babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
UNITE HERE dissidents to join SEIU
March 23, 2009 - 3:02pm
Sorry, here's the source:
Ben Smith's Blog: Dissident union group joins SEIU
Ben Smith also reports the response from the other camp here: Wilhelm blasts SEIU, "Czar Stern"
I see this only as a good thing. If the two sides cannot get along, it is like a marriage where it only hurts everyone involved. It's time for both sides to go their separate ways.
I dont' want to get caught in the crossfire.
What makes SEIU "one of the worst" aka Mycroft?
Do you have some personal experience or know someone who has?
I think SEIU's been a little too eager to put "growth" above all goals, and their shitshow with Puerto Rican teachers is a prime example of that.
But I also think some of their efforts to organize - for example, the justice for janitors effort - have been inspiring and effective.
Labour matters in the USA. Amazing. Its headline news! SEIU knows how to organize. Its very impressive.
I'm not sure this is proof that SEIU knows how to organize. But it might be proof that SEIU is a powerful, effective union - at least in some people's eyes.
That said, SEIU - it's impossible to deny - is growing and doing a lot to reverse the trend in declining union density. Sometimes their tactics are dubious (virtual sweeheart deals a la CAW's "Magna" contracts). Sometimes they're inspired and effective (Justce for Janitors). A lot of terrain in between.
The "worst union" knock makes absolutely no sense. Hoping aka Mycroft will come back and explain further.
In the meantime, I'll bemoan the fact that - at a point when US labor is about to turn things around - infighting seems to be breaking out everywhere.
That said: there was a lot of infighting and turf wars when John L Lewis was creating the CIO sixty years ago.
Bad contracts. Sweetheart deals with management in exchange for certification (see Lousiana's nursing home sector for instance)
Never heard of this. Got a source?
This article in the Nation goes into both sides of a so-called "sweetheart" deal. It's not always straightforward.
Interesting article.
This is a US article. We don't have the same labour framework in Canada, and neutrality agreements aren't nearly as necessary here -- a distinction that Stern and his employees and acolytes have brushed aside. So we end up with the same US-based, cynical, wheeling-dealing, behind-closed-doors unionism, unnecessarily, even knowing ahead of time all the legitimacy and sustainability problems that are going to defeat those unions and drag the rest of us down with them.
Interesting article from the NY Daily News.
Service Employees International Union president goes to the extreme
Intro:
"Andy Stern, president of the powerful Service Employees International Union, seems hellbent on using classic corporate raider tactics to bring a huge portion of the U.S. labor movement under his absolute control."
http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/03/25/2009-03-25_service_employees_international_union_pr.html
I would love to see a copy of the affiliation agreement between Workers United and SEIU as referenced below in the Daily news article. I find it hard to believe that the ongoing interference by SEIU could be perceived as anyting other than raiding. I'm curious as to how this will play out in Canada.
"Stern's union will provide legal, staff and financial assistance to defend Workers United "against any and all challenge from other labor organizations, including any challenge arising from its affiliation with SEIU," the agreement states.
That alone could cost millions, because both factions of UNITE HERE are fighting in federal court over control of the Amalgamated Bank, the only union-owned bank in the country.
In addition, the affiliation agreement allows Workers United to pay as little as $7.65 in monthly per capita dues to SEIU over the next four years. Since the splinter locals were paying a whopping $16.05 in monthly per capita to UNITE HERE, the discount alone will save the new group more than $60 million."
"In speaking with colleagues in the United States it is evident that this merger, despite best of intentions, has clearly failed."
-- President of National Union of Public and General Employees (Canada) James Clancy, letter dated 3/16/09
United Food and Commercial Workers President Joe Hansen and well known labor mediator Larry Fox have both led mediation sessions between the two sides of the dispute, and now agree that a split is the only workable solution.
President Hansen proposed a split in the most recent mediation session he held, and Fox indicated that a divorce was the only possible resolution when he ended his mediation back in November.
Teamster's President James Hoffa also called for an end to the merger in a recent letter to UNITE HERE leadership.
so if the merger is not working, and HERE continues to hold UNITE members and there assets hostage; then sometimes larger players need to get involved and help defend the rights of UNITE members and assets, and in this context that meant SEIU.
after this is all said and done HERE will shrink and eventually become extinct because they have no ability to handle money. they will go bankrupt fairly quickly, and SEIU Workers United will organize all around, and finally non-union hospitality workers will finally get a voice on the job.
robbie dee,
I'm not sure how much the members were actually consulted during this initial process. It appears, through various media sources, that this was a plan that was developed by Raynor and Stern and then rolled out to the members of the Unite faction. Perhaps Raynor did approach other Union's that would have been more aligned from a jurisdictional perspective (ie USW) but they were opposed (unlike SEIU) to entering into a raiding scenario. Also I think that Raynor knew that legally/constitutionally that he was on shaky ground with the splinter group and needed someone with a very big bat that had a history of 'growth at any cost' - at least in the US.
It would appear that this battle will continue for sometime. It is rather a bizarre situation where Raynor has led the secession drive yet remains as the President of UNITE HERE.
"Criminal allegations in union fight"http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0309/Criminal_allegations_in_union_fight.html
A copy of the 'Affiliation' agreement between SEIU and the UNITE HERE splinter group is available at:
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_seiu.html
It will be interesting to see how this flies with the CLC Constitution and whether SEIU will be in violation due to their interference and subsequent affiliation agreement with the UNITE HERE faction.
Seeing as how Unite owned the bank long before the 2004 merger and obviously trusted the merger was for the good of the labour movement, they saw no reason to protect their assets. Sad fact is HERE obviously had an agenda as I've said before and it wasn't for the good of the labour movement. It would seem since HERE is in federal court fighting for control of UNITE'S Amalgamated bank that it, HERE, wasn't in this merger for the member's or the labour movement.. One must also ask since HERE has the majority why then was it on the verge of bankruptcy previous to the 2004 merger???? What were the members dues used for???? As for the SEIU affiliation at least Worker's United learned it's lesson and has protected it's assets.......
In Canada on April 1 2008 Paul Clifford sent a letter that started with "In view of our inability to agree on an equitable continuation of the Merger Agreement we hereby request Ontario Council to return to Local 75 a list of properties". So you see stop raiding this didn't start with Stern or SEIU, this started with HERE wanting to control finances and assets it hadn't earned otherwise why would they be in court fighting for something that wasn't their's in the first place? And sorry to say only became their's because UNITE trusted HERE......So no protection of assets. Stupid of UNITE???? Maybe
stop raiding you really seem to have a cult of the personality thing for the individual leaders in this thing as it is always Raynor this, Stern and Wilhelm that. I have to say, it really increases the annoyance factor lots of us in the rest of the labour movement have for the soap opera some folks want to make this whole thing into.
robbie_dee's question about whether textile workers will find a home in a service sector union is one of the more interesting ones in the two threads on this subject.
It seems in Canada that the mixing of manufacturing and service sector workers has been going on for a while now, much more so than in the US. I'm thinking, for instance, of the many Air Canada flight attendants who are in the CAW or the hotel workers who are represented by the Steelworkers, Autoworkers or Machinists. Obviously Vivienne who I see is now commenting here, is a service worker and seems more comfortable with the former UNITE folks than her previous service sector union HERE. I think that tells us a lot. This stuff is more about servicing and empowering the members than anything else.
There is real strength in members from different industries coming together in one union but it needs to be a union that works for all members. Obviously, in the case of UNITE HERE, that didn't happen.
Vivienne:
Did the workers in your shop vote on joining SEIU?
What were the results of the vote?
How many people voted (out of how many total workers)?
What was the percentage in favour of joining SEIU and what was the percentage against?
Willow I'm not sure what bubble you live in but my years working in and around the labour movement has opened my eyes to a lot of old guys making deals behind closed doors on behalf of their members. I find it hard to believe that many, who have been following this dispute, don't perceive this as a top-down arrangement absent of real member involvement. Leadership develop a strategy then roll it out to the members. Granted not all unions operate in this manner but I believe it is quite prevalent within the labour movement. Do you really think that this was a comprehensive educational and consultative process with the members of SEIU or UNITE HERE?
As far as cult of personality leaders - by virtually all-accounts Andy Stern stand heads above the rest as far ramming programs and policies down members throats without adequate consultation. To deny the ego of Stern and the lack of member input into many of his recent interfering activities speaks volumes and I'm surprised that he escapes your criticism - perhaps he will be your future employer and if so I understand why you would be reticent to question his commitment to democratic trade unionism.
3to1 makes an interesting point and willow I would hope at the very least that you would be interested in determining the outcome of the vote.
willow, this is an interesting comment:
"There is real strength in members from different industries coming together in one union..."
I would be interested in people views in regard to the notion of organizing any workers in any sector versus efforts by specific unions to focus on increasing density within respective sectors. CTW attempted to try and define juisdictional areas as these unions saw the value of sectoral organzing as a means of optimizing the power and influence of members within their respective sectors.
I thought the original UNITE-HERE merger was at odds with the expressed position of the CTW unions regarding jurisdiction and building industrial "density." Rather, the UNITE-HERE mergers appeared to be based more on financial considerations and perceived political and cultural compatibility between the two unions respective leadership and staffs. I'm not necessarily saying its a bad thing, I'm just noting the discrepancy between the words and the actions. Now, almost five years later, the hoped-for "compatibility" between the UNITE and HERE groups has clearly not happened. If we are going to have a "redo" one would think that the jurisdictional issues would be raised again, but it appears they still take a backseat to other considerations.
Frankly, though, I think the whole situation is just sad and counterproductive for working people everywhere. This isn't really a dispute about workers' interests or the best way to pursue them. This is a dispute about power, personalities and money. I wish everyone involved could step back, take a deep breath, and remind themselves why they became union activists in the first place. Then get back together with the other side and negotiate a fair resolution.
the question of CULT has come up in this discussion. HERE is very much like a CULT. this was posted on another thread: thoughts?
i've known of HERE staff going through this practice of pink sheeting and the person Amelia was working in Arizona.
HERE Pink Sheeting and Cult
HERE is nothing but a small cult in the labour movement.
HERE practices something called "pink sheeting", and there is currently a legal case against HERE from former staff and members regarding the practice of pink sheeting.
Essentially pink sheeting is when HERE Management forces staff and members to tell them about deeply personal matters including family dysfunctions, health and financial troubles, spousal abuse, addictions, and childhood traumas. These conversations are then written on an HERE pink sheet and it is used to manipulate the staff or member. If you do not share these personal stories you are FIRED.
This is a quote from a former HERE organizer who was pink sheeted:
"I was forced to share things that had been painful for me in one-on-ones with my supervisor Brendon Walsh and also group staff meetings where I was pushed until I broke down in tears. I was forced to tell people about my struggles with depression. Yet I was still told that wasn't deep enough. My supervisor kept insisting that I must resent my parents, that there must be some dirty family secret I wasn't sharing, that I must have something more personal and diffiucult to share" - Amelia Frank-Vitale, Testimony to Vice President of UNITE HERE
This invasive practice is coercive, despicable, and intolerable. The BOSSES within HERE Local 75 have been identified to craft and practice this method. They infact practice pink sheeting on a daily basis in there offices and this is now going to be taking place at the OFL building. Those of us working at the OFL building should go and investigate this illegal practice of pink sheeting.
My thoughts? You need to back up your allegations with some sort of evidence. If there has been a court case or "testimony" you should preferrably provide links to it if its available online, if not then at least provide some more information as to the location of the court proceeding, parties, court and case name or number. If there's been an internal union proceeding you should indicate when and where that occurred, before what union body, and whether a transcript or report of that proceeding has been published anywhere.
I've never heard of "pink sheeting" and my own google search of the term has turned up nothing besides what you've posted here. It's obviously a disturbing allegation but without any more substantiation it's hard to know what to make of it. I imagine the owners/moderators of this website may have some concerns about the posting of this information, too, at least unless and until you are able to back it up.