Samuelsen's Demagogues

Where in the world have you seen a newly elected official give his loser opponent a job? This was an idiotic question from one of Samuelsen’s mouthpiece! Another rabid infected poodle chimed in ‘He offered a job to Curtis Tate, his opponent for president. Several of Toussaint's supporters who were on staff and near retirement were allowed to remain on the union payroll until they reached their retirement dates, rather than be subject to the TA's medical dept’. Samuelsen has brought goodwill and unified the TWU Local 100. More ridiculous, bizarre & clueless statements followed and they believe that would be the end of all discussion?

Samuelsen’s propaganda machine is at work because these oxymoronic statements are thinly veiled expressions of a superiority complex. While I strongly support their right to free speech times change. If you want a union to be a homogeneous union, where everyone peddles your shameless propaganda, I’m sure that exists. But not in TWU Local 100 union.

Those mouthpieces of Samuelsen  seem to neglect the elephant in the room, which is that 70% of the membership identify themselves as people of color and Samuelsen is a Toussaint loyalist. When TWU Local 100 began in 1934, it was a small group of primarily Irish transit workers aimed to represent just themselves but times have changed. We do not think Samuelsen and his propaganda machine would expect Sylvia's to serve Irish stew they can choose to try some African American dishes and they might like them.

Samuelsen needs his opponent, he wants him there because of the 70% of people of color and not because of his generosity. The numbers do not lie because without his opponent African Americans are the majority and he needs them to create an illusion of satisfying African Americans. However when society of African American transit employees recently had its 42nd annual dinner dance, guess who were absent? Samuelsen and his propaganda machine could not attend.

We think those mouthpieces realize all of these but use their rhetorical questions as a thin veil for their antipathy toward African Americans. Samuelsen may attend the Sikh American transit employee society function but does that mean he will treat the two societies or groups equally? Also whether this would be fair behavior from Samuelsen? Do you believe Samuelsen will snub other ethnicities functions just like the society of African American transit employees?

The subject of bigotry is a complicated one because it takes many forms and occurs for a variety of reasons, ranging from pure prejudice on one hand to other motives on the other. Can you consider Samuelsen’s boycott towards the society of African American transit employees as discrimination and was this snub intentional or just a mere oversight? Samuelsen must be given the benefit of doubt because maybe he had a family emergency but what about his propaganda machine barmbrack eaters? Why didn’t they show up? What are the consequences of their behavior and who gains and loses from it?

Clearly Samuelsen’s propaganda machine claims that he does “satisfy and unify the entire union” because he let his opponent stay at the union hall. But this is oxymoronic to the extreme because any member of the society of African American transit employees knows that actions speak louder than words.

0% or 1% raise

A source claimed that Samuelsen would accept the ‘0% raise for the future contract of 2012 so long as we maintain what we have gained’. Why would you accept no raise? now what motivated Samuelsen to that idea?

Is Samuelsen out of step? is he aware of what wage policies that would need to satisfy the rank and file? is he aware our work offers less flexibility of hours, work pace, and involves higher level of injury and other work place hazards? and we are the most productive employees.

Maybe he lives in Utopia and is not affected like the rank and file with the cost of living increases or inflation maybe in his thinking he considers us affluent, rich or the truly ‘filthy’ rich maybe with nannies, private school, the choice of a Porsche or Mercedes and a piece of original artwork maybe he is not aware we live paycheck to paycheck, that is a definition of poverty. why he would deny the rank and file a raise? we would like to know why

He would come with an explanation that he fought against the employer and instead of a zero he got something. He completely ignores the fact that we are like all other employees, desire higher wages. How does Samuelsen decide to accept 0% as the wage to demand in bargaining? The rank and file should be primarily responsible for formulating the wage policy. This 0% or 1% will not maximize the union membership and its well-being

The rank and file knows the exact limits of what is obtainable and what is not, so Samuelsen has no discretion

Disgraceful Development

Not going your way organization has little to show for since its inception. It is barren of accomplishment. We wonder why not close it down as any common sense investor would once they realize there is no return in their investment by stopping the bleeding. However that is not what is being done with TWU Local 100. 

COPE money is intended to be successful and clearly not going your way can be considered as wasteful spending. The membership who signed for Committee on Political Education money deduction intended to see it be fruitful and not troubled.

Without any income not going your way organization should be run by a volunteer and simply be disbanded. Instead it will engage membership resources to reward TBOU loyalty. We can only surmise that not going your way’s main purpose will be to promote Samuelsen’s interests instead of those for the benefit of the membership.

Birds of feather flock together

Why does Samuelsen not file charges against Roger Toussaint, the former president of the TWU Local 100? Or refer any investigation on the basis that he sold the union building and let justice take its course? You can surmise there is a quid pro quo. There are numerous questions that Samuelsen and Toussaint need to answer such as how much was the building sold for? Who was the buyer? Where was the money? What was the reason the building was sold? This bogus notion that TWU Local 100 was a financially weak organization that needed to sell its building in order to stay afloat is hokum.

It is clear Toussaint totally controlled this puppet Samuelsen, the question is why wasn’t the sale of the building not referred to the District Attorney for investigation?

Samuelsen is ethically challenged based on his inability to refer the matter to the justice he becomes a loyal lapdog to Toussaint. We would like to see Toussaint questioned on the financing of the sale of the building and let the law take its course. We have faith in the Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr because he will not be bought and he is guaranteed to find the wrong doing. Samuelsen should be embarrassed for his inaction on this matter and the membership should be outraged at him. He must come clean and let the law look and shed light in the dark dealings that went on and let the wrongdoer go to Rikers Island.

The membership must be made whole. First Samuelsen must provide a detailed financial report from the time of the sale of the building up to date on every penny showing in detail why and how they were utilized based on documents at hand. Second Samuelsen must refer the matter to the law for investigation, his inability to do either will only cast a dark cloud over TWU Local 100 as a troubled union.

What is a hidden agenda between the birds of feather who flock together? We call for a full investigation of the sale of the property, for violations of law and violation of the standards of fair and open government. It is time to look into the TWU Local 100 and open up their shenanigans to the membership for scrutiny. Samuelsen is compromised by putting loyalty to Toussaint ahead of the interests of the membership.

No to Samuelsen's $5 policy

(5*52*39000=10140000)
Numbers don’t lie. What are those figures? Those have been dictated by Generalissimo Francisco Franco and his lackeys to the commoners [due to the fact they erroneously believe they can rule by divine powers and we the commoners have no input]. The issue at hand is the health insurance of the laid off members and how Samuelsen and the executive board have come up with this fools rush in where common sense fears to tread.

So what are the above figures? Well Samuelsen wants you to give him ten million dollars annually. His idea is so far off-the-wall that it warrants a response, and in fact actually shows unfortunately how mentally challenged Samuelsen is. Samuelsen wants you to voluntarily contribute $5 a week times 52 weeks in a year times 39000 which is the number of the membership. This calculation comes out to a whopping $10,140,000 try it on any calculator and the numbers wont lie.

Now this idea may appear to be as noble as to help out our laid off brethren in solidarity but you are able to see clearly how Samuelsen has mastered the derivative schemes of Wall street from West End Avenue while the economy is in it downward spiral. There are many questions that arose from this $5 front such as why and what factors is it for a specific period or infinite? how many of the laid off members have requested health care insurance coverage? It is honorable to aid our laid off brethren, however you have to think of the current membership, retirees, the deceased members and their families who need health care insurance which have to be included but that does not interest Samuelsen.

We know our employer currently is auditing the membership with the intentions of excluding family members and even children who are in college however that does not interest Sameulsen. Retirees who cannot afford health care insurance for their family members and deceased family members who cannot afford health care insurance also don’t interest Samuelsen. So what is Samuelsen interested in? Clearly he wants ten million dollars annually - we smell a $200 bagel and $20,000 worth of fresh sushi.

Several insurance companies have provided quotes for a group of 1000 members, health insurance coverage to be less than a million dollars annually. Samuelsen wants ten million dollars and what would the difference in nine million dollars be used for? Let your imagination run wild here. West End Avenue economy market seems to go up against the reality. It is clear Samuelsen’s $5 health insurance policy is discriminatory and is not inclusive since it does not include current membership - young adult children, retirees family members and deceased family members. The common sense would dictate TWU Local 100 should pick up the cost initially then after it should ask the membership for contribution.

No blank check should be given to Samuelsen.

Liter on the streets and not in good standing members are appointed to the Union hall

Should we be surprised that some members of the current leadership were not in good standing and were appointed by Samuelsen? We’re not because a dark era for our TWU Local 100 has emerged.

Why would Samuelsen appoint an officer who was not in good standing? Maybe they have finally paid their dues, however what type of message is he sending to the members who are in good standing? This is disgusting behavior imposed by Samuelsen. The signal is clear to many of us, even if you were not in good standing member you can be appointed by Samuelsen if you are a ‘go-to‘ guy.

We are also disgusted by those officers, who were not in good standing and who are using their positions to advance Samuelsen failing harebrained schemes. We want to reverse this trend. The TWU Local 100 has sunk so low that members who are not in good standing don’t feel the need to bring themselves to good standing because they don’t know if Samuelsen will appoint them to the union hall they love 'pay to play' too. They equate and point to those appointed officers to the clergy who molest children. Those members have a right to their opinions. We respect that, thus Samuelsen appointees who were not in good standing should be kicked out of the union hall, those appointees should not be tolerated.

Welcome to the land of Samuelsen’s double standards. Those appointees who were initially interested in running for the union wide positions were unable to do so because they were not in good standing. However ‘pay to play’ which is exactly what some did in their one stop shopping TBOU slate. This is not a mere oversight from Samuelsen it is a judgement call and clearly it stinks to high heaven.

It is our belief, that we have reason to think is shared by the membership that only members who were in good standing and paid their dues in a timely manner should be in union hall when the dues were stopped by the judicial order however those who took advantage of not paying their dues are not worthy to be in the union hall their intent was clear to not pay the dues.

Sub-par Union

We don’t like to give the membership the bad news, and it pains us to have to report on the awful state that the union is in. This is not the first class union it once used to be, in a mere few months it has been turned into a troubled union. The latest layoff news just confirms everything we feared about the TWU Local 100. TWU Local 100 is failing its membership by not securing job protection which is extremely important to the membership, and this news is not good.

The layoff figures don’t lie, by any measure, this is awful. Considering the reputation of  TWU Local 100 within the labor movement as among the best and most desirable in  the country, we can clearly see why we specifically characterized TWU Local 100 as ‘sub-par’. Why - because that what we are now. We could sugar coat the layoff situation but that does not change reality. And we must face reality and develop strategies to make things better. Fixing the problem means beginning with the truth. Not the truth of Samuelsen and the current leadership who have failed the membership in a profound way, but the truth that comes from admitting painful facts and making a hard and careful analysis of the current sorry state of affairs.

How did we get so bad so fast? We have failed leadership that is running our Local 100 headed by Samuelsen. There will be a price to be paid - mostly by the membership.

And certainly the membership are paying the price. There are hundreds of members who have been laid off. This is a crisis for every member. Local 100 was a key indicator of successful labor movement in the country, and currently ours doesn’t reflect well. The ugly truth is that we have become ‘sub-par’ and this must not be lost on us. It is the sound of our prestige once held which is slipping away.

Dispatch

Function of union hiring hall in which worker requirements from companies are logged, sorted and matched with union members’ skills, availability then members should be dispatched to the job.

It is obvious president Samuelsen and current leadership at TWU Local 100 are not serving or caring for the laid off members interests. They are forgotten - they did not have a say in layoff - those laid off members were in good standing, then why would Samuelsen and current leadership forget them? Out of sight out mind? 

Placement officer is a must at the unionhall for the laid off members - It is amazing how president Samuelsen and the current leadership have failed the laid off members,, Samuelsen and the current leadership were informed by the employer about the lay off earlier on however there was no plan to get them jobs from other companies, why

Should we be surprised that hundreds possibly now inching toward thousand of members were laid off, were not. The fact that even the most basic protections for the membership are ignored by president Samuelsen and the current leadership just reflects the sloppiness and lack of respect for our membership that pervades union hall. 

Thank you, president Samuelsen for your attention to the protection and job security of the membership entrusted to you. Just this layoff alone could be cause for president Samuelsen removal. But there are plenty of reasons to give him the boot, this breaks our heart. After all the union invented the concept of job security, only to see it diminished by those who lack any commitment to job protection.

We certainly would love to see Samuelsen leave, and the main reason is lay off - instead of setting our sights to be a highly nationally respected local Samuelsen has turned TWU Local 100 into just another troubled union.

All of this spells trouble for the membership. We need to take a hard look at what is becoming of TWU Local 100. Laid off members deserve better. Samuelsen and current leadership must take responsibility. Do the right thing. Resign.

Grapevine

Unionhall - there is on going talk, we are approaching Cuomo camp,  ‘ we back Cuomo and if Andrew Cuomo makes it to be a NY state governor, then he will give the boot to our boss’ 

This rumor is faulty, idiotic and ridiculous - they ignore the fact that our boss has a contract.  He does not care who the governor is, and if any governor wants to kick him out - he would be walking to the bank smiling. It is obvious TWU Local 100 president Sameulsen and the current leadership are not bright and creative thus they resorted to create a myth with the intentions of pacifying the membership.

Once Cuomo gets elected, and our boss stays in place - Samuelsen and the current leadership will come out with a new tale - can you guess what it will be?

Outsourcing

What is outsourcing, it is subcontracting of a work to a non-union plant where the wages are much lower. The question is why would TWU Local 100 agree to such a principle which clearly undermines its own membership and leads to a decline in membership.

It is clear our employer has made a decision toward elimination of the union, with the end result of over time unionized portion shrinks while the unorganized portions gradually expands in importance. 

A recent article in The Wall Street Journal described the Ingersoll Rand(I-R) Co. The company followed the three-pronged approach in its efforts to reduce exposure to unions.

1. It built new plants in the South where the probability of keeping them non union is greatest
2. Close or sell off parts of the company where union is established
3. Turn itself into a nonunion company to quietly encourage workers at unionized plants to decertify their unions

It is clear our employer maybe is trying to copy I-R’s strategy, before it reaches the third step maybe we as workers should copy I-R’s workers response in an effort to save their jobs. Therefore, workers at six of the company’s plants voted out their unions.  Clearly Local 100 under president Samuelsen and the current leadership are failing the membership, and maybe it is time to decertify our union.

Section 1.13 - Farming out of work - this section must be eliminated, removed stricken and deleted. Do you believe president Samuelsen and the current leadership are capable of delivering the future contract without this section?

Overtime

A laid off bus operator and station agent were observing why president Samuelsen and the current leadership at the TWU Local 100 would go along with the employer to cover up the overtime work?

They are aware that their work has been taken away by being laid off thus why would Samuelsen and the current leadership act like scabs?

Is Samuelsen protecting the chosen ones?

A laid off bus operator and station agent were wondering how come none of the members of the maintenance of way department are laid off? Are they equal to other departments or do they get a special treatment from our employer? 

They wonder when it will be their turn to be laid off? They wonder whether Samuelsen is only protecting track workers? Maybe there is more to the lay off than meets the eye.

Health Insurance Dependent Audit

I met a maintainer who was upset about his young adult children who are in college losing their medical coverage insurance and especially our employer currently is auditing the membership to exclude dependents while the law has been passed he could not understand why president Samuelsen and the current leadership at the Unionhall are incapable of enforcing the law?

Fact sheet what hinders Samuelsen and TWU Local 100 to enforce the law on the employer? On this issue we are in a win-win situation, the law of the land is on our side for inclusion of the dependents. Do you believe Samuelsen has coherent explanation?