One cost of union membership is the loss of wages during a strike. The threat of strike gives TWU Local 100 its ability to raise wages and benefits but this extra bargaining power is not without cost, for sometimes the strike must actually be used. The loss in wages during the strike may be offset by strike benefits from the union, although not all unions pay them and those that do, usually pay only about 20 to 30 percent of regular earnings. There is also the possibility that the worker may never get the job back at all if the employer can successfully hire non union workers and break the strike. Finally strikes lead to psychic costs for workers due to the conflict and ill-feelings that a strike engenders between union members and nonstriking workers and management personnel.
So how do you justify scabs infiltrating our union and who are now in a position to negotiate our contract? By your not standing up for every righteous dues paying member you are part of the problem. The following is revealing for sure.
ReplyDeletePursuant to the Local 100 by laws, the Convention elections and the Local 100 Officer elections were held simultaneously in June of 2009. The dues qualification requirements for delegate to the Convention mirrored the requirements for Local 100 representatives and officers - a requirement of one year of continuous good standing prior to the election.
Put simply, anyone who was ineligible to run for delegate to the convention would also be ineligible to run for office then or hold office at Local 100 now.
The documents which your administration delivered to the DOL indicted dozens of individuals, at least 41 that I am aware of, as being in bad standing during the period in question.
Those documents included of one your closest personal advisors, Tony Utano who is currently Vice President of MOW department, and would have been ineligible to run or much less hold that office. The documents you had sent to the DOL also included Pete Foley, your current Director of Bargaining Unit Protection; Jay Carrasco (Track division); Dominick Spagnola (LES); Derrick Echerrivia and Paul Piazza ( senior Station Division officers); Josh Friedstein (RTO) all of whom are know as being among your major supporters -- and many others.
When one talks about strike costs it would not be too much to include that as of now, about 25% of our fellow brothers and sisters are not in good standing.
ReplyDeleteBecause of the severe penalties of the Taylor Law, one of which is the loss of dues check-off, we had at one time at least one thrid of our members owing dues.
It was something that really hurt our Union.
The cost of that today is the knowledge that with about 20-25% of our members owing dues, it makes further decisions rather academic.
The cost of that particular strike also was devastating when after the negotiaed settlement was voted down, an unprecidented revote was fashioned to in essence reverse the will of the membership.
The cost of that move was a lot of members distrusted their Union and stopped participating.
So the costs of the strike is more than dollars and cents, it is the actual health and effectiveness of the Union.
Your name is listed as non-paying on documents submitted by the union. A bit hypocritical wouldn't you say?
ReplyDeleteI think you should figure out what hypocritical means if you want to throw it around.
ReplyDeleteWhat I don't get is you seem like an intelligent guy but your focus is so narrow it's not even funny.
My statement 100% jibes with whatever the DOL investigation brings about.
Too bad you can't figure out why.
Maybe you should ask your handler to tell you what to say.
BTW you did not write most of the post you led off the conversation with, you are a plagiarizer.
You use other people's work and falsely try to make it seem like your own.
If you can't write something yourself why bother?
Say what you want about other bloggers at least they write their own stuff.
I wrote "the following is revealing for sure",which indicates it was from another source. However I see your point next time I'll use quotation marks. Hope you get a good laugh at whats to come.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally this blog has been cutting and pasting for over a month1
Clear the air Paul. Exactly how long was the period that places you on the infamous list of 41? Is your situation like that animal Christopher Magwood who walked by the dues office everyday at 80 West End Ave. and simply did not pay what he owed for months? Whatever the case, elected leaders who choose to or accidently lapse in their dues should not be allowed to hold office. Hopefully the D.O.L. rises to the occasion and takes a hard line and orders their removal and bars them from running in 2012.
ReplyDeleteYou didn't answer Paul. Why?
ReplyDeleteI will say it again.
ReplyDeleteI think you guys are looking at this situation ass-backwards. How were 41 (allegedly) delegates allowed to pass the built in vetting process?
BTW your questions are totally disingenuous.
The site you contribute to already posted what they say is accurate information. But you ask me to tell you what they post?
I was under the impression I was totally paid up. You say different.
Let's see what the DOL says.
You guys want to try and convict people without a trial.
But you say the former Treasurer was railroaded and you say the Official charges pending against you in the Union are baseless.
A clear case of selective memory.Or perhaps it is a clear case of UNION POLITICS.
And please do not call anyone a animal. Just not right.
Your dues delinquency is nothing compared to Christopher Magwood's. He went months and months without paying his dues. I saw a transcript of his dues payment history and it is abysmal. No I will not refrain from referring to him as an animal. In fact he is worse than that. Anyone who has the fortune of full-release time and walked past the dues office each day fully well knowing he was not paying his dues is a disgrace and should be barred from holding office of any kind much less a position on the Executive Board where members get to vote on the disbursement of union funds...funds by the way Magwood felt he did not have to contribute to. Come on Paul stop defending this ilk and just take the union's trash to the curb which includes a large bag of soiled and odorous Turbans.
ReplyDelete