority, solely because they have an ax to grind with the previous leaders. What I hear is the current leaders referring to members as “idiots” because they support NUHW. What I don’t see is very many real leaders stepping forward in support of SEIU. What I don’t hear is any commitment to real democracy. Sure, you want more members on the Local Organizing Committee than were on the previous Executive Board, so you can say how inclusive you are, but it is very clear that the only voice these members will have is to repeat what ever message the trustees decide, which is currently "Destroy NUHW at all costs". If you cannot pledge to carry that message don’t bother applying. The Executive Board set policy, the LOC can only follow the policy set by the trustees.

This all brings us back to the Fresno Blitz and my decision not to participate. Simply, I refuse to lie to members to get them to do something, because this is manipulation. Furthermore an organizing campaign that relies on manipulation evinces no more than a cynical disrespect for members. The telephone script for the Fresno phone-banking contains many misrepresentations and some straight, flat out lies. It is a lie, for example, that the former leaders "were removed for misusing members' money." The truth, and you know the truth, is that the former leaders were removed for not co-operating with the transfer of the long term care members to a local where the leader was removed for misusing member's money to enrich himself, his wife, his wife’s family and his friends. It is also a lie, although one of omission, not to tell the members that if they vote to "remain" in UHW they are really voting to be moved out of UHW into Tyrone's old local. If SEIU is indeed the better choice for the Fresno Homecare members, why are we not focusing on the reasons they should remain in SEIU? Why do we need to lie and misrepresent and vilify the opposition leadership?

The other day while phone banking, I sort of got into it with somebody named James Hunter. I had overheard him leaving a message, saying that the NUHW folks were taking peoples' ballots from them and if they tried to take "your ballot" to call some 559 number. I asked him where this was on the script and how could they be taking ballots when ballots hadn't even been mailed yet. He showed me where the script said they would "probably" engage in this behavior. He also said this was how NUHW won the Doctor's Hospital election, by going door to door and taking people's ballots. I asked rhetorically if this was how a 7:1 victory was achieved. He said he worked on the campaign arid his experience talking to workers, the election should have been about even.. He went away for a few minutes and care back citing Kim Evon’s e-mail as proof of his assertions, since Kim said at least three times that the election was "tainted" it must be true.

I avoided repeating the lies and misrepresentation when I phoned, but I overheard others, with unchecked imaginations, expanding on what was on the script. I cannot blame them, because they have been whipped into a state of frenzy by you and others in high positions within the trusteeship. I have heard you exhort the troops to share your "righteous indignation" right after you told us all that we were "doing the Lord's work" (your frequent religious sermonizing I find personally offensive, by the way) by fighting to destroy NUHW. The former leaders of UHW have been called thieves, liars, power hungry, self-aggrandizing, opportunistic, satanic and worse. For those of us still with SEIU who know the former leaders, we know these to be lies. And the latest epithet being bandied about is that they are "union busters". I guess that makes Dolores Huerta, an icon of the labor movement, a union buster, since she supports NUHW. Does it make Andy Stern a union-buster? How are the raids of UNITE-HERE or, in the past, CNA, different front what NUHW is doing?

You talk to us about the values of UHW and speak of your admiration for Nelson Mandela for not seeking retribution against those who imprisoned him and tell our lost-time members to hold out an olive branch to NUHW supporters. Yet you follow that up with saying you are not done yet with efforts to get Josh Wiser removed from his position with SEIU 1000, simply because he was a former UHW staff member who left in support of NUHW. No retribution there. And for a different audience, you said that SEIU's attorneys would be thoroughly examining every document returned by the former leaders and it was your hope that they would be caught withholding something so they could go to jail where they belonged. I guess one day it might be New Testament and turn the other cheek, but for now it's all Old Testament and an eye for an eye.

I refuse to compromise my values and principles by being part of a dishonest campaign. Furthermore, I have yet to hear anything to convince me that SEIU is the better choice for these members. How can I be expected to sell SEIU when the only facts I can rely on are SEIU has lots of members and lots of money and NUHW doesn’t.

Shortly after the trusteeship I was placed on paid administrative leave because I refused to sign a sort of "loyalty" letter. After 30 days, I was allowed to return to work with the understanding that my role would be centered on representational issues within Kaiser, not only at my facility, but also in assisting other areas who had no experienced reps and assisting with regional bargaining. I understood it to be a condition of my employment that I support SEIU but I also made it clear I would nor do anything unethical or morally repugnant. I expressed it as my sincerest desire to remain with SEIU so I could continue to organize the members at Kaiser to fight the boss (albeit in the peculiar way we fight the boss in the LMP), and not to be embroiled in the Sal v. Andy dispute. I know I have been performing my role well and I wish to continue doing so, without being required to participate in the negative campaigning. Perhaps this is not possible and you will wish to terminate my employment. I can accept that consequence for myself. But 1 will be touched with added sadness for the members whom it has been my privilege to represent for the last 12 years, as their immediate interests continue to be neglected.

Please let me know your decision. I will be reporting to my facility tomorrow.

Yours truly,
Greg Tegenkamp
Lead Field Representative/Organizer

Cc: Mary Grillo Greg Maron

__________

Greg Tegenkamp was fired by SEIU on Monday, June 8th.

How NOT to Raid a Union...

Those loveable scamps at SEIU have poured millions of dollars, and thousands of man-hours into SEIU 721, in order to raid EAA down in the City of Los Angeles. Of course, they didn't have the wontons to put the actual vote tallies in their "victory" announcement. That's because they got their asses kicked, and they don't want people to know how badly they actually did.

EAA, on the other hand, had no problem publishing the actual vote totals.

Here's what the Plague got for their money and their time:

May 7, 2009 – Tentative results are in for the representation election. However, 3 of the units have sufficient numbers of challenged ballots to affect the outcome. Over 70% of the ballots mailed to EAA-represented employees were returned, an impressive number. The actual number of votes cast in each unit follows:

EAA IS HERE TO STAY

MOU 1: Voted to protect their union, stay in EAA.
EAA: 859
SEIU: 568
No Union: 17
Challenged: 123
Void: 7

MOU 8: ERB to resolve challenged ballots due to large number of challenges. Runoff election likely.
EAA: 453
SEIU: 489
No Union: 36
Challenged: 75
Void: 5

MOU 17: ERB to resolve challenged ballots & irregularities in the ballot counting. Runoff election likely.
EAA: 165
SEIU: 180
No Union: 9
Challenged: 19
Void: 0

MOU 19: Voted to protect their union, stay in EAA.
EAA: 108
SEIU: 88
No Union: 4
Challenged: 8
Void: 12

MOU 20: Voted to protect their union, stay in EAA (ERB must resolve challenges, but number of challenges is small compared to vote margin). No runoff expected.
EAA: 497
SEIU: 392
No Union: 34
Challenged: 77
Void: 0

MOU 21: Voted to protect their union, stay in EAA.
EAA: 659
SEIU: 269
No Union: 7
Challenged: 68
Void: 5

Remember that the procedures require a successful choice to obtain 50% + 1 of the votes counted after disposition of all challenged ballots. If no choice receives this amount, a runoff election is scheduled between the 2 choices receiving the highest numbers of votes.

EAA thanks everyone who voted to protect his or her union. Your effort in learning the facts and returning your ballot is appreciated.

Bringing all the numbers together, it breaks down like this: A total of 5233 votes were cast, of which only 1986 (37.95%) were cast for SEIU. On the other hand, 2741 votes (52.38%) were cast for EAA. A total of 370 ballots (7%) stand to challenge, but none of the challenge votes can flip a MOU from EAA to SEIU.

In fact, SEIU failed to win a clear majority of votes in ALL SIX of the MOU's - the best percentage that SEIU obtained was 48.26% in the second-smallest MOU by vote total.

All in all, this was an EPIC FAIL on the part of the Plague.

And for all you Plague supporters out there, you should keep in mind that, were this vote being conducted by standard SEIU rules (pooling all the votes together instead of individual units voting), then SEIU would be absolutely, positively out on its ass in this vote. As it stands now, they need to survive a runoff in order to achieve victory in two (maybe three) of the six units.

Couple that with the ill will they've engendered all over SEIU 721 with this useless campaign, and it's a lose-lose every way you slice it.

Well done, Andy. You've once again done us proud.

Wilhelm's Response to Andy Stern...

...is a monumental F-you letter. Note that the letter was sent directly to Andy Stern, with copies to Bruce Raynor (UNITE/HERE) and Edgar Romney (Workers United), when as you recall the letter to Wilhelm was co-signed by all three "leaders"...

Andy Stern
President
SEIU
1800 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington DC 20036

Dear Andy:

This is in response to SEIU's letter following the end of the mediation process.

Your offer to end some of SEIU's interference in UNITE HERE's internal affairs is disingenuous at best. You state that SEIU will continue to campaign in "disputed" areas, meaning that you will continue to try to hijack UNITE HERE members, even where members have clearly voted to stay in UNITE HERE, and even where SEIU has engaged in demonstrable fraud and voter suppression in so-called "votes."

You also state that SEIU will not interfere in "new" UNITE HERE organizing campaigns' does that mean SEIU will continue to seek revocation of UNITE HERE authorization cards in situations like the Phoenix Sheraton Hotel, and continue to try to "burn the ground" in other UNITE HERE organizing campaigns"

You state that SEIU's proposal at the last mediation session recognizes UNITE HERE's core jurisdictions. That is, of course, false. Your proposal continues to try to hijack UNITE HERE members in hotels and gaming, and demands that UNITE HERE agree that SEIU will organize competitively in the hotel industry.

Your statement that SEIU's financial offer would leave UNITE HERE as a viable Union is absurd. I can only conclude that SEIU's accelerating financial problems lead you to try to hijack UNITE HERE's financial resources, leaving UNITE HERE unable to re-establish its International Union and be viable, let alone be able to organize aggressively. You want to leave us financially crippled so that we will not be able to compete effectively with SEIU's demand to have competitive organizing rights in our core industries.

Your proposal for arbitration is likewise disingenuous. We already have written recommendations from a highly respected neutral, UFCW President Joe Hansen, who invested enormous time and effort in understanding these issues. UNITE HERE accepted President Hansen's recommendations as the basis for a settlement, even though we find several of them repugnant. SEIU rejected President Hansen's recommendations explicitly because those recommendations respect UNITE HERE's core jurisdictions in hotels and gaming.

Why start the process over? It is absurd to say that, having attempted to hijack UNITE HERE, you will now try to get another arbitrator to award you parts of UNITE HERE membership, jurisdiction and resources, after you rejected President Hansen's recommendations. UNITE HERE would have all the risk in such an arbitration, and SEIU would have no risk at all, because UNITE HERE has not tried to hijack SEIU membership, jurisdiction, and resources. Let's put on the table situations where parts of SEIU would clearly be strategically better off in UNITE HERE, such as SEIU public and hospital members in Nevada; SEIU building service workers in South Florida; laundry workers in every major hotel and gaming city; and many others, as well as SEIU financial resources.

No International Union has ever submitted its very future - its membership, its organizing jurisdiction, and its financial resources - to arbitration.

Why didn't SEIU propose arbitration in your dispute with United Health Care West and Sal Rosselli?

Why did SEIU reject the recommendations of impartial, respected mediators both in your raid on UNITE HERE and in your California dispute, if you so value neutral help?

There is no need to start over with an arbitrator, who will have to learn our dispute from scratch. SEIU should simply accept President Hansen's proposals as the basis for negotiations, as UNITE HERE has done. Let's get it done now.

Fraternally,

John W. Wilhelm
President/Hospitality Industry

I would add here that, at the outset of the blowup between UHW and SEIU, arbitration was sought, and was initially attended by both parties, but when it was clear that the arbitrator was actually going to act fairly (instead of rubber-stamping SEIU's desires), SEIU walked away from the arbitration and set in motion the chain of events that resulted in the Marshall Hearings and, ultimately, the Trusteeship.

The SEIU hive mind will, of course, have forgotten about some of the nasty facts that Wilhelm brings up in the latter part of his letter. Wilhelm also points out the SEIU hypocrisy in its positions in a manner pretty close to what was written here earlier on this subject.

Still, it's refreshing to see two pages of absolute 190-proof "F-you" directed at Andy Stern, especially when it comes from someone with the authority and the background to back it up.

An Offer He Can't Refuse...

Our Glorious Maximum Leader, in a letter co-signed with Edgar Romney of Workers United and Bruce Raynor (soon to be formerly) of UNITE/HERE, has made an offer to John Wilhelm of UNITE/HERE, an offer which Stern and his buddies feel that Wilhelm will not be able to refuse...

April 30, 2009

John Wilhelm
President/Hospitality
UNITE HERE
1775 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006

Dear John:

Our Challenge

We met today at the 100-day mark of the Obama Administration. Our country faces a wide range of new opportunities to transform the lives of working Americans. Our members expect and are counting on us to help the Administration succeed.

We are also at a time where after several years of efforts—including two formal processes with independent mediators as well as significant bi-lateral discussions—our unions have not been able to resolve either the internal differences between the leaders of UNITE and HERE or to find a shared understanding on how to move forward in the wake of the creation of Workers United and its affiliation with SEIU.

The dissolution of the merger of UNITE HERE was not the outcome anyone dreamed of, but legally, politically and practically it is a reality, we believe, we must all accept.

Moving Forward

There are now at least two ways to resolve the well-established outstanding issues of organizing jurisdiction, division of assets, and units where representation is still contested:

1. Negotiation. We have continued to take advantage of the advice of Joe Hansen in his role as mediator. We put forward to you today a comprehensive settlement offer that recognizes UNITE HERE’s core jurisdiction and the leading union of hotel and gaming employees, provides UNITE HERE with a substantial financial package that allows it to remain a viable international union, and seeks to definitively resolve which union (Workers United/SEIU or UNITE HERE) that members in disputed areas will be a part of going forward. To date these discussions have not been successful, and we believe we must consider continued negotiations as you have proposed as well as other alternatives.
2. Arbitration. We are prepared now or if the negotiation process is not successful, to submit all outstanding issues to an independent third party for a final-offer arbitration process. We appreciate that in any dispute there are two points of view and believe that the use of an independent third party is necessary to make a final determination if we cannot do it amongst ourselves.

We are also prepared to unilaterally take four very important steps to demonstrate the sincerity of our position. Obviously, we would expect UNITE HERE to do the same.

1. No raiding commitment. In the interim, and in all of the alternatives, we are willing to continue to comply with the provisions of the CTW Constitution regarding no-raiding and will ask the Change to Win Presidents to immediately appoint a permanent, mutually-acceptable arbitrator who would be empowered to expeditiously settle all questions of raiding. We will abide by all decisions.
2. Cease membership contact. In addition, we are unilaterally ceasing any contact with the approximately 200,000 uncontested members of UNITE HERE.
3. Respect organizing campaigns. We are unilaterally willing to not interfere with any new UNITE HERE organizing efforts.
4. Employer relations. We are agreeing not to disrupt any existing employer relationships as it relates to existing contracts, contract negotiations and dues deduction in all undisputed jurisdictions.

To reiterate, we believe there are two viable alternatives for resolution of our strongly held differences all of which can lead to a thoughtful conclusion of our dispute. We are willing to attempt to finalize negotiations, and if that is not successful, we are willing to submit to arbitration as soon as feasible.

We believe the time is now to focus on the opportunities in front of our members and our country and ask for you to join us in making America a place where the dreams of our members and all Americans still can come true.

Sincerely,


Edgar Romney
President
Workers United

Bruce Raynor
General President
UNITE HERE

Andy Stern
President
SEIU

Say what you want about the Purple Plague, but they sure do have some chutzpah. SEIU raids UNITE/HERE, breaks off a faction by means less than entirely legal, tries to move in on UNITE/HERE's main asset (the Amalgamated Bank) after having taken out a gargantuan loan from that bank prior to the raid, and then turn around and offer binding arbitration as a means of sealing the peace.

And as a "sweetener", they offer a "no raiding commitment" - with the definition of a "raid" to be determined by the Change to Stern coalition Presidents, of which Stern has a working majority - and to cease member contacts on any "uncontested" UNITE/HERE members, with evidently SEIU alone determining which of those members are "uncontested." Furthermore, they will respect existing organizing campaigns of UNITE/HERE.

The fact that SEIU had to put those sweeteners into the letter says (in my opinion explicitly) that SEIU has, in fact, been engaging in raiding, has been contacting members of other labor organizations, and has been interfering in existing organizing campaigns of UNITE/HERE.

Otherwise, why else would you promise to stop doing what you had already been doing, if what you had already been doing was entirely on the up-and-up?

I hope John Wilhelm doesn't have a horse.

Update 5/2/09: It seems that John Wilhelm is prepared to put the horse's head on the line...

The Service Employees International Union and a newly formed union offered to resolve a long-running and bitter dispute with Unite Here that threatens to distract the unions from engaging on political priorities, including health care and a bill to ease union organizing. But the offer was quickly rejected by the leadership of Unite Here, and the dispute, in which both sides have filed lawsuits, could continue for weeks or months.

(snip)

Under the proposal, Workers United would also give Unite Here $20 million within two months of the execution of the agreement, and up to $46 million within five years. Each side would retain its pre-merger assets, meaning that Mr. Raynor's faction would retain control of New York-based Amalgamated Bank, the only union-owned bank in the U.S. with $4.6 billion in assets.

On Friday, Mr. Wilhelm called SEIU's offer "disingenuous at best," in a letter to Mr. Stern. He said the proposal "continues to try to hijack Unite Here members," and he rejected the financial offer as "absurd." The latest back and forth between SEIU and Unite Here emerged when mediation by Joe Hansen, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers, ended this week. Mr. Wilhelm suggested that the two sides use recommendations made by Mr. Hansen , such as letting Unite Here under Mr. Wilhelm retain all of its gaming industry members, as a basis for negotiations.

Mr. Raynor said some members who had previously belonged in Mr. Wilhelm's side of the union now want to belong to the Workers United union affiliated with the SEIU. Since Mr. Hansen's mediation failed, he said, the groups should agree to arbitration rather than letting the matter work itself through the courts, which will take longer.

Ah, so now the finally truth comes out - Workers United (and through them Our Glorious Maximum Leader) wants to get his greasy mitts on the Amalgamated Bank and its $500M or so of assets which now rightfully belongs to UNITE/HERE.

Nice.

What Andy Wants...

Okay, now we get back to our regularly scheduled Andy bashing.

Some of the folks at UNITE/HERE have decided to take a chunk out of the hide of Our Glorious Maximum Leader, and do so with outstanding results...



The last 30 second section of the voice track is absolutely brilliant:

"Andy Stern doesn't care about union democracy. He doesn't care about workers having a voice. All Andy Stern wants is for you to be in SEIU - whether you like it or not. And he'll do anything to take your union from you."

When Cooperation Just Isn't Enough...

Another blogger who also happens to be an elected steward (this time with a CHW facility) has awoken from a self-imposed blogging slumber, and is discussing his dilemma within the Great California Union Foodfight. And while initially on the side of cooperating with Zombie UHW, all it took for him to switch sides was a bit of over-reaching on the part of SEIU, as he explains on his own blog...

Last Monday and Wednesday, I had the opportunity to talk to the SEIU representative assigned to WHC. I told her that we, as workers, had many issues involving failures by management to follow the terms of our collective bargaining agreement. We have many scheduling, assignment, and other worksite issues that need to be addressed and corrected. We, as employees, all know of decisions that managers have made that are just WRONG.

To this end, I met with the SEIU representative assigned to our facility. I talked to her about the need to set aside our SEIU/NUHW differences and work together for the good of the members. I told her that if she would be willing to be more available to work with our job stewards in terms of grievances, Committee meetings, etc. that I would keep her apprised of what we need and when we need her.

I also told her that I would no longer distribute information regarding NUHW at the facility. I wanted her to understand that I would work as a steward representing our contract, and only our contract, on matters involving union issues.

In the light of the current division in CHW facilities, including our own, regarding who is vs. who should be representing us (over 70% of our members signed petitions requesting a change of representation - a change that, by the way, could have been done by CHW without us having to wait for a vote), I felt that it was important to work with them (SEIU) ASAP.

There's a lot at stake here.

Our meeting seemed to be productive, and we were heading towards and understanding that would us focus on the work that needed to be done in the Hospital and Clinic.

Then the ball dropped. A dealbreaker was put in the mix. I was told that from this point on any of the stewards that has anything to do with NUHW or those working with NUHW will be removed as stewards in their facilities. I reminded her that any meetings that I or any other steward attends on our time is OUR business. Telling us who we can associate with is out of line and out of bounds. Period.

I will continue to meet and associate with who I please, as long as it is not against the law.

I was willing to forgo communicating with NUHW staff in order to build on a working situation with our SEIU representative - what a letdown.

Now I've decided to sign up for the NUHW founding convention, and yes, I had dinner with our former union rep, Lydia, this evening. So, I fully expect to be relieved of my position as job steward some time soon. I am not trying to "call their bluff", I am just doing what I believe is right.

Take a moment, and click over and read the rest of this gentleman's story. His motives to cooperate with Zombie UHW were absolutely directed in the correct manner (providing good representation to his peers during a trying time), but even THAT wasn't enough for the Purple Plague. They insisted on complete capitulation and domination of who he sees, and what he thinks, 24/7. And in so doing, they ended up flipping him to the NUHW side.

Whenever I state that SEIU is acting as NUHW's best recruiting tool, this is the exact situation to which I refer.

Update on 4/18: It appears that the blog post referenced above has gone 404. I cannot speak to the reasons why this might have occurred, but in case there are any questions regarding the veracity of the text highlighted above, the Google cache is available, and I have procured images of the blog post in question.

I will confess to some strong opinions being espoused on ¡Adios, Andy!. However, I am also aware that when I hit the "publish post" button, that post is going to be in the Google cache until the Google gods decide to purge it - at which time the Internet Wayback machine takes over in that respect.

Update on 4/21: It's back. I can't tell if it was a system glitch or second thoughts, but the post is back with (as far as I can tell) all the original verbiage.

For All That'll Get Ya...

John Wilhelm of UNITE/HERE has filed a complaint against SEIU to the leadership council of Change to Win.

To: Change to Win Leadership Council

As Co-President of UNITE HERE International Union, I write to ask that you accept this letter as a request for mutual aid and support under Article XVII under the Change To Win Constitution and as a formal complaint against SEIU pursuant to Article XVI “Procedures for Resolving Disputes.”

The Change to Win Constitution mandates under Article XVII, Sections 1 & 2 that:

“Each affiliate of this alliance agrees that it shall not divide workers’ strength by engaging in activity that disrupts the established representation rights of any affiliate …”

“…all of the affiliated unions within the alliance …shall use the full power and the resources of the alliance to protect the interests of the aggrieved union and the affected workers.”

As you all know, UNITE HERE is experiencing an across the board assault on its jurisdiction and its membership by SEIU. I ask that the affiliated unions use their full strength and power to protect the interests of UNITE HERE, as provided under Article 17.

Additionally, UNITE HERE seeks redress under Article XV, Section 1 which states in part:

“Each affiliate shall respect the established collective bargaining relationship of every other affiliate. No affiliate shall organize or attempt to represent employees as to whom an established collective bargaining relationship exists with any other affiliate.”

A UNITE HERE splinter group allied with Bruce Raynor claims to have merged with SEIU on March 22, 2009. Prior to and after that date, SEIU has interfered in our collective bargaining relationships in multiple locations nationwide. This interference has taken many forms including but not limited to SEIU staff and elected leaders encouraging UNITE HERE members to secede from UNITE HERE, SEIU staff pursuing NLRB “RC” petitions in UNITE HERE workplaces, and otherwise interfering with the established collective bargaining relationships with UNITE HERE members. Attached please find documents in support of this claim and which identify the locations and bargaining units at issue.

In another brazen example, SEIU is barraging UNITE HERE members with mail and phone calls urging “no” votes on dues increases. Let me stress that this activity extends throughout UNITE HERE.

Second, UNITE HERE seeks redress under Article XV, Section 4 which states in part:

“No Affiliate shall, in connection with any organizational campaign, circulate or cause to be circulated any charge or report that is designed to bring or has the effect of bringing another affiliate into public disrepute or of otherwise adversely affecting the reputation of such affiliate or the alliance.”

SEIU in concert with the Raynor splinter group has orchestrated a months long communications program, designed by Steve Rosenthal, which has defamed UNITE HERE leaders among its membership through the coordinated use of robo-calls, live telephone calls, direct mail, and home visits. SEIU participated in the planning and execution of these attacks. The intent of this communications program is to vilify the elected leadership of UNITE HERE and agitate UNITE HERE members to secede from their union.

These defamatory attacks against UNITE HERE include baseless charges against UNITE HERE elected leaders of “corruption,” “wasteful spending,” “intimidation,” and “mismanagement.”

While I recognize that the Chair of Change to Win ordinarily has certain roles regarding Article XVI procedures, I ask that the Chair, an SEIU officer,recuse herself from any involvement in this matter and that the Leadership Council itself act immediately to process the complaint.

UNITE HERE further asks that the Article XVI mediation step be skipped and that the process move immediately to arbitration since there have been numerous unsuccessful attempts to solve this dispute by mediation already.

Thank you.

John W. Wilhelm

President/Hospitality, UNITE HERE

cc. Andrew Stern, SEIU

Oh, by the way, the "Chair" of Change to SternBurger that Mr. Wilhelm refers to in the above letter is Anna Burger. Asking a SEIU officer to recuse themselves from something in which SEIU might actually be found at fault is right up there with asking them to cut off their arm. Three words for that one: Not. Gonna. Happen.

Good luck with that letter there, John. I'm sure that the leadership of Change to SternBurger will give it all the attention that it merits from her point of view. It's probably just pro-forma anyway, since the remains of UNITE/HERE have asked for readmission to AFL-CIO.

That is, of course, if SEIU will allow them to disaffiliate from Change to SternBurger.

A Look at Life Inside the Hotel California...

The Nation is a magazine that has long been a lapdog for Our Glorious Maximum Leader. A search on "Andy Stern" on The Nation's website will return phraseology like "far-reaching," "visionary," "charismatic," "very bright" - along with criticisms which are almost always couched in either/or propositions, like "savior or sellout", "not shy about speaking his mind," and the like.

It evidently has gotten to the point that one of The Nation's readers decided to write a letter to let the editors of that fine publication know that not everyone out here in California is as enamored of Nice Scarf as those nice folks back on the East Coast think we should be...

When it comes to SEIU and Andy Stern, The Nation is afraid to speak truth to power. In editorials and articles, you continue to treat SEIU as a legitimate labor union and Stern as a legitimate labor leader. SEIU can no longer be considered a real labor union. The widespread corruption, SEIU's anti-democratic structure and Stern's dictatorial style have resulted in a situation where a large part of the union is effectively in trusteeship, denying SEIU members the right to elect their local leaders and an effective voice in the running of the union. Almost all 600,000 SEIU members in California are in locals under trusteeship for corruption (Local 6434), speaking out against corruption (UHW West), or in locals unilaterally merged by Stern over two years ago whose leaders are Stern appointees and where there's yet to be an election scheduled (Locals 221, 521, 721 and 1021), or in locals whose leaders are entrenched Stern appointed loyalists (local 1877).

Coming on the heels of the UHW trusteeship and the blocking of the upstart National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) election petitions, Stern's most recent outrage, an effective annexation of UNITE and a despicable raid on HERE, should be the cause of loud public condemnation by labor leaders and pro-labor progressives. Instead, the silence is deafening. Silence equals complicity. Under US and International law, workers have the right to choose their own union and, by their actions, Stern and SEIU are violating that right.

Employee Free Choice is not only the right to join a union, but the right to choose which union. The CNA-SEIU pact is an odd one in that Stern's brand of corporatist, corrupt, top-down unionism is fundamentally incompatible with the CNA's tradition of militancy and support for single payer. CNA Executive Director Rose Ann DeMoro has made some some very strong (and accurate) criticisms of Stern, but the most telling and truthful is that Stern is a scab. Stern's battle with the new National Union of Healthcare Workers is what forced him to settle with CNA on the CNA's terms. The CNA-SEIU deal will hold until Stern sees an advantage to himself in breaking it. DeMoro is smart and is likely already prepared for it.

So, when will the Nation stop being a fig leaf for SEIU and Stern, and start standing up for workers' rights?

Charlie Ridgell, Oakland CA

03/28/2009 @ 10:42am

It is indeed worth considering that the great majority of SEIU "members" in California now no longer enjoy any sort of voting rights as would be typical in the normal union. SEIU union halls, once a place of welcome for the membership, have been turned into locked offices, and in some cases like the Zombie UHW SoCal headquarters the resemblance is more like the Green Zone in Baghdad.

One Thousand Cocktails to Mr. Charlie Ridgell of Oakland, CA, for letting people back east know that not everyone is happy here in Hotel California.

It's no secret that one of the parts of "union democracy" is actually having the chance to vote on something.

Why is SEIU so afraid of its members actually expressing their collective opinion?

Six Pages, 111 Footnotes...

The remains of UNITE/HERE have put out a policy document which goes approximately six pages in text, with 111 separate references inside, documenting the SEIU approach in dealing with other unions that it has decided to take over and otherwise do battle with.

Stern’s current attempt to absorb UNITE HERE’s 450,000 members while ignoring UNITE HERE’s constitutional process is unprecedented in its audacity and scope. However, actively campaigning against fellow members of the labor movement is not new to SEIU, and the tactics they are employing against UNITE HERE follow a now-familiar pattern.

This ain't your average union-versus-union hit piece either. The details are exacting, and no factual statements are made about people's actions or statements without attribution. One highlight of this document is a graph of just what SEIU has been up to over the last eight years or so...



This graph basically represents how many people Andy Stern has managed to torque off over the last seven to eight years with takeover attempts and other such efforts at meddling in the internal affairs of other unions. The size of Andy Stern's appetite (not to mention his ego) can be summarized thusly:



The recent "peace treaty" between SEIU and CNA/NNOC makes a little more sense now, in that CNA/NNOC is well-funded, is very loud, is very proud, and was probably able to extract more than a little blood money from the Purple Plague in order to bury the hatchet.

That CNA/NNOC also managed to bury the hatchet into the back of Sal Rosselli and NUHW is probably just icing on the cake for Our Glorious Maximum Leader...

The CHW Redemption, Part Deux

Well folks, it's official.

It looks like The Purple Plague is going to be given at least 2-1/2 years to brainwash, browbeat, and otherwise abuse CHW workers who have expressed their desire to remove themselves from SEIU's yoke.

The NLRB is taking the position (at least for now) that the contract bar would prevent NLRB from imposing an election.

CHW, of course, could request an election, but CHW probably knows a good thing when they see it, and it's pretty clear that Stern and his buddies would take a much more business-friendly and much less confrontational approach than would Sal Rosselli and his acolytes at NUHW.

Since CHW's contract was approved in late October of 2008, under the "contract bar" language of the collective bargaining law, a petition for representation can only be filed "90 to 60 days prior to the expiration of the contract or 90 to 60 days prior to three years after the contract was entered into, whichever is shorter."

Thus, my CHW friends, you're in the Purple Prison until August of 2011.

The Plague is deathly afraid of any kind of vote regarding its representation. Why is that?

A New Union is Born...

Disaffected workers, tired of their current union hierarchy, and feeling that they are no longer properly represented by that union, have banded together to secede from that parent union, and have formed their own union - a union which has is composed entirely of workers in a certain sector of that (former) parent union.

The former parent union is now taking measures (via legal means as well as NLRB obstructionism) to keep those disaffected workers in the parent union - even though those disaffected workers have already chosen a name, have already chosen a potential slate of elected leaders, and have already scheduled a founding convention, to be held later this month.

One would assume that I am discussing NUHW, but I'm not. The new union in this case is called Workers United, and they are an offshoot of UNITE/HERE. And which union, do you suppose, is helping to sponsor this new renegade union, even to the point of offering to take the new union under its wing?

Why, it's our very own Purple Plague.



The math - and the irony - are left to the student...

Kaiser Steward Removal Revisited...

Another (now former) UHW Steward, Lisa Tomasian, has penned an article on Daily Kos explaining the events surrounding how she was removed as a steward by the Zombie UHW Kaiser director.

After trusteeship, the first letter I received from Dave Regan and Eliseo Medina stated that there would be no changes to our elected Shop Steward structure. The most recent letter I’ve received, however, said:

“We understand that you no longer share our commitment to build a stronger union and win a strong contract for 2010. Therefore, we have no other recourse than to remove you from your position as an SEIU-UHW Steward."

I found that interesting, to say the least, since neither of them has ever talked about this with me!

In the old days, pre-trusteeship, the only way an elected steward could be removed was through a recall by the members, the same people who elect us and who we're accountable to. Not anymore!

After I was removed from my elected position as a shop steward, more letters went out to other advocates for NUHW. The Trustee’s appointee Greg Maron started assessing shop stewards in Northern California. If shop stewards don't toe the SEIU line or if they say they support NUHW, they receive a letter removing them from their democratically elected positions. Greg has even stepped it up a bit by going to Steward Council meetings and if they don’t agree with him he suspends the meeting until further notice. Greg then follows up with letters removing them as shop stewards.

Interesting in that the letter quoted above has EXACTLY the same verbiage as the letter referenced in my post below, which was received by a different individual in KP. It appears that the nice folks at SEIU have just basically up and decided that everyone who was a steward now needs to be removed, no matter if they violate the established process for doing so, and no matter if Eliseo Medina specifically stated in his January 27th robocall that such actions would not occur.

However, Lisa evidently wasn't willing to just leave it at that...

Dear Greg Maron,

We understand that it is your current misunderstanding that you have the power to "remove" Shop Stewards because we want to join another union, we don't toe the SEIU line, we don't do what you say, we argue with your scab staff you've assigned to our facility, and we don't respect you, the trustees or SEIU's "leadership."

Sadly for you, our members are well educated and empowered to understand that our power comes from the workers, not from some failed attorney who gets to temporarily play "Kaiser Director" while the workers decertify SEIU. They understand that they elected Shop Stewards and that nothing you do or say or write will change that. Ours is a democratic union and of course, your trying to "remove" Shop Stewards because they disagree with you just highlights why 50,000 Kaiser workers will very soon no longer be a part of SEIU's dictatorship.

But the real point of this letter is not the lost cause of trying to educate you on union democracy. The real point is to make sure you understand the impact of our having filed a petition by the majority of Kaiser workers two weeks ago. The impact of that means that SEIU is no longer the union of Kaiser workers and you are no longer the Kaiser Director.

As such, you are hereby notified that you are no longer recognized by the Kaiser workers as the Kaiser Division Director. Further, Ken Krause and Linda Erickson are no longer recognized as union representatives to the workers of Santa Clara Kaiser.

Respectfully,

The Kaiser Workers

Lisa Tomasian CRT/ARRT
Kaiser Santa Clara
NUHW Shop Steward

When I say that SEIU has been NUHW's best organizer, the stuff up above is exactly what I am referring to. It seems like SEIU has been going out of its way to offend their (allegedly) wayward brethren in UHW, and seem absolutely bent on conquest going forward rather than cooperation.

Cooperation is not achieved at the point of the gun. It certainly is not achieved by taking all of the old processes which were (by every estimation) beneficial to both the employees and the management - as well as the patients - and tossing those processes in the gutter in favor of SEIU-brand corporate unionism.

What Part of "NO" Don't You Understand?

As reported here yesterday, NUHW won recognition for 350 workers at four North American Healthcare facilities in Northern California.

Our friends at the Purple Plague could have let this one go, seeing as how there was an absolute majority of workers signing up and asking the employer to recognize NUHW as their bargaining agent.

Alas, that's just not how SEIU rolls...

"This is not a done deal," SEIU spokeswoman Michelle Ringuette said. She said the SEIU on Tuesday filed an unfair labor practices charge with the National Labor Relations Board, accusing North American Healthcare of "illegally recognizing" the National Union of Healthcare Workers.

She said former United Healthcare Workers leaders purposely allowed contracts with employers to expire at North American Healthcare and many other facilities so that if the SEIU took over the local -- as it did in January -- they would be able to make a play for the workers through a new union.

Oy...

SEIU is now going to go to court in order to try to prove constructive indifference against its former UHW officials - while evidently also trying to duck the fact that SEIU has had "monitors" in place at all UHW facilities since the beginning of the Marshall trial in September, and have been telling everyone far and wide that the only reason people sign on with SEIU is because of the vaunted International bargaining team, and that the locals have little, if anything, to do with it.

But arguing the above sets aside the obvious question: Why does SEIU have to resort to raiding in order to bolster its membership - and why does SEIU have to resort to lawsuits in order to retain its membership?

Andy's Special Pink Scarf

Pick A Side, and Go With It...

You gotta hand it to the Purple Plague - it seems that their proximity to Obama has made them believe that they can say or do anything and nobody will make any kind of attempt to compare it to their past statements.

We all remember all the various flyers and other justifications for the Trusteeship, but they almost all boil down to one concept - There Must Be Unity In Labor!

So what has the Purple Plague decided to do?

Actively intervene in the possible divorce of UNITE/HERE.



Unbelievable.

Anyone who has been paying attention knows how the Purple Plague reacts whenever anyone in a red NUHW shirt shows up and starts talking to people.

It will be entertaining to see if purple-shirted SEIU scabs start squealing about "Unfair Labor Practices!" if and when loyal UNITE/HERE stewards tell then to get lost.

NUHW Ups the Ante, Part The Second...

The nice folks at NUHW sent KaiPerm's CEO, George Halvorson, a letter yesterday:

(click on each image below to enlarge, or click on the link above to launch PDF)





If what the verbiage in the letter states is indeed accurate - that NUHW has collected petition signatures from greater than 50% of UHW's covered workforce, then going by standard card check rules, NUHW is now the de-facto bargaining agent for UHW-covered KaiPerm employees.

However, the law is unclear on which version of card check rules is in place. To be sure, though, if EFCA passes, then by law KaiPerm will have to recognize NUHW.

Look for the Purple Plague to very shortly and all-of-a-sudden discover a deep and profound opposition to EFCA.

NLRB Blocks Decert Elections

I know I shouldn't be surprised, but I suppose I can be a little disappointed...

Efforts by a new union to woo away members of Service Employees International Union hit a roadblock last week, when the National Labor Relations Board put work-site elections on hold in order to investigate unfair labor charges field by SEIU.

The new union has also been asked to explain why elections are begin sought at Catholic Healthcare West, since it appears a signed contract is in place. If true, new elections cannot be held until the contract nears expiration.

Eleven petitions for new elections were halted last week; two more went out Monday and others are expected, said Tim Peck, assistant to the regional director of the NLRB in San Francisco. The office has received 27 petitions and expects to halt them all, he said.

This is truly not a good thing for NUHW, as they need a "quick" victory in order to prove their viability as a bona-fide labor organization.

Halting all of the elections (not just those that are opposed by the Purple Plague) seems to me to be a bit of an extreme step, but I have to wonder if Nice Scarf has already met with The Messiah and given him his marching orders vis-a-vis what the NLRB should do with any decert petitions.

By the way - SEIU is complaining about "unfair labor practices"? (snort)

Monday Roundup

"Labor Leaders, Have You Lost Your Damn Mind?"

"Busting up the UHW" - Video project

Andy Stern to Chamber of Commerce: Debate me.

Companies are having webinars to prepare themselves for the Purple Plague and EFCA...

Resistance is Futile...

WTF has gotten into Our Glorious Maximum Leader?

He hasn't come even close to getting the remains of UHW in any semblance of order, and now he's talking about trying to swallow up UNITE-HERE?

A man has GOT to know his limitations...