IBEW guilty of supplying "Replacement Workers"(SCABS) & IBEW President declares Dictatorship

15 posts / 0 new
Last post
Eric Klyne Eric Klyne's picture
IBEW guilty of supplying "Replacement Workers"(SCABS) & IBEW President declares Dictatorship

For those following the recent Lock-out and termination of CEP 2003

TD centre workers by the Cadillac Fairview corporation ... it is important to know that

the IBEW 353 is supplying "Replacement Workers" (SCABS).

http://ourlocal353.ca/forums/index.php?topic=4752.msg36353#msg36353

 

The following letter was recently released by an IBEW member trying to seek justice.

It's a letter from the American Washington DC IBEW President Edwin D. Hill that states that

his IBEW International officers cannot be held accountable.

************************************

Dear Brother Mitchinson:

This is in response to your inquiry dated December 10, 2004, regarding the filing of charges

with the International Office against First District International Vice President Phillip Flemming.

Please be advised that there are no provisions in the IBEW Constitution for the filing of charges

against an International Vice President or an International Representative in the performance

of his/her duties.

Season's Greetings!

Fraternally yours'

Edwin D. Hill
International President

http://ourlocal353.ca/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4877.0;attach=2535;image

 

Somehow, these questionable IBEW officers have to accountable to Canadian workers...

please pass this information on...

Unionist

The IBEW is one heck of a union. They abolished their strike fund by convention action in the early 1920s because some international officer gave a speech saying that their goal was to negotiate contracts - not have strikes - so why not put all their money into negotiations?

Seriously.

 

Ken Burch

They were also one of the instigators of the so-called "Canadian Federation of Labour", deserting the CLC(which they later rejoined)in part because the CLC had the temerity to require all member unions to actuall ELECT their delegates to CLC conventions.

triciamarie

Unionist wrote:
They abolished their strike fund by convention action in the early 1920s

That may be so, but a century later IBEW locals do appear to maintain strike funds.

See for example, Article XI of the Local Union bylaws, L.213 Vancouver:

Quote:
Sec. 1. (a) Subject to Section 1(c) each month $6.00 of each member''s monthly working dues, plus all approved Strike Fund assessments shall be transferred from the General Fund to the Local Union 213 IBEW Strike Fund. (b) No other funds than those specified in (a) above shall be transferred to the Strike Fund without prior approval of the International President. (c) If a member's working dues are not in excess of $7.50,then the amount submitted, less $1.50, shall be transferred to the Strike Fund.

Sec. 2. The Strike Fund shall be used to pay benefits to members of Local Union 213 who are engaged in strike action and who are in need of financial assistance. Such strike action must have prior approval in accordance with Article XV of the IBEW Constitution.

Sec. 3. The Strike Fund shall not be used for any other purposes other than as specified above and all payments shall be made on a fair and equitable basis.

Sec. 4. All disbursements made from the Strike Fund shall be authorized by the Local Union.

Sec. 5. The Strike Fund shall be subject to audit in the same manner and means as the General Fund of the Local Union.

www.ibew213.org

So if they're a CLC affiliate, is there anything to be done about this on that level?

Unionist

Um, TM, the reason [some, not all] IBEW locals have strike funds is precisely because the International doesn't.

I know of no other union where locals need to save up money for strikes.

ETA: Re CLC, do you mean, can they do anything about the supplying scabs allegation, or the lack of appeal procedures, or lack of strike fund? The answer is probably "NO" to all three, but I wasn't clear what you were referring to.

Eric Klyne Eric Klyne's picture

Thank you all for your replies.

Unionist,

although we do have 'strike funds'... the IBEW 424 Business Manager Tim Brower stated that we didn't have a strike fund when I questioned him in a Union meeting about how much we had in our strike fund back in 2007. I told him that our Defense Fund spelled out our "Strike Fund" and Tim Brower stated that our Defense Fund was not to be used as a "Strike Fund".

The following is from the IBEW 424 Bylaws:

ARTICLE XII

Defense Fund

Sec. 1. All members of Local Union 424, IBEW, shall be assessed $1.00 per month. All such. monies collected shall be deposited to the bank account designated as Local Union 424, IBEW Defense Fund.

Sec. 2. NO other funds than those specified in Section 5(a) shall be transferred to the Defense Fund without. prior approval of the International President.

Sec. 3. The Defense Fund shall be used for the following purposes only:
(a) To pay strike benefits to members of Local Union 424 who are engaged in strike action and. who are in need of financial assistance. Such strike action must have prior approval in accordance with Article XV of the IBEW Constitution.
(b) To defray legal costs in defense of Local Union 424 and its members when circumstances warrant such.
(c) To defray costs incurred in' the promotion of. the IBEW and Local Union 424.

Sec. 4. The Defense Fund shall not be used for any purpose other than specified above' and all payments to members shall be made on an equal and impartial basis.

Sec. S. All disbursements made from the Defense Fund shall be authorized by the Local Union.

Sec. 6. The Defense Fund shall be subject to audit in the same manner as the General Fund of the Local Union.

********************************** 

As for negotiations, Tim Brower totally acts like CLAC in that the members of IBEW 424 weren't allowed to participate and weren't informed about how negotiiations were going in 2007.

Ken Burch,

although the IBEW would have us all believe that they elect delegates to the CLC convention... the process is so biased, unfair and non-transparent that it's an insult to all IBEW members. Toronto IBEW 353 has had nothing but trouble with their Local Union elections and IBEW 424 also has their share of problems.http://ourlocal353.ca/forums/index.php?topic=4315.0

triciamarie,

yes, we have strike funds... but what good are rules if they are never followed? In 2007, the Building Trade Union members made history by finally jumping through all the Labour Law hoops. Solidarity amongst the Building Trade Union members finally put them in a position to strike... but

the Boilermakers' International delayed the opportunity to strike by telling their Local Union that despite being in a "Legal" position to strike, they apparently violated their Constitution throught the process. This was a Labour Code violation but the Labour Board kept dismissing my complaint.

The Labourers Union purposely delayed their strike vote ballot count, a Labour Law violation and delayed the Carpenters' right to Legally strike which caused the 2007 "Wildcat".

And finally, the IBEW 424 BM Tim Brower totally screwed up the 3rd Ratification vote by having members receive their ballots late and the Ratification for the new Collective Agreement passed by 50.8%.

The IBEW is an American Union that does NOT look out for Canadian workers.

Everyone is so busy pointing at CLAC... yet the IBEW 424 is a mirror image of them...

I was a proud member of the IBEW... at least I'm still a proud Unionist... and just when I thought that the IBEW couldn't get any worse... they SCAB against the CEP 2003 TD Centre workers.
At present, their doesn't seem to be any way to hold the IBEW officers responsible for these heinous acts except EXPOSURE.
Please pass it on to ALL Union members that are affiliated with the CLC.
Thanks!
In Solidarity,
Eric Klyne

triciamarie

My union, OPSEU, maintains large local funds which are primarily reserved for use during strikes. Granted we also have a very healthy central strike fund. But Unionist, your post implied that IBEW -- which is not the union you belong to, nor the one whose members you represent -- allows no provision ever to go on strike, and that is not strictly the case. I believe that solidarity for our Brothers and Sisters in IBEW and CEP requires us to approach their issues carefully.

Eric Klyne, what are the labour law hoops you mentioned in reference to Building Trades? I am interested to hear about your LRB application.

And does anyone know if the CLC can or will enforce minimum standards for an affiliate union, in any respect? The only time recently that I remember a union getting sanctioned was when CAW raids on CUPE locals (if that's what they were) resulted in the CAW getting kicked out of the CLC.

munroe

Disrespect for a picket line is intolerable, but perhaps the brush applied here is a bit wide.  My experience with the IBEW Locals here in BC has been quite positive.  Locals 213 and 258 have taken many progressive stands and are far from patsies.  This does not speak to the International leadership or other jurisdictions, but in BC the IBEW Locals certainly have my respect.

Eric Klyne Eric Klyne's picture

Agreed munroe,

But do not let the tragedies occurring with the IBEW International and other jurisdictions go unnoticed.

Others will try and state that "airing dirty laundry" will destroy the IBEW... that's bullshit!

If we don't EXPOSE the IBEW officers that are involved in questionable conduct... the IBEW members will suffer!

 

In Solidarity,

 

Eric Klyne

Unionist

triciamarie wrote:

My union, OPSEU, maintains large local funds which are primarily reserved for use during strikes. Granted we also have a very healthy central strike fund.

I know nothing about OPSEU, but I am curious about locals maintaining funds used for strikes - surely that would lead to inequities based on how well-off a particular striking local was? In fact, that's exactly what happens with the IBEW, where some strikers get respectable strike pay, while in other locals (if they even dare go on strike), they get exactly nothing, because there is no such thing as an IBEW strike fund.

Quote:
But Unionist, your post implied that IBEW -- which is not the union you belong to, nor the one whose members you represent -- allows no provision ever to go on strike, and that is not strictly the case.

TM, I am a little disappointed that you would perceive some "implication" and attribute it to me. My words were very clear. I said the IBEW was the only union I knew without a union-wide strike fund. I explained the history of how that came to pass. I said and implied absolutely nothing about whether IBEW allows its members to go on strike. If I said something that was inaccurate, please correct me. And by the way, although I'm not an IBEW member, I've worked at close quarters with them for decades. And the ones I work with get $0.00 (U.S. dollars) per week in strike pay. Nada. Nothing.

Quote:
And does anyone know if the CLC can or will enforce minimum standards for an affiliate union, in any respect? The only time recently that I remember a union getting sanctioned was when CAW raids on CUPE locals (if that's what they were) resulted in the CAW getting kicked out of the CLC.

The CLC doesn't interfere in internal union governance. And it was SEIU, not CUPE.

 

munroe

Eric Klyne wrote:

Agreed munroe,

But do not let the tragedies occurring with the IBEW International and other jurisdictions go unnoticed.

Others will try and state that "airing dirty laundry" will destroy the IBEW... that's bullshit!

If we don't EXPOSE the IBEW officers that are involved in questionable conduct... the IBEW members will suffer!

 

In Solidarity,

 

Eric Klyne

 

I spent many years as a member of two american craft unions and have no time for their american leadership, believe me.  They need to be exposed for what they are.  My only point is that there are many good people at Local levels. 

triciamarie

Unionist, respectfully, that's not what you said. And the lack of a central strike fund is admittedly pretty problematic, and probably points to larger issues in that union (as in many others). I just don't want to go down the road of vilifying IBEW, for the reasons stated by munroe.

Problems with elections are by no means unheard-of in many large unions, including some prolific Canadian ones, but isn't there usually some way of removing leaders or placing the local under supervision if worse comes to worst? I checked the IBEW Constitution and there's absolutely nothing.

Scabbing the CEP jobs seems pretty low. Is there any other way of looking at that -- do they maybe not consider the CEP picket as a true line, in the circumstances? I'm not suggesting I would agree with that, but is there a convincing argument to be made? If not, then I can't understand why CLC wouldn't or at least couldn't get involved, on that issue at least. It's not just internal affairs at that point.

Eric Klyne Eric Klyne's picture
Eric Klyne Eric Klyne's picture
Unionist

triciamarie wrote:

Unionist, respectfully, that's not what you said.

I think, at this point, we'll just let anyone who's interested scroll up and read what I said and decide for themselves. I said nothing against any IBEW local. Not one solitary word. But I'd like you to know that there are IBEW locals which have been on strike for months without one penny of strike pay, because their local didn't have a strike fund, and of course the international has none. And I'd still like to know which sizeable union has no central strike fund - haven't heard any responses to that one yet - besides the IBEW.

Quote:
And the lack of a central strike fund is admittedly pretty problematic, and probably points to larger issues in that union (as in many others). I just don't want to go down the road of vilifying IBEW, for the reasons stated by munroe.

What "reasons"? Munroe stated his well-founded respect for two IBEW locals in BC. I share that respect. Why would that impede "vilification" of the international union, which doesn't support its members' and locals' strikes??

Quote:
If not, then I can't understand why CLC wouldn't or at least couldn't get involved, on that issue at least. It's not just internal affairs at that point.

The CLC can do and will do nothing about this. You may take that to the bank on my behalf. I'm not happy about that, but you might as well recognize reality.