Perez Stern

Something you never had the chance to say?

2010-04-14T17:30:00.000-07:00

As kindly pointed out by the wonderful blogger Stern Burger with fries, you can text a parting message to Andy Stern (well, to an SEIU staffer or some database somewhere, but it still sounds like fun) by texting "ANDY" and your message to 787753!

Have fun with it!

"Don't cry because it's over!"

2010-04-14T15:34:00.000-07:00

I won't!

I wish I had something profound to say about this moment, but all I can think is "he's so orange!"

The end of an era!

2010-04-13T00:32:00.001-07:00

Andy Stern in happier times with his son, who (so far as Perez knows), is NOT slated to inherit SEIU's 2.2 million members

So it looks like it's really true! Andy Stern is on his way out the door! Not "within hours" perhaps, but most likely at the Executive Committee meeting Perez hears is set for Wednesday. (Update: SEIU's statement says he will "address" the issue at the meeting)

Why now? Perez isn't exactly sure, but it's interesting timing with the failure of the lawsuit, isn't it? Was Andy telling the locals that he wouldn't be asking for yet more staff and money to fight Kaiser workers this summer because the lawsuit would kill NUHW? And did it also become clear this week that the UNITE HERE negotiations are going nowhere because SEIU has no power in the situation, as Perez hears? So is there now a block of people within SEIU with enough independence to realize that Stern's strategy is a suicide mission, and enough power to do something about it, or is Andy just embarrassed beyond recovery?

Let's hope there's no (real) political job in the works for Andy - the way this news has come out it doesn't look like it.

The best information Perez has right now says that Anna Burger will take over for a 90 day period, during or after which there will be an election. If Andy still has any sway, Burger will be the new permanent president. Perez hears though that there's a small group of top officials who swore years ago that they would never let Burger control SEIU (even going so far as to make an emergency plan) and that as Perez predicted last year, Mary Kay Henry is pushing for the job. Can they all stop fighting everyone else for long enough to fight each other?

For sure it's too much to dream that this means a shift back to democracy or even to real organizing - it's certain that whoever takes over will be one of the team who took SEIU down its sorry path. Maybe though it's just possible that the new CEO will get that fighting losing battles against multiple other unions while trying to stomp out dissent in your own union is just plain bad business sense!

Whatever comes next, I'm glad I was able to play my tiny, tiny, tiny, little part in making this happen!

Andy Stern to resign within hours?

2010-04-12T15:52:00.001-07:00

Perez will believe it when he sees it, and maybe not even then, knowing Andy (some kind of Vladimir Putin deal maybe?).

I'll keep you posted as always.

Well that was random!

2010-04-09T16:56:00.000-07:00

And a total mess!

It's pretty clear that everyone on both sides of this trial is shocked by the verdict today.

Jury trials are great and important, but it's hard to see this as anything but a big fail! The jury handed the court a grid with numbers scrawled in, and it makes no sense. There's apparently no way to clarify the jury's reasoning, or how the numbers are supposed to work - from what Perez understands, all we get is this grid of names, charges, and penalties. There's about $20,000 in increased security costs against a couple of defendants, about the same for lost dues, and then there's the entire January salaries of all but a few of the defendants, and substantial amounts against the same defendants and NUHW for "diversion of resources". The total amount is unclear because it's unclear how the judgments are supposed to work, but it's way less than SEIU has hoped for, just a tiny portion of their legal costs.

And Perez doesn't see any way at all for these numbers to come out of the minimal evidence presented. There are actually plenty of things both sides agree the defendants did (like requesting a disaffiliation vote) so it was always possible the court would find against a few of the defendants on a couple of points, because in the drawn-out struggle to try to save UHW from trusteeship, it's likely SEIU's constitution wasn't always followed to the letter. Perez is just fine with that, and I know most of my readers are too.

(Bluntly, so long as decisions were honestly and democratically made, Perez is fine with more than that. Big good things don't always happen strictly within the limits of an anti-worker legal system. Remind Perez to tell you about Capital Strategies some other time... But that's not even an issue here, as these charges were all about the SEIU constitution and the structure of the union.)

Although it would have been ridiculous for this silly case to go on any longer, one obvious major problem is that the defense team had only 18 hours to present all their witnesses and cross examine the plaintiff's witnesses. 1080 minutes to adequately respond to multiple charges against 27 people! The defense obviously followed the only sensible strategy of presenting the defendants who made major and strategic decisions. But what seems to have happened is that many of the minor defendants who didn't testify were found liable, when they most likely could have cleared their names with five minutes on the stand! Perez can't find any logic in who the jury gave judgments against - organizer Peter Tappeiner liable for $30,000, and directors Michael Krivosh and Paul Kumar liable for nothing? How bizarre!

This thing makes no sense, and I'm not just talking about my view of SEIU's failed arguments and evidence. Sure I think it's unfair, but you know, I can imagine a judgment that would have had me shrugging my shoulders and saying (as I said above) that not everything worth doing can be done within the SEIU constitution. What I think is that it isn't legally sound! How the hell can NUHW be responsible for lost dues from nursing home contracts when it wasn't created when the contracts were canceled? How can Emily Gordon have diverted resources from a union she wasn't employed by or a member of? I think it's a mess, and I think it's going to keep on being an expensive waste-of-dues (although not NUHW members' dues) mess when it goes to the appeal courts. This wasn't a good case, and Judge Alsup was right when he said it was going to be a nasty surprise for one of the parties and he didn't know which. After SEIU's sorry performance though, no one had really expected it to be a nasty surprise for the defendants. You can count Perez as "nastily surprised" by it!

The legal and financial stuff will come out in the wash, worst comes to worst it's just money. The thing that's really frustrating and concerning is how this lets SEIU run wild with more of the same PR bullshit this whole case has been in the service of. "Guilty"? Purrrleeese! This wasn't a criminal trial! (I'll be talking more about how this cynical rhetoric works tomorrow). It is nothing but a distraction and a bait-and-switch, because that's all SEIU can do with what they have. Everyone who wants democracy within and outside of SEIU needs to hold their heads high, roll their eyes at it all, and get on with doing what needs to be done this summer!

The final day - Rules and consequences, bowels and tentacles!

2010-04-08T12:10:00.000-07:00

First, just a little note to SEIU “member blogger” Erica Boddie - Do you know who you sat next to all day in court on Tuesday? That man with the gray mustache was Henry Telfian, a lawyer for Kindred - some of the worst nursing home bosses in the state. Did you have a pleasant conversation?

And a second little note – Judge Alsup’s court was in session on Wednesday, but with no jury and a vastly reduced audience. The judge will decide on the question of who the officers of the UHW Education Fund (nothing to do with the Patient Education Fund) should be, rather than the jury, as there are no damages requested. The fund is managed by representatives of the employers who contribute to the fund, together with representatives of the unions whose members benefit from it, and right now the union trustees include some of the former UHW officers who SEIU is suing. SEIU is asking that they be made to leave their posts so that SEIU can appoint their own people. Today the judge asked both sides to file documents for him to look over, and he plans on making a decision by April 13.

On to our great big last day in court report! This report is long, but Perez thought many readers would want to hear about every single moment. I’ve tried to tell the story as it was told to me, and this post is built out of notes and quotes sent by some amazingly diligent readers. It is not a verbatim eyewitness account or anything like it, just my best shot at conveying what my readers saw. Please let me know if I have anything out of order, or I missed something important…

Tuesday started out, as so many have before, with the lawyers arguing with each other and Judge Alsup about what can be shown or told to the jury. I’m going to come back to some of this discussion later on, but for now I’ll mention that SEIU wanted to move 95 documents into evidence without showing them to the court first, and that the SEIU lawyer readers are now calling “The Dork” had more objections to the jury instructions, but it wasn’t clear what they were. Judge Alsup seemed excited to reach the last day of the case, interested to hear how the sides handled their closing arguments, and irritated at the mounting evidence that SEIU has been wasting everyone’s time.

“This is where the rubber meets the road!” Alsup declared, and called the jury in.

The plaintiff’s closing argument came first. Both sides had two hours to use for closing arguments (essentially a speech from the best lawyer they have), and because the burden of proof is on the plaintiffs, they are allowed to divide their time into an initial argument and then a shorter rebuttal to respond to the defense’s closing argument.

Gary Kohlman took the floor for SEIU, and tried on the role of the old-fashioned strict father, who doesn’t want to administer a spanking, but has no other choice! “It’s about rules and it’s about consequences” he lectured, “about a group of individuals who knew what the rules were and made a decision years ago that they were not going to abide by the rules!” “The society that you and I enjoy… we have the ability to construct rules that protect each and every one of us. “

The rules Kohlman was referring to of course, were from the SEIU constitution. Not a document known for its strength in protecting each and every member! But just because you don’t give a crap about protecting members doesn’t mean you can’t invoke them to prove your point, even if you aren’t really sure who they are!

“The janitors and porters and doormen, that those people can join a union and draft language like that… think about a society… 2.2 million members put this into their constitution! The members said that the final word would be reposed with the international executive board!”

With even the judge raising his eyebrows, Kohlman moved deftly on to connect the dots…

“Now the defendants will tell you that they had an obligation to their members, that they’re bigger than The Rules, but you can’t have a structure where officers, individuals decide whether they’re going to follow The Rules… it would be chaos!”

And then Kohlman tried to humanize himself to the jury a little - “I’m a big fan of Charles Dickens, especially A Christmas Carol. Now it makes no sense unless you realize Jacob Marley is dead! This makes no sense unless you realize the defendants were never going to give up the healthcare workers!” Indeed. Although honestly, Perez prefers Dickens’s Bleak House!

Despite whatever it was he was trying to say, readers say Kohlman gave a compelling performance - mostly because he had such tight and exaggerated control of his voice and movements. He would stride around the room, and then lean in close to the jury, he would raise his voice, and then whisper for long stretches, forcing everyone in the room to strain to hear him. At this point in the speech he moved into a sort of outraged staccato to describe what it was the defendants did...

Instead of leaving SEIU honorably, said Kohlman, the defendants “chose a 4th option” That option was the option to move “data offshore” and their “modus operandi was to make money off the books and lie to the members about it” Of course, he clarified, “It’s not that the PEF was itself illegal, it’s just the first example.”

The second example never came up though, nor did the third! What came up was a lot of Dickensian imagery, as Kohlman tried to create a dark and creepy little world for the jurors, in which the defendants “knew they were playing with fire!” and did various things “around corners” and “down in the bowels of the various facilities” while also being in a tunnel afraid of “the trusteeship train and the jurisdiction train” (the little jurisdiction engine that couldn’t?).

Kohlman finished up on the process by calling Ray Marshall “The secretary of labor” to make the trusteeship hearings sound like a government process, and reminding the jury that moving the homecare workers was all about the members, because (no matter what members said) “members decided that they didn’t want any one particular local to be able to veto it”

Then he switched to the unfairness of it all, and how mean everyone was to SEIU and their staff! The defendants planned to create a hostile environment, he said, and “Did they ever play the hostile environment well!” (well not really, but some other people did…). Poor Rashida Anthony came up again, now Kohlman’s story is not just that she was bent over a desk, moved into a hotel, and happens to be a mother, but that “she barely gets to the hotel with her kids!”

It was all just so unfair and un-American!

“Here’s the beauty of what happened, there’s few things we enjoy more than fair competition, such as between two racing cars! The American way would have been for them to compete with UHW at this point in time” If you believe Gary Kohlman, the trusteeship was just like “Two people about to have a fair race, when one picks up a handful of sand, and throws it in the eyes of the other!”

And who was left to pick up the pieces, but the most sympathetic characters Kohlman could think of… “Hal Ruddick, Lisa Gude, Cass Gualvez, these good decent people had the responsibility of servicing 100,000 members!”

Dear Gary - could you please, please, stop talking about “servicing the members”? You’ve said it over and over in this case, and aside from being a horrible way of talking about what unions (should) do, it makes everyone giggle at you.

Just in case the jury hadn’t gotten the point by now, Kohlman produced a copy of the purple union constitution pamphlet and waved it in the air, yelling “It’s the members! They want the constitution!”

And now moving to closing the sale with his marks, Kohlman moved to the damages SEIU hopes to collect. He’d like the jury to pick from the grid SEIU’s expert witness brought to court last week, using textbook car salesman speak, he’d like them to find “A figure you’re comfortable with.”

Here’s what SEIU want:

1) The salary and benefit costs of the defendants from January 2009
2) Operating costs of UHW and salaries and benefits of other staff from January 2009
3) Security costs beyond the amount Jerry Bullock says a normal trusteeship costs
4) Lost dues from nursing home workers whose contract extensions were canceled

Throwing in an extra “that dog will not hunt!” he must have had left over, Kohlman closed - “This is about the members they left behind wanting to hold them accountable. This is about whether we have a society that has rules!”

“They left behind way too much paper, and they left behind… their honor!”

-----

And then lawyer Dan Siegel (who some readers are calling “Picard”) made the closing argument for the defense....

Sigel told the jury how he likes to go out at night and look at the stars (“it seemed corny… until the very end” says a reader) he’s always amazed how the ancient Greeks saw the constellations, because it seems so arbitrary and random to pick a few stars out of thousands to make a picture. And that’s what SEIU is doing with this case - picking a few pieces of data out of thousands to make a picture that’s just not there. “It is a feat of imagination!”

Siegel apparently structured his closing argument by showing and explaining the jury instructions, and tying them in to SEIU’s list of four claims. First, he reminded the jury that the plaintiffs have the burden of proof on all issues, must prove their claims separately against each defendant and must prove the damages caused.

The plaintiffs didn’t keep their promise to bring Andy Stern in to testify, Siegel pointed out “It’s a shame because I’d like Andy Stern to explain why SEIU is a one-party system – is that the American way?” No one has seen Dave Regan in the courtroom at all either, Siegel continued. Why not? Isn’t he the trustee who has been running the union? Who could speak better than him to the state the defendants left UHW in? And neither have the jury seen George Harris, UHW’s lawyer for the trusteeship hearings, who is still UHW’s lawyer under the trustees, and who SEIU claim could testify that UHW put on a false defense against the trusteeship (Perez suggests that Harris didn’t appear because as a lawyer he fully understands the meaning and implication of perjury).

Siegel then talked about the burden of ethical behavior on a lawyer, and asked the jury to consider what it meant for that duty when Gary Kohlman made dramatic allegations against John Vellardita which he would not back up or produce evidence for.

Then showing the page of the jury instructions titled “Defining duties of defendants” Siegel argued that they had an obligation to the members of the local union, and to use resources for the benefit of members of the local. He also drew attention to the section of UHW’s constitution that specified that taking the advice of a lawyer, consultant, or accountant in good faith protected officers against financial misconduct.

He pointed out that SEIU agreed that local unions were free to use resources to campaign on any pending issue, and that after a decision was taken, members and staff still retained the right to hold and express their opinions. The deadline the IEB set for UHW to provide information on the long-term-care workers to assist in their transfer was 5pm on January 27 2009, but the trusteeship was imposed at 2pm, so no one can ever know if the defendants would have complied.

He also reminded the jury that some locals had deals with the international so they could never be trusteed (cough! 1199 New York! cough!).

And then he asked, “So what did the defendants do to obstruct?” They talked about the issues, they told security guards and suppliers that the International might come, and about who owned the buildings, although this information never influenced anything that happened. Members were sleeping in the offices with no violence at all occurring.

There has been no evidence shown that any defendants took files, Siegel argued, but the trustees' plan for the hand-over of the local was terrible - they never tried to get files back, and they never communicated with the defendants. Freya Nelson called three times to try to give her files back. Other defendants only kept files they thought were personal, and then returned those too when they were ordered to. The plaintiffs argued that a security guard watched files be carried from the Sacramento office after the trusteeship, but he didn’t write down the license plate of the van they were taken in, and can’t describe the people who took them. The guard also said in his deposition that it was the plaintiff’s witness and others who took files, although he tried to retract that in court. There is no basis for speculation on who took the files, because it is for the plaintiffs to prove, Siegel concluded.

And then he described how Lisa Gude lied under oath when she said she couldn’t bargain because she didn’t have files – and that makes her testimony on other issues doubtful too. In the weeks before the trusteeship she was talking to bosses and they supplied her with the files she needed. It was also not until May that the new staff tried to do anything about grievances. As was shown by Eliseo Medina’s email to the rest of the IEB, the biggest concern at UHW in February 2009 was that all the staff had left and members would not work with the trustees! It had nothing to do with files, which he did not mention in the email!

“Yes, people did say “throw the bums out”” Siegel said, “just as is often said in any political campaign. The message was “Go back to where you came from! We don’t want you here!””

Then Siegel talked about SEIU's conspiracy claim, asking the jury if they had heard about the conspiracy theories around September 11 2001, or the Kennedy assassinations. Conspiracy theories make sense, he explained, when you hear the evidence that supports them. But the problem is all the evidence that’s left out. And when you consider every piece of evidence, it becomes clear that the conspiracy just can’t be the truth - just as it is in this case.

Siegel explained that attending a meeting is not a conspiracy, brainstorming is not a conspiracy. A conspiracy must be a prior arrangement to commit a wrongful act. It should be clear, he argued, that most of what the defendants planned was actually just about PR strategies.

And now, he said, “let’s look at the evidence SEIU left out. Where’s George Harris, and where’s Bill Sokel too? Sokel was at all the “conspiracy” meetings, and he’s still UHW’s lawyer. Why doesn’t he testify to the “conspiracy” that he saw planned?” (same reason as George Harris, Perez suspects!)

“Yes” Siegel argued, the defendant’s did use non-SEIU email to communicate. It was not illegal, and not part of a conspiracy. UHW was under a monitorship and they had a right to communicate privately. He then explained that (although SEIU are working on the problem) a local is not like a local branch of Bank of America, it’s an independent organization that is affiliated. But SEIU are trying to keep “handcuffs” on local unions with clauses in the constitution like the rule that even seven members of a local can veto a disaffiliation. “How is asking for a disaffiliation vote part of a conspiracy?”he asked. “It’s clear that it was not realistic to have fewer than seven members vote against disaffiliation, and that it was a political point to have members’ concerns be heard.”

Siegel then described how defendant Barbara Lewis’s memo that described making UHW “ungovernable” after a trusteeship was discovered only on her own USB drive (voluntarily handed over to SEIU), and had never been shown to anyone else. Of the 35 devices (like USB and computer drives) SEIU were able to demand the defendants hand over, only Lewis’s contained that draft memo. The plaintiffs say they’ve been able to recover more than 3,000 of John Borsos’s “double deleted” emails, but nothing juicy was apparently in them, and neither was the “implosion” memo. Further, Andy Stern himself told local union staff not to use union resources or communication networks for anything not strictly related to union work!

The defendants tried, Siegel said, to change the SEIU constitution. They went to the 2008 convention in Puerto Rico with amendments to make the union more democratic, but they were not even allowed to discuss them. “Let’s have Andy Stern come in and explain about the convention!”

About the “offshore info” – “It’s true, and it has nothing to do with this case!” Sigel described how emails from back in 2005 show how defendants planned to strengthen steward networks and worksites using the same methods they’re accused of using as a conspiracy to start a new union. It was always the policy of the local, and part of why members loved it so much, he said. The distribution of lists also makes sense, because - as members testified - they were UHW lists collected by workers over the years, and some more recent lists given out by SEIU staff employed by the trustees.

Why was the long term care jurisdiction such a rush? Why did SEIU need to give an ultimatum? They still haven’t moved the workers. And are we really expected to believe that the defendants were so cunning that they paid lawyers and planned and sought advice about how to stay out of trusteeship all the way through January, while they also secretly wanted to bring on a trusteeship so they could start NUHW?

Even though Leon Chow testified for the plaintiffs, Siegel described how he was a very important witness. He was part of the core group of planners at UHW right up until the trusteeship, and even after. He was the second highest ranking official in the group, and he is now the highest ranking official to have stayed at UHW to work for the trustees. If there had been a plan, Chow would know about it, but he testified that there was no conspiracy, and that at the time he believed that everything the group did was right and legal.

Moving on to SEIU’s claim for security costs, Siegel reminded the jury that “the burden is on the plaintiff to prove what portion of the security costs were necessary and appropriate, and they haven’t proven it.” He asked the jurors to look through the fat stack of invoices from contractor Jerry Bullock, arguing that they make no sense and don’t describe what work was done. “You would have to take his word whole, and that would be a bad idea because he has been dishonest on other issues.” For example, in his initial 1pm report on the “violent” event in the SEIU Los Angeles office, Bullock described how he had pictures and video, and said the UHW group did not gain access to the administrative area. But in another report at 2pm, he described how the office was attacked by 40 to 50 “total UHW personnel. A large, organized, criminal attack on personnel” with four to five people injured. What does that inconsistency, as well as his email about using the Richard Rubio-Bowley incident as a “highlight” for the media, say about his reliability as a witness? asked Siegel. And Nancy Stengel - also a plaintiff witness, told a very different story, one about how members were prevented from leaving and were injured, and about how they only wanted to tell SEIU they didn’t want a trusteeship.

On SEIU’s claim for damages for lost dues from the canceled contract extensions, Siegel argued that the plaintiffs had not proven why the contracts were canceled, while the defense witnesses explained pattern bargaining clearly, and SEIU had not contradicted their account. SEIU had also not proven damages, contract extensions can be reinstated and contracts can be backdated, but SEIU showed no evidence about their efforts to collect dues.

And then in closing, Dan Siegel talked about his confidence that the “members of the community” on the jury would reach a good decision, and said it was an honor to present the case to them. He asked them to consider why SEIU brought the case to court, “Did something horrible happen?” he asked... “I view it as an act of revenge, of retaliation, of punishment, risk for their livelihoods. The crime of my clients was to insist that UHW members had a right to vote.”

-----

When Gary Kohlman came back up to deliver his rebuttal, he was mad! Unlike his contrived whispering earlier in the day, this was a red faced accusatory performance that seemed either out of control or designed to intimidate the jury.

“This case has never been about freedom! This case has always been about rules!” he hissed! He seemed to be taking it all personally - “Do I put my pants on one leg at a time? Yes!” (Perez could have done without the mental image!) “I wasn’t the one who tried to change what this is about! It is a case about rules of law!”

Trying to resuscitate his original points, he sounded less like a strict father, more like someone powerless who feels personally aggrieved.

“Did the defendants because they could not bring themselves to accept the constitution, did they take steps to make a conspiracy?” “There’s nothing in the constitution except the fact that the members have the constitution!”

Then he went after what he claimed were Dan Siegel’s omissions… “He doesn’t want to talk about Rashida Anthony barely making it to a hotel with her little daughters… he doesn’t want to talk about Barbara Lewis driving members to the office and then driving them back again!”

By this point, readers say whenever Kohlman had his back to the jury he would take a deep gasping breath! The judge and several jurors were covering their mouths, raising their eyebrows, alternately looking up to the ceiling and down at their laps. One reader tells Perez that a juror was biting on a pencil to keep from laughing, as Kohlman slid into a kaleidoscope of bizarre analogies and clichés, mostly aimed at Siegel…

“Brought to the dance… punch line… Dog won’t hunt… He wants to sponsor Leon Chow? That’s fine!... This attorney wants to try to hoodwink you!... He brought them to the dance! Let’s just take little baby steps here…”

And then Kohlman started to mime his case! - “I can hear (fake phone held to ear) Mr Harris’s voice in this trial”

It seemed inexplicable to Gary Kohlman that when the defendants “had the Kinko’s lined up!” (with paper already in the copiers, perhaps?) the jury could find them anything but liable. Positioning himself as the jurors’ opponent, here to force them to reach a verdict they obviously would not want to reach, he asked them to decide “Whether you’re going to follow your oath”

And then he lost it altogether! Readers say there was open laughter in the room as Kohlman ranted about “tentacles that went out into the facilities” (into the bowels of the facilities? Has Mr Kohlman been watching too much shokushu goukan?)

“That’s the way the system works! Someone has to be in charge! That’s the beauty of it frankly!” he claimed, to little support or sympathy. The jury must find the defendants liable, “Not because Andy Stern is a big fatty fat fatty, but because the members want the constitution enforced!”

And with that, the jury went to lunch, and SEIU’s case went down the toilet!

------

Except that I left one big thing until the end of this story for the sake of both clarity and drama! First thing in the morning, with the jury still out of the courtroom, there was a big blow up over a document SEIU wanted to show the jury in a heavily redacted version. It turned out though, that through an error, they had already introduced an un-redacted version into evidence, although it hadn’t been shown or used in court. SEIU tried to get the redacted version swapped in, but the judge wasn’t having it, telling SEIU, “This is the end Mr Kohlman, not more argument! Don’t start fooling around with redactions, I see the way you do things!”

Gary Kohlman then tried to have the whole document thrown out, saying he’d also drop the argument he was trying to build around it (that the defendants tried to cover up their actions). Judge Alsup’s response? “The rules count for something, now you’ve created a mess!”

In the end, the document stayed in evidence, to be included in the pack of evidence the jury get to look over in their deliberations, and to be used by either side in their closing arguments however they wanted. But it wasn’t mentioned in either closing statement. It’s understandable why the plaintiffs wanted to try to forget all about it, but many in the courtroom expected defense lawyer Dan Siegel to show it to the jury. By letting it slide however, he not only looked gracious to the judge (and later to the jury), but he prevented Kohlman from having a chance to try to explain it away in his closing rebuttal.

So, a little “ticking time bomb” (as the plaintiffs like to say) went to the jury room, to be discovered by the jury as they consider whether to award damages to SEIU.

What was the document? It was our old friend the implosion memo, from way back in June 2008!

-------

From: Bill Ragen
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 09:28 AM Eastern Standard Time
To: Thomas Debruin; Stephen Lerner; Denise Poloyac; Kirk Adams; Edgar N. James
Subject: a few thoughts about UHW

Post-convention UHW work

A few thoughts
* Trusteeship would be difficult - it's like Iraq, easy and then to get in and then a slog
* Implosion would be a better outcome but what will it take?

* Loss of LTC means half the local will be in the south, where there are pockets of dissatisfaction
* Local elections are early next year
* Some key senior staff may want to get out of a suicide mission

Issues that will need our attention after the convention include:

Legal
* Education Fund (2 lawsuits)
* DFR's - Possible filing at Kaiser Sunset, elsewhere

Long Term Care jurisdiction

Internal
* complaints about UHW relationship with vendor It's in the Bag
* Kaiser SF stewards - internal appeal and possible DOL filing their dismissal by UHW

Members that have publicly spoken out, organized:
* Kaiser: Sunset, Woodland Hills, Panorama City
* California Hospital - CHW
* Independents: Good Samaritan, Cedars Sinai, Motion Picture
* Christy Brooks - homecare worker in Northern CA (blogger)

UHW Staff
* Going to work for other locals (possible 2 in LA)

Member outreach
* Information about decisions of the convention

Open Contracts
* Nursing Homes - 14,000 (9,000 in UHW)
* Hospitals - about 65,000

Issues to decide
Goals before, after LTC hearing
* Follow up with legal cases (and plaintiffs)
* Response to member complaints (It's in the Bag, DFR's)
* Follow up with members who have taken a public stance

* Communications strategy

* How do we let members know what was decided at the convention
* Do we want to build on the e-mails and other communications from workers, exposing UHW's lack of attention to members' concerns
* Other locals - if this debate continues, it needs to be between UHW and the rest of the division about decisions democratically made at the convention) - and not portrayed as a power struggle between UHW and the International

* Staffing
* Field
* Communication
* Legal

* Overlap with CNA work
* Shoring up CA Public Services locals that will receive mischief from UHW

Bill Ragen
Service Employees International Union
1800 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036

------

Perez rests!

Tuesday in court - You'll have to wait!

2010-04-07T00:09:00.000-07:00

Perez got a great report on the closing statements today - it's practically a transcript! I can't thank the readers who sent it in enough!

It was a great day for the defense, and readers (who know enough to tell when it's been a bad day) think SEIU's case went up in flames! As their lawyer Gary Kohlman would (and did) say, "that dog won't hunt!"

Also in this report, Andy Stern called a "fat fatty fatty fat" and a lesson on how, in our great society, "someone has to be in charge" Perez is not joking!

The catch is that it's a lot of material, and I want to get it all up for readers now and in the future to see. Please have some patience for once, and I should have it up Wednesday evening!

Monday in court - "A big zero!"

2010-04-05T21:38:00.000-07:00

With time running down for both parties, today was the the last day for actual evidence (what there is of it!) to be presented in Andy Stern, Mary Kay Henry, Anna Burger, Dave Regan, Eliseo Medina, Leon Chow, Steve Trossman, Rebecca Malberg, and SEIU's case, and the defense rested their case only about an hour into the morning.

After Barbara Lewis's cross examination was completed pretty uneventfully first thing, the defense called former UHW officer and hospital division director John Borsos to testify calmly and lucidly about about how NUHW was formed, and thoroughly impeach ("show to be lying" to us non-lawyers!) Denny Henriquez, who testified for the plaintiffs at the beginning of the trial. Henriquez testified that UHW staff had given him decertification petitions to circulate before the trusteeship was imposed. According to Henriquez, there was no place to write the date on the petitions he used, but this morning the actual petitions were produced, and showed his signature right at the top of the page, his signature again, to show he was responsible for gathering the other names on the sheet, and the date - 1/29/2009 for every signature on the page!

SEIU's lawyer Gary Kohlman (top) - whose near meltdown is one of the best stories Perez has heard today - first tried to say that Henriquez's signature was forged (by pointing out a supposed spelling error that was actually his own misreading) and then argued that the dates must be forged because they were all written in a similar style! It was the desperate tactic of a man with a thin case and only a minute left on the clock, and as one of SEIU's "member bloggers" would say... didn't work! Readers report that they could see Kohlman's hands shaking on the projector screen as he got more and more agitated!

Then with only a few minutes left, the defense called nursing home worker Eloise Reese Burns. Her testimony might have been the shortest of the whole trial. Reese Burns said simply that she had been the elected bargaining chair of her facility for contract negotiations in 2008, and that John Vellardita had asked her to poll the bargaining team (with representatives from the other nursing homes in the chain) on whether they would support canceling their contact extensions as part of a pattern bargaining strategy. Every member of the team wanted to go ahead. In response, Kohlman asked Reese Burns when she knew about the formation of NUHW! January 28th, she responded, and that was that!

Well, except for the plaintiff's rebuttal - a brief opportunity to respond to the evidence presented by the defense. For their rebuttal SEIU played a section of the video deposition of former UHW staffer Elizabeth Ortega, and a clip of John Vellardita's deposition about the scheduling of staff meetings that they'd previously "been unable to find" (or could it be that they just wanted to get it in last with no chance for the defense to respond?). There was some debate about allowing the video, but the defense lawyers declared it "not very interesting", and the judge seemed to agree, exclaiming "Is that it?".

And then the judge sent the jury home with another reminder not to "go on the Google!" They'll be back tomorrow to hear closing statements from both sides and the jury instructions, and then to begin their deliberation.

About 50% of the real meat of this case has always come when the jury is out of the room, and today it was apparently about 90%! Two things were up for debate - the "Rule 50" arguments - which are all about what charges and issues should actually make it to the jury for a verdict, and the jury instructions - which are about the parameters and guidelines the jury should be given to help them. This case is so complicated and such a mismatch between what's right, what's legal, and what SEIU want, that the jury instructions are especially important.

There are too many different legal things going on here for me to try to explain for you, or for my readers to explain for me, or even probably for my readers to get their heads around! Readers write that even the judge seems confused (and irritated), resting his head in his hands, and shutting down the lawyers when things get too convoluted. SEIU are relying on several different sets of state and federal laws (as well as the local and international union constitutions) to patch their case together, and it sounds like they try to switch them all around when one approach hits a brick wall!

Some of SEIU's arguments are plain scary. They would like to have the judge tell the jury that if anyone who is employed by an organization spends even five minutes of time outside of work hours on something that organization would not support, then they are violating "faithless servant doctrine" and owe all their salary back to the organization! They claimed today that they had "paid for the loyalty" of UHW officers and staff (wasn't it the members who paid for that?). They also argue that obeying the SEIU constitution in good faith would not be enough, because Andy Stern's interpretation of what it means is the only one that applies! And then they are trying to argue that any breach of the union's constitution is automatically a breach of fiduciary duty even if it doesn't involve money. They would also like the judge to hold that shop stewards can be held liable for damages if they breach their union's constitution!

"Let's just say a local is totally convinced, 100% convinced that the international union is totally corrupt..." asked Judge Alsup today. "They want to get out of the international, maybe join another international. So then the international comes in and says "No, you can't do that, you're violating your fiduciary duty to us. What other remedy would they have?"

SEIU's answer? That (as we all knew) there's basically no remedy within SEIU for a local that recognizes the threat the international poses to union members' rights and freedoms.

But now for the fun part! Today SEIU put up a lawyer readers haven't seen much of before. He's sat quietly for most of the trial, and Perez hears he should have stayed quiet today! First he told Judge Alsup he thought he was violating his oath of office by refusing to make the change to the instructions this lawyer (Perez doesn't know his name) wanted! The judge was clearly annoyed, but told him "You're a young guy (he's not!) you'll live and learn!" But the lawyer kept raising his voice, interrupting, and pushing for changes to the jury instructions, all while bobbing his head and wringing his hands behind his back! Perez hears he smiled at NUHW lawyer Dan Siegel, and Siegel looked at him like he was crazy and edged away! At one point the other lawyers from his own side shushed him! The SEIU lawyer did manage to get a few of his points to stick, but maybe not ones that will help his case - as the judge told him "I think you're going to regret this! Don't complain to me later on if you wind up getting a big zero on this one!"

So readers report that it sounds like the judge will reject many or most of SEIU's arguments, but it won't be clear until the jury instructions and rule 50 decisions are final tomorrow. Judge Alsup was apparently pretty skeptical of SEIU's whole case today, telling them that he only knew who three or four of the defendants were, and he didn't think they had enough evidence to go to the jury on most of them.

"There are too many defendants there, and you ought to be thinking about how to convince the jury that every single one of them ought to pay money to someone!"

And that's a fact!

Friday in court - "Is that it?"

2010-04-02T21:05:00.000-07:00

First things first - readers emailed with two corrections to Thursday's post. I'll blame my original correspondents for the oversights! Here's the updated version.

TGIF! I don't generally waste my time rebuffing SEIU spin, but for the sake of novelty and to give some structure to my run-down of this messy day, I am going to address a couple of points from tonight's "Action update". By the way, Perez doesn't see any SEIU "member blogs" online tonight (at least yet). Doesn't SEIU trust them to get it "right" today?

First, let's talk about SEIU's continued insistence that this case has nothing to do with what members wanted! Writing about defendant Barbara Lewis's supposed plan to "get" members to sleep in the UHW offices, they conveniently forgot to write about the testimony of Kaiser Psychotherapist Emily Ryan, who started to cry on the stand today as she described how she and her coworkers wanted to say goodbye to the building they felt was their home, and to let SEIU know the harm they were doing. Despite continued objections of "irrelevant!" from SEIU's lawyer, Ryan testified that she stayed with several other members at an (unusually clean!) Oakland UHW office from Jan 27 to Jan 30 2009, locking the doors for safety because she was afraid of SEIU (and still is), picking up dinner from a local restaurant, and working on grievances until SEIU cut off the phones and computers.

Then, let's address SEIU's claim about the defendant's testimony today that "What they couldn't explain, however, was why they were communicating using a secret, private e-mail network they set up..."

Really? Because what readers tell Perez is that more than one witness has explained quite clearly how some UHW staff took discussions of the conflict with the international to personal email because they were being spied on and knew there would be retaliation for their political views!

And lastly, Perez notes how news about the long-anticipated and finally delivered video testimony of Richard Rubio-Bowley (on whose evidence SEIU's claim for security costs seems to hang) is buried deep in today's email! A more cynical observer than Perez might suggest that SEIU waited until today to show the video in order to taint as much of the trial as possible with anticipation that it would show something shocking, when today the court saw that it just wasn't all that! "Is that it?" asked the judge when the video ended!

Readers say that Rubio-Bowley, an older man who is obviously in poor health, didn't even claim to have been threatened. He testified that he felt scared because he was initially unable to identify two figures on his dark street, and he was then asked by defendant John Vellardita (from his car) "What are you doing Richard?" (to which he responded by taking out his cell phone and threatening to call the police). Vellardita (who Perez guesses had gotten the answer he needed) then called Rubio-Bowley a scab and drove off, along with staffers Gabe Krystal and Mario Santos (who had been the figures on foot). And that's it, except that Rubio-Bowley then called deputy trustee Lisa Gude, and security/media guy Jerry Bullock, who urged him to file a police report. Readers say there was actually no conflict between Rubio-Bowley's testimony and John Vellardita's, except that Vellardita explained that Santos and Krystal were walking because he dropped them off while he went to look for parking, and that Santos was close personal friends with Rubio-Bowley and concerned for him when he didn't answer his phone that day.

I'm going to skip over the long list of defendants and witnesses who testified today. I hear they all did a good job, particularly at explaining the long-term commitment to empowering stewards and members at UHW, the haphazard and purely defensive nature of the so-called plot, and the sheer quantity of regular work that got done at UHW in January 2009. SEIU's conspiracy claim is being methodically broken down on almost every point, with possibly some evidence left that a little time was used to plan immediate responses to the trusteeship a day or two before it happened. Highlights were apparently John Vellardita's declaration that "Yes, Eliseo is a class collaborator. He sells out workers!" and UHW rep Gloria Watkins's description of how SEIU spent the first weeks of the trusteeship planning how to "get rid" of strong worker leaders who they saw as trouble. Honestly though, my reports from today mostly fall under "you had to be there", and you can read about it all elsewhere. I think I'll spend your limited attention span talking about some of the legal details...

The plaintiffs now have 17 minutes left (although the judge says he will allow them at least one minute to cross every witness) and the defendants 37. Testimony should finish on Monday, with both sides making two-hour closing statements on Tuesday. "All good things must come to an end at some point!" says Judge Alsup! Perez hears that the judge seemed tired and irritable today and ready for the case to be over. He is still warning both sides repeatedly about how complicated the case is, and how they need to come to agreement over some guidelines to present to the jury. Apparently both those guidelines and motions to dismiss some of SEIU's remaining charges for failure to show evidence will be prepared over the weekend.

So readers seem to feel that today was a solidly successful day for the defense, but (unlike yesterday) also a day that reminded them both of what they lost when UHW was destroyed, and that they were now sitting in a courtroom with a bunch of lawyers and all the inadequacies and ugliness of the legal system.

And finally on that same point - I've also gotten reports on something else that happened today, and no, even though it is Friday, I'm just not going there. But I will say that SEIU's willingness to throw even their most loyal staff under the bus to make the tiniest point in a lawsuit should be a real wake-up call.

Real Thursday in court - "What, me worry?"

2010-04-01T19:36:00.000-07:00

Happy April Fool's Day! I thought I'd best keep it simple today, since last year got a little too "War of the Worlds"!

Today actually was a fun day in court for several readers, as testimony from NUHW members and activists took up most of the day, and readers describe the mood in court as "joyful and defiant"!

Activist Andy Reid might have been the sleeper hit of the day. He told the story of how he "panicked a bit" when after he was accused of stealing UHW documents, a box arrived at his home full of the very same paperwork! Readers say Reid kept it simple on the stand, methodically going through how the bargaining and steward structures that kept UHW democratic explained many of SEIU's allegations about the distribution of lists, and how "paying the expenses" of members sleeping in the office just meant ordering them a pizza! But then SEIU lawyer Kohlman tried a dramatic new move we'll call "the surprise swear"! Talking in a near-whisper about an email from Piete Clayton (corrected 4/2), Kohlman suddenly raised his voice to quote: "...stay THE FUCK out of the facilities!" Responding calmly, Reid shot back "Yes, I did think SEIU should stay the FUCK out of the facilities!"

And if Reid was the sleeper hit, Beverly Griffith was the summer blockbuster! Readers say she gave a big smile for the court photographer, and the audience laughed! Griffith told the story of the Alameda office "break-in" in a proud and matter-of-fact way, and noted that she and other members had done exactly the same thing at a hospital years ago with the support of SEIU International, and with Reverend Jesse Jackson at the front of the crowd.

Also on the stand, hospital workers Don Fugate and Tonia Smith-Fryson (a rep until SEIU fired her after the trusteeship), to talk about how SEIU's charges over lists and data are groundless, and about how SEIU destroyed their union. Fugate's hospital isn't even unionized yet! ( Where were the workers to speak for SEIU's case? (Reader correction 4/2: Fugate is an NUHW member! He works at Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital, where workers voted in December 2009 to join NUHW)

The day ended with former UHW secretary-treasurer Joan Emslie, who was actually out on disability during the time for which SEIU are suing her for her salary. She testified that actions SEIU are presenting as part of a conspiracy (charting, information gathering, and keeping money in separate funds) were actually routine parts of running the local. Her testimony will continue tomorrow.

The jury perception problem I described yesterday deepened today, as SEIU objected "Irrelevant!" to every heart-felt witness testimony (Defense lawyer: "Can you tell the court why you wanted a voice in your union?" Plaintiff's lawyer: "Irrelevant!"). Readers say the jury visibly winced at the interruptions. And then there's the way that SEIU's cross-examination of every witness hammers on why they chose to "disobey" SEIU's "rules" - a sort of "if you didn't like it you were free to leave" line. These past couple of days already seem to belong to NUHW in a way that SEIU's case just didn't belong to them. All SEIU have left is the hope of convincing the jury that while the defendants might be more sympathetic, they were still technically in the wrong.

And SEIU know that they're losing. Readers say that in contrast to the packed NUHW benches and laughing members, they sat upright and tight lipped today, and that instead of hanging out in the hallway chatting after proceedings finished, they packed up their things and scuttled away!

And here's part of their email from back on Monday...

How many times in life do we see something that is totally wrong and we wish it was also illegal and are furious to learn it's not? The same is true for this trial.

The former leaders did many terrible things, but only some of them are clear violations of civil law and are subjects of the trial. For example, the former leaders raided $3 million from our strike fund to pay for newspaper ads, catering and legal costs in their self-serving fight against SEIU. They never paid the money back and left the strike fund depleted just as dozens of contracts were expiring. This is morally inexcusable, but technically legal...

...It's frustrating that the trial is not the venue to hold the former leaders accountable for these selfish acts, but we know that the most important jurors are the 150,000 members of UHW. And ultimately we will hold them accountable by getting them out of our worksites once and for all.

Huh? What? Yes, Perez often sees things that should be illegal but aren't (like politically motivated trusteeships and nuisance lawsuits), but it isn't often he pays $10 million in legal fees to find out that he doesn't have a case!

With so many other great things to be mean about, I try not to focus too much on physical appearance. However, there's a minor debate raging in my inbox about SEIU lawyer Gary Kohlman! When I reported yesterday that one reader felt his ears were his distinguishing feature, another chimed in to argue that his eyebrows deserved at least a mention ("like a pair of fuzzy shelves from some crazy 70s apartment."), and another to say that Mad Magazine mascot Alfred E. Neuman might have been based on a younger Kohlman!

Oh, by the way, Perez was wrong with yesterday's prediction about how the plaintiffs would spend their remaining time (guess that's why I'm a blogger and not a lawyer). With about 100 minutes left at the end of the day (the defendants have about 200), the plaintiffs are still cross-examining all the witnesses, although generally very briefly.

Keep your speculations, look-alikes, and court reports coming to perezstern@gmail.com!

Thursday in court - Coffee and Kool-Aid!

2010-04-01T15:59:00.000-07:00

Readers report a much kinder, gentler day in court today, with plaintiffs and defendants tripping over each other in their efforts to apologize and make things right. "No, please, let me pay your legal costs" begged Mary Kay Henry to defendant Joan Emslie, "Believe me, this hasn't been fun for me either!" In the hallway, Amado David and defendant Gabe Krystal were spotted exchanging hugs and sharing an iPod to listen to a little MC Krooked. "Honestly, I just want a nice SEIU local to call my own" sighed Sal Rosselli, "Just give me 221 and a new purple windbreaker, and I'm done! Are you with me Dan?"

To mark the more relaxed mood in the courtroom, Judge Alsup ordered court security officers to bring coffee in for audience members, and turned on the heating. Ironically however, proceedings may now run through April as the parties reverse-negotiate, and SEIU fundraises among its large community of labor allies.

Wednesday in court - Wellspring of the members!

2010-03-31T20:32:00.000-07:00

Andy Stern, Mary Kay Henry, Anna Burger, Dave Regan, Eliseo Medina, Leon Chow, Steve Trossman, Rebecca Malberg, and SEIU finally rested their case today in federal court!

Readers tell Perez that while the NUHW area of the courtroom is packed with members, staff, supporters, and journalists, attendance on SEIU’s side is down to a skeleton crew consisting of a few senior staffers (staff lawyer Deedee Fitzpatrick and deputy trustee Debbie Schneider have been regulars), PR staffers Steve Trossman and Matt Browner Hamlin (Michelle Ringuette didn’t come back after the first couple of days), someone’s kid, and the “member bloggers”, along with a huge legal team.

Spotted on those sparse SEIU benches today, Mary Kay Henry looking back at the SEIU side and making faces during Sal Rosselli’s testimony. Spotted in the ladies bathroom, Rebecca Malberg frantically snatching handfuls of paper towel and stuffing it in her purse! Maybe that’s where all the UHW documents went?

The day began with cross-examination of SEIU’s email expert (he only makes $250 an hour while the math guy makes $600?!), and the stunning revelation that “double deleting” emails means deleting them and then emptying your trash can! Then came Debbie ssssSchneider, followed by a paralegal from one of SEIU’s law firms, and a security guard from the Sacramento UHW office, all to talk about boxes and data. Perez didn’t hear anything interesting about any of them or about the defendant deposition videos SEIU played.

And then the plaintiffs finally rested their case with about an hour of the day left, and the defense went straight into calling witnesses with Sal Rosselli. As Sal took the stand, readers say there was a palpable feeling of “this is our turn!” in the room, and the energy changed. The jury literally sat up and took notice too, looking more animated, and writing more notes than at any point in the plaintiffs’ case.

Readers say Sal wasn’t in exuberant rally-speech mode, but gave a very sober and clear history of the actions and decisions that led inevitably to the trusteeship – the 2007 SF Weekly article on the nursing home deals, the 2008 convention, the jurisdiction decisions, the trusteeship hearings, and along with it all, the struggle of UHW members to make their international union acknowledge their existence as something more than dues units. Readers say it just sounded like the straight-up truth.

SEIU lawyer Kohlman (“the one with the big ears”) gambled and lost with his cross examination. Faced with a choice between staying calm and trying to subtly steer Rosselli, or going all-out and trying to intimidate him, Kohlman chose the latter strategy (each has its place, there’s no moral judgment here!), sounded out-of-step, and fell flat, failing to get any real concessions from the witness or trip him up.

It’s tricky for the plaintiffs now, because just about any legal concession they might be able to get from a defense witness - for example that UHW’s officers should have obeyed the IEB and not union members - makes SEIU look terrible to the jury, and the defendants look good. It happened today, as SEIU objected repeatedly to Rosselli’s account of democratic processes at UHW on the grounds that they were “irrelevant”, and then turned around and argued in their cross examination that the undemocratic changes to the SEIU constitution made in Puerto Rico (essentially turning all important decisions over to Andy Stern) were an expression of the members’ will! Judge Alsup might insist that appearances don’t matter, but he does so because they do; especially in a case that’s still so legally ambiguous and messy.

Things are getting messier and messier too in the negotiations that happen between the lawyers and the judge when the jury is out. This morning Perez hears the judge accused SEIU of “larding the record”, and called their case “big law firm practice at its worst!”. However, he also insisted that the former UHW staffers must have spent at least a little time planning to be disloyal on SEIU’s dime, or how else would they all have coordinated to quit on the same day? Not a point that make sense to Perez (has Judge Alsup heard of weekends?), but it shows how tense things are getting, as the judge urges the sides to come to some sort of agreement to clarify things for the jury.

The judge wouldn’t give the minute counts he’s given at the end of every other day, but with 200 left in the morning, the plaintiffs must now be very low on time. Just for fun, Perez is going to make a little prediction – SEIU will spend all, or all but a few minutes cross-examining Sal Rosselli. It’s abundantly clear that they’re going to have a hard time making any charges stick, and spending five minutes crossing every witness would just be useless. The real point of all this time and money is to taint NUHW, and winning nothing at all, or just some random finding against a staffer, won’t do that cause any good! That’s why Perez bets they’ll throw it all at Rosselli (who they’ll say is ultimately responsible for everything that happened) and hope they get something they can use!

Now, does anyone want to pay me $600 an hour for my expertise at making semi-informed guesses?

Tuesday in court - Skandalous.

2010-03-30T17:23:00.000-07:00

Andy Stern, Mary Kay Henry, Anna Burger, Dave Regan, Eliseo Medina, Leon Chow, Steve Trossman, Rebecca Malberg, and SEIU wasted more dues dollars on their federal suit in San Francisco on Tuesday, as reported by readers...

"Krooked" Alex Espinoza appeared as promised today, and finally achieved what he's been fronting for years - committing a federal crime! Alex perjured all over himself on the stand, and for what? To claim he didn't know where Amado David was in January 2009 and wasn't talking with him, when in fact emails to Alex's "Krooky account" showed the pair were in regular contact. How must that make Amado feel? Well judging by his appearance in court, it makes him feel like an unwashed stoner, but that's not an actual emotion, so who knows?

Readers suggest that Alex also lied when he told defendant Barbara Lewis that he would stay at UHW "for the members". Alex is just the latest in a long list of recently-promoted SEIU staffers on the stand, and his entire testimony was about how he's a big shot with multiple people reporting to him. Asked to describe the structure of his team, he described a pyramid, where as a "working lead" he directed "his" staff, who directed stewards, who finally directed members "on the front lines". One reader writes that union members in the audience were visibly disgusted by Alex's repulsive inversion of their union.

Can someone let Perez know if SEIU has put forward any witnesses who aren't on their payroll? Aside from Alex, four paid staffers took the stand today - Abbie Reeve, Annie Durazo, Lynn Templeton, and Yvonne Shaw. All told pretty much the same story - in 2008 and early 2009 they were asked to update contact information for members, to phonebank to bring members to meetings, and to update charts. Annie and Yvonne claimed they had been told to spend most of their time fighting the trusteeship, and as Annie said, "not to spend any time with the members". Both revealed under cross examination however, that their facilities had been in active bargaining, with actions and one-day strikes throughout January - hard to do in 10% of a work-week! Oh, and apparently Yvonne's supervisor told her to try not to lose her job when the trusteeship happened, and asked her to tell her what was going on inside the local. So damn what? The judge repeats every day that fighting the trusteeship was not illegal. SEIU had better find something much, much, better, and fast!

The other two witnesses in what sounds like a full day were SEIU paid "experts" on computer data recovery (to talk about various emails and lists) and accounting (to present numbers for the damages SEIU want). It's interesting to see the glimpses this trial is opening up into another side of the story of the trusteeship - into the dynamics inside and around SEIU. One thing that's now abundantly clear is that a string of companies and individuals saw the way that SEIU was throwing members' money around, and cashed in!

Take for example, Michael Lasinski, SEIU's damages expert - Lasinski is a specialist in "financial forensics" who works out of Chicago, and starting last year he charged SEIU $600 an hour to take a 23 page list of "assumptions" written by the trustees and information supplied by UHW financial staff, and come up with numbers for how much SEIU should demand in damages. Readers in court today couldn't figure out what Michael did besides work from the presumption the defendants were liable, and divide their salaries and benefits (or the local's operating costs in other cases) by the amount of time the international claim they spent fighting the trusteeship! The international want the jury to just pick a number from a list of options, but the judge was skeptical. Oh, and Lasinski was charging $600 an hour for his appearance in court today too.

Readers describe an interesting legal end to the day (there are always a few minutes of planning and clarification between the judge and lawyers after the jury leave), with Judge Alsup suggesting that both parties agree on a simplified version of the relevant law to present to the jury. The judge is concerned that this case is so complicated that the jury will have too few clear and objective criteria to judge it by, and might reach a surprise verdict that one or both sides "wouldn't like!"

Judge Alsup also chided SEIU for getting close to the end of their allotted time. They only have about 200 minutes left to use for their remaining witnesses and cross examination of the defense. After dropping yet more charges today, they had better have something magical planned for those 200 minutes!

Monday in court - "Our dues paid for this!"

2010-03-29T19:36:00.000-07:00

Andy Stern, Mary Kay Henry, Anna Burger, Dave Regan, Eliseo Medina, Leon Chow, Steve Trossman, Rebecca Malberg, and SEIU continued their badly limping lawsuit Monday, as reported by readers...

The morning started out with the continuing cross-examination of security contractor Jerry Bullock, whose initial testimony was apparently all-but demolished by the time he left the stand. The Bush era style paranoia and incompetence Bullock described was shocking even to readers who lived through it all! While Bullock didn't keep any records at all of "incidents" from February 5th 2009 through May or June, he did send SEIU staff regular emails before the trusteeship, and sometimes advised them which "incidents" he thought they should try to exploit for media purposes! Oh, and Jerry didn't bother getting the names of staff who claimed they'd been assaulted, because he thought the police (or the press?) would probably do it. Sounds ridiculous to Perez, and apparently the judge thought so too.

Several of Bullock's report emails were read in court, and they were a creepy combination of inane and chilling - about one of the big pre-trusteeship member meetings he wrote "they have numerous automobiles, and approximately ten children under ten years of age are present" about another "they are wearing purple shirts but do not have signs or other items" How sad that while SEIU members were wearing their union's colors and rallying to try to save their member-run local, their own union was spending their dues money to have ex-FBI agents spy on them.

And then UHW member Nancy Stengel was amazing! Nancy is a Kaiser worker from Orange County who was very active before and around the trusteeship, but followed her scab union rep Tammy to SEIU. Nancy was one of the leaders of the January 21st 2009 "visit" to the shadow SEIU office in Los Angeles, and readers were expecting her to spin a juicy story of defendant-led violence and conspiracy. Sounds like SEIU's lawyers were expecting her to tell that story too, but it's not what happened at all.

I have an in-box full of direct quotes from Stengel's testimony, so I'll tell this story with as many as possible...

Nancy Stengel testified that after being trained by UHW communications staff on how to video and photograph their action, she went with other members to the secret SEIU office "to have a conversation with them, and let them know that we weren't interested in having them take over our union." She and other members were able to enter the office without anyone telling them to leave. Once in the office she saw posters that had "Free the members! Save the members! type rhetoric" and she found it jarring. She also saw a "war room" with charts on the walls. Nancy told a security guard "we have a right to be here, our dues paid for this!" And then she testified how SEIU's security became violent with the members, "shoving girls down stairs" and cutting one badly on the side as they "slammed her against the gate" they were trying to close to trap members inside. Nancy also testified that "one of the guards had flashed a gun at the girls".

She also didn't go along with SEIU's script on other charges, testifying that yes, it was unusual for stewards to be given a list, "unless you had a contract election", that all the staff left the room at the big pre-trusteeship meetings so that members could discuss options by themselves, and that Sal Rosselli told her he couldn't get involved when she emailed him about their discussions at that meeting.

Nancy told how she slept in the union hall and asked other members to come too, she called defendant Michael Krivosh "Mike," she told how she delivered flyers to SEIU staff to "let them know we thought they were scabs for destroying our union, and we wanted them to go home." None of this testimony came out under cross-examination (the defendants' lawyers had no questions at all for her) and readers who were present say it was an honest and moving account of how SEIU destroyed UHW, and how members who loved their union fought back.

Perez hears that when SEIU staff lawyer Deedee Fitzpatrick led Nancy out of the courtroom she was all smiles, but when she returned by herself she had a tight grimace across her face!

Thank you Nancy, for reminding SEIU that the choices members make in this screwed up situation are more complicated than blind loyalty, that seeming to pick a side doesn't mean your real side isn't with your coworkers, and that even choosing SEIU doesn't mean you're a puppet who'll lie for them!

And then the rest of the day was anti-climactic financial and IT related testimony that readers say fell squarely in the "So what?" category. SEIU only have a few more hours left to make their case, and despite their repeated promises to "tighten this noose even tighter" it's just not happening! They still haven't even shown the judge why their claim for security costs makes legal sense. It's now or never guys!

Spotted in the hallway and rumored to be up on the stand tomorrow, homophobic scab wanna-be-rapper, Alex "Krooked" Espinoza. Perhaps he can save the day? Perez can't wait!

Just can't get enough?

2010-03-28T14:57:00.000-07:00

Me neither! Here's some more trial coverage to keep you going until tomorrow...

NUHW are doing a pretty detailed run-down each afternoon on their website. As you probably know, I tend not to link to NUHW stuff, because although I'm a supporter, I'm not affiliated with them, and also because I have no interest in becoming a collection of material you can find everywhere else! Their trial coverage however, has a lot of info I didn't get or don't have room for - check it out.

SEIU meanwhile have "member" blogs at Calitics, The Huffington Post, and (big surprise!) Firedoglake. They have a lot I don't have room for too! I'm not going to link, but they should be easy enough to find, and worth reading for the comments at least.

Lastly, if you missed it, here's Carl Finamore's great piece on the trial for In These Times.

Friday in court - In the fetal position.

2010-03-27T23:47:00.000-07:00

Andy Stern, Mary Kay Henry, Anna Burger, Dave Regan, Eliseo Medina, Leon Chow, Steve Trossman, Rebecca Malberg, and SEIU* continued their federal lawsuit dramedy on Friday, as reported by readers...

It's abundantly clear that this was (and still is) a real no-expense-spared trusteeship. Why bother taking bids from security companies to get the best deal, when Kaiser members' dues will cover it all in a month? Fly staff in from across the country? Put even the local staff in hotels? No problem, members will pick up the tab! And the same goes for this lawsuit, which is costing at least twice the damages SEIU are demanding. After all, it would be stupid to pinch pennies now, when losing the big Kaiser unit would cost SEIU a billion dollars over the next twenty years.

Leon Chow got more interesting under cross examination on Friday, as he stepped up his "just following orders" act and pretended not to know where the slogan "Yes we can!" originated. It's actually hard to tell how much real agency Chow had in planning for the trusteeship - even Perez can't decide whether he was the second-in-command top official and leader the defendants' lawyers argue he was, or the confused idiot he tries to paint himself as. What is clear is that (as NUHW's lawyers say) if he hadn't run scabbing back to SEIU, Chow would be sitting with the defendants. One last thing about Leon Chow: both sides agree that he's a key witness, as the plaintiffs argue he proves the defendants plotted illegally, and the defendants counter that as a central player in the efforts to resist SEIU, Chow never saw any evidence that a new union was being formed before the trusteeship went into effect.

Then came Eliseo Medina himself, to describe how he was appointed the "external relations" trustee (bad choice) and claim that he was just sent to California to collect information and make sure that all grievances and arbitration were up to date! Perez hears he seemed nervous on the stand - a reader describes how he turned his head in one direction and then another, as if trying to look in control! One of SEIU's lawyers ("the dark haired one") apparently has a flair for the cutesy, and tried it with Eliseo, asking whether locals 6434 and 521 had "a smile or a frown" about the jurisdiction decision, irritating the judge. Overall, Eliseo's testimony mostly just made it abundantly clear that the trusteeship was a done deal way in advance.

And then the court got on to the security cost charges. Supposed to be a big shocker, Perez hears they melted away like a snowman (a straw-man?) in the sun...

Confidential Administrative Assistant (that means she works for management and isn't a member of the staff union) Rashida Anthony did a decent job, but her part was overwritten, and just not supported by the material. It's clear that it was pretty stressful to work in SEIU's secret Alameda office before the trusteeship, but SEIU's lawyers just pushed it all too far, especially given that no one was hurt, nothing was damaged, and no charges were filed in the scuffle Anthony described. Readers say the lawyers repeatedly asked Anthony about "her little daughters", until the judge scoffed that it was too much, and that they tried to put a strange and uncomfortable spin on her testimony that had some weird racial and sexual overtones.

Perez thinks the defendants lawyers should be asking why SEIU hired such crappy security along with why they hired so much! What kind of a former secret service agent curls up into "the fetal position" (as emphasized repeatedly by Anthony), or is left "shaken and scared" when thirty (mostly middle-aged women) health care workers hold a protest in an office? Well, most likely they ended up with such an ineffective team (so ineffective SEIU were withholding payment, remember?), because they just threw some money at Jerry Bullock and told him they wanted what the real corporations have...

Bullock reportedly seemed like a decent enough guy when he took the stand Friday, but he didn't do well as the expert witness SEIU wanted to use him as. Under cross examination he revealed that he is actually the only employee of his (previously) impressive sounding "Bullock and Associates", and provides security services by sub contracting to other companies like the OSO Group. Of course, he also stands to make a lot of money from a successful SEIU lawsuit. Bullock could only remember a few "threatening incidents", almost none in the crucial period before the trusteeship, and the only records he kept of them were emails to SEIU staff. One of the incidents he described was a break-in to cars belonging to SEIU staff when the cars were parked at a hotel for the night. What was stolen? GPS devices and clothing. Left behind? Files and lists! Another "threatening incident" was the time someone allegedly drove past Mary Kay Henry's San Fransisco home and took pictures - in response Bullock and OSO Group provided round the clock personal protection for Henry and her partner through May 2009.

More than one reader was grateful to Bullock however, for the trip down memory lane his testimony provided. Perez himself clearly remembers the paranoia dripping from SEIU in spring 2009, the sense that they expected anything to happen, and were prepared to do anything in return. One reader described a juror as "visibly moved" on hearing the extreme measures SEIU took by hiring a security company (OSO) that specializes in "counter intelligence, asset searches, and investigations". Bullock reportedly looked sheepish as he described how one night he thought he was being menaced by someone in a van with a "firearm", but it actually turned out to be a video camera. Heady days, but so expensive!

The day ended (as they increasingly do) with Judge Alsup asking SEIU to explain just exactly what their legal argument is supposed to be. But of course, this isn't a real trial, it's a play about a trial - written by SEIU, and acted poorly by paid SEIU staff cast into insultingly corny roles. It's not about the truth, it's SEIU's chance to recite every slur and accusation they've made in the past year, and brand it all with the "Federal Court" seal of legitimacy. Anything any witness says can be spun in a flyer as "It was revealed in Federal Court that..." See how it works?

Well that's enough fun for Friday. The trial resumes Monday, when Perez hears SEIU will be bringing the crazy more than ever!

------

*Dear fellow union democracy bloggers. Please join me in using the full names of SEIU staff and bosses at the beginning of posts for the benefit of Google indexing.

Perez is partying!

2010-03-26T20:24:00.000-07:00

The Friday court report will be online asap Saturday...

Thursday in court - So what? And what?!

2010-03-25T19:06:00.000-07:00

Andy Stern, Mary Kay Henry, Anna Burger, Dave Regan, Eliseo Medina, Leon Chow, Steve Trossman, Rebecca Malberg, and SEIU continued their federal lawsuit dramedy on Thursday, as reported by readers...

Readers write that Judge Alsup always tells it like it is, and he kicked off this morning by telling SEIU "This is a problem of your own making! You're overreaching over there, and you're being greedy!" SEIU's lawyers were wrestling yet again with the challenge of demanding money without saying how much and what they want it for, and were bargaining to call in a witness with massive limits on what he would be allowed to speak about. It didn't work out for them, today at least...

As Perez hears it, everything felt messy today, like the court was trying to untangle a snarl of wires to find what was in the center (hint - nothing!). Judge Alsup himself admitted that he'd been confused about the Education Fund and the Patient Education Fund, and the jury asked for a definition of the word "redacted". The judge is constantly clarifying things to the jury, repeating over and over that anything the lawyers claim is not evidence (only witness testimony and exhibits like documents are evidence), and that resisting the trusteeship was not unlawful. But SEIU doesn't want the jury to be clear, their aim is plainly to push the "no smoke without fire" line as far as they can.

But unfortunately, many of their poorly prepared witnesses (were they told this would be a slam-dunk?) leave the stand hopelessly confused and defeated themselves. Witness Fresno homecare member Jackie Peppars (famous for wearing purple camouflage to speak at a rally) unable to say which union NUHW activist Kevin Hall was working with when he allegedly gave her a list to contact other homecare workers after the trusteeship, or where that list came from. Sources say Jackie left the stand looking humiliated - SEIU's lawyers (who likely made more money in the time it took to lead her through her testimony than a homecare worker makes in a week) should not have put her up there.

Mostly, SEIU's witnesses seem to be falling into two categories - first there are the "so what?" witnesses like Miriam Escamilla and scab homecare director Leon Chow, whose late-afternoon testimony was apparently so boring and drawn out that one reader reports: "By the time Chow was done I was freezing cold and my butt hurt from the seat"! These witnesses tell long stories about personal emails and secret meetings that sound juicy and compelling, but turn out to have been totally legitimate. In Escamilla's case, the judge was apparently so bewildered by the hours of pointless stories that he demanded the lawyers explain just what her testimony was supposed to show.

And then there are the "maybe perjury" witnesses, who contradict themselves big time, and get caught out lying! Lisa Gude definitely fell into that second category today, as it came out that she'd been on first name terms with nursing home bosses since mid-January, and had all the files she needed to bargain by the time of the trusteeship, courtesy of those same helpful bosses. The essential files she claimed defendant Mark Kipfer had kept from her turned out just to be a small stack of notes. As a reader writes, that's all while contradicting her earlier deposition that she had exactly no bargaining files, and nothing she needed to bargain - flat out lies.

To add insult to injury (hers and the workers whose union she attacked), Lisa Gude also testified to being director of UHW's CHW hospitals department (everyone's a director of something now!). When asked what CHW stands for, she stumbled a bit then said "Catholic Healthcare Workers" as if it were a union and not an employer... Which I guess is easy to confuse if you're SEIU!

Perez rests his case for Thursday! Keep your testimony coming to perezstern@gmail.com!

Wednesday in court - [Redacted]

2010-03-24T22:24:00.000-07:00

Andy Stern, Mary Kay Henry, Anna Burger, Dave Regan, Eliseo Medina, Leon Chow, Steve Trossman, Rebecca Malberg, and SEIU continued their federal lawsuit on Wednesday...

Sounds like it got even clearer today that SEIU are walking a very narrow plank! How can they prove their case without mentioning anything that would clue the jury in on what's really going on here?

The way things work in court, the NUHW defendants can only respond to the evidence and issues that SEIU bring to the room. Because they are defending themselves against SEIU's allegations and not making their own case, if SEIU don't mention something, the judge doesn't allow the defendants to. Yesterday that led to some dramatic cliffhangers, as SEIU's lawyers objected (and the judge upheld) just as some pretty big deal things like Tyrone Freeman's massive corruption and SEIU's payments to Ray Marshall were about to come to the jury's attention.

Readers say that the jury now seem increasingly suspicious and perplexed about just what it is they're not allowed to know that would apparently affect the case in NUHW's favor so much. Perez hears that the judge keeps reminding the jury NOT to go on the internet, and NOT to Google anything (wonder if he's seen Perez?). That's how a jury trial works, but it's super weird and awkward here - this isn't like say, a murder trial, where anything in the press is essentially speculation, this is a situation that has been investigated and written about by serious and neutral (and some not so serious or neutral!) people for two years. There's 1,000x more information available outside the courtroom than will ever come out inside it.

So SEIU are backing off of charges and running rings around themselves trying to keep the juicy stuff out of court while simultaneous smearing the defendants enough to make it all worthwhile, and it's tough!

First thing this morning SEIU read a little of Sal Rosselli's speech to the 2008 convention, but then they ended up being forced to read the whole thing to a visibly moved jury. Then later on, Mary Kay Henry (left) opened the door to her own cross-examination over the undemocratic trusteeship process, and ended up admitting that the long-term-care workers (who such urgent action had to be taken to protect) are still part of UHW, as the trustees haven't gotten around to complying with the IEB's order yet! Almost every document SEIU tried to submit today was heavily redacted (blacked out), but after the judge agreed with the defendants' lawyers, many redactions ended up getting redacted, with the documents going to the jury whole.

So watch out, there's an iceberg under that little visible tip!

And then the rest of the day sounds like it was a parade of lazy mediocrity, as one newly over-promoted and over-dressed SEIU staffer after another took the stand. First, Cass Gualvez (left) admitted that she was MIA as a union rep. Apparently she was so MIA that the member who followed her on the stand was asked if he knew that she became his rep soon after the trusteeship, and he replied "I know now!" Then came Oriana Saportas, grinning horribly and contradicting herself about Kinko's and car trunks, and then finally Miriam Escamilla (who deserves her own post or two for other reasons...), to tell a damning story of how the defendants prepared to help members organize against the trusteeship (which the judge has repeatedly stated is fine), and how she was fully involved at every step.

Isn't it fascinating to see how SEIU hired all these staffers who took part in such terrible treachery against workers, and made them all directors of something or other just a few months later! What could they possibly do to repay SEIU's forgiveness and generosity?

One last gem comes from a reader who found themselves locked out in the hallway in today's crack-down on bathroom breaks (Judge Alsup runs a tight ship, and you had better respect it!). Talking to another observer standing by the closed and guarded doors, Debbie Schneider suggested a little too loudly that she and her team should put on their NUHW t-shirts, and just barge their way in! "What do you mean? Why would we do that?" replied the observer, sounding bemused, and forcing Debbie to explain that the judge would then think NUHW were the ones causing trouble.

Just a tip, Debbie - that kind of joke is supposed to be about an obviously ridiculous thing no one would dream of doing, not something your organization is accused of on a regular basis!

Reader reports to the usual address please, see you all tomorrow!

Tuesday in court - SEIU me if I go too fast...

2010-03-23T21:23:00.000-07:00

Well yes, I am mostly retired... and I owe you all a much better sign-off and an explanation of where I've been the past few months. But can we put that all to the side for a moment while we talk about THE TRIAL?

I just got a super detailed report on today's "proceedings", and I bet there's more on the way. So I make no promises about being back for good, but how could I pass up the chance to dish on this one?

But first (for anyone who somehow dodged the avalanche of spam email) here's what's going on in San Francisco right now: this is the week disgraced former UHW leaders will stand trial in federal court to be held accountable! Ok, sorry if I sound flippant, it's just that after a whole year, the shock-tastic word-soup is stale beyond stale, and I could write SEIU spam in my sleep!

But being entirely straightforward about it for a moment, this two week period is the end result of all SEIU's digging and deposing and lawyering over the past year. It's their civil case (NOT criminal, as they'd like to imply) against the leaders and activists who formed NUHW after the trusteeship of UHW, and this is supposed to be where it all comes out and gets cleaned up. All the rhetoric and smears of the campaign they've waged against workers in California have hinged on the case SEIU claim they can make in court this week.

Others have already made the point that this seems to be the incredible shrinking case - after asking for $25 million in damages to start out, SEIU are now down to demanding around $5 million, with multiple accusations and multiple would-be defendants dropped along the way. But Perez thinks that's not just down to incompetence or a weak case. At SEIU the lines between spin and facts have always been more than blurred, and every action is just a little hook to hang a giant sack of PR on. So why not have a trial just for show? SEIU can afford it! If groundless threats of legal action scare members a little, a real trial will scare them a lot, right? Think of this as "Puerto Rico Convention - The Sequel!" Let Perez know when the jumbo-tron of legal costs starts up!

So the trial began this Monday, but there was nothing much to tell you about yesterday (and not enough people had begged me to blog again). Yesterday was all about laying the ground rules and selecting a jury. Things began today for real.

So as Perez hears it, here were the five best moments in court today...

5) Playing Perez bingo.
Sounds like SEIU's section is a who's who of all your favorite characters from the last 14 months! Oh look, there's 'Hands-On-Edgar'! and there's Rebecca Malberg, and there's Amado David (leaning against a wall as usual) And doesn't that look a little like Steve Trossman over there? Reports say the jobs rush pioneers are looking a little worn, but they have new yuppie accessories ($400 purses galore!) to make it all worthwhile.

4) Nancy Herrera Barrett flips hair, rolls eyes.
Perez hears this woman is a star! If you need someone to make faces and purposefully misunderstand, hire her! If you need someone to be an effective union rep, or follow legal directions when under oath, maybe not. When asked if she had any notes on grievances, Nancy apparently replied that she didn't have any handwritten notes! What a cunning legal strategy!

3) Shallow Hal is actually very serious.
For anyone who hasn't heard, Hal Ruddick went to Yale! SEIU lawyers were sure to point that out, just in case anyone had any doubts about Hal's qualifications for taking over a thriving union, lying to members, and canceling bargaining session after bargaining session. Also serious apparently, Hal's hurt feelings when he got a leaflet that called him a union buster - so serious that he took the dramatic step of... telling someone at the office the next day. Apparently Hal "does indeed have a wife" though, so don't get any ideas about trying to slip anything else into his hotel room, if you know what I mean...

2) SEIU only really wants about $5 probably.
Have you heard all about how NUHW activists put members at risk and jeopardized bargaining and grievances? How they sabotaged the work of the union for months for their own gain? Well apparently not so much! Jaws dropped in court today when SEIU's lawyer explained that SEIU is not claiming that any delays or harm were caused to the work of the union by the actions of departing staff and members. It's just the time they allegedly spent planning it all in January that SEIU has a problem with.

1) The judge's "WTF? Then why are we here?" moment!
Perez hears that Judge Alsup was pretty punchy, and snapped at the NUHW legal team a couple times for trying to explain the full circumstances of the trusteeship and tell the story of why UHW fought back against the international. Alsup insisted that the lawyers stick to a narrow response to SEIU's charges (unfair and practically impossible, but that's the legal system for you). Readers say that things felt lop-sided, and the imbalance was frustrating... until SEIU's big moment (see 2) when as the judge asked SEIU to clarify their stunning reversal, a look of disbelief came over his face, and his tone changed. Seems like the judge is realizing that it's not just NUHW who are trying to tell more than the bare facts, SEIU are there for the PR points, and they're the ones filing charges and wasting his time.

So that's my rundown of day one, as reported by my readers. Sorry if I'm a little rusty, I've missed you all!

Where's Annelle?

2009-10-06T17:28:00.000-07:00

Didn't we just go through this with Rickman Jackson? Exactly where is the disgraced former Local 721 President, and what is it that SEIU members are paying her to do?

While the official SEIU story is that Annelle is now some kind of assistant to Anna Burger on the east coast, she is described as "Manager" for Local 1000 in California on a contributions form for Cathy Hackett, a candidate for the 2009 elections for the Public Employees' Retirement Board (CalPERS), and her address is given as "Commerce" (in East Los Angeles).

It's only $100, but it's bizarre, especially as readers report that no one at Local 1000 knows anything about Annelle working there, and she is not currently in the office, nor expected to be!

Mysterious huh? So what's up?

Look who else is back!

2009-10-02T14:33:00.000-07:00

Perhaps life as a sports agent isn't all he hoped it would be, as it looks like Tyrone Freeman is dipping his toe back into politics!

"Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining" says Tyrone (very aptly) on his new blog "The Blueprint for Justice". The blog - which Perez is sure Tyrone could make much more exciting - covers Tyrone's thoughts on the economy and unemployment (although not his own). He even asks his "mom" to get involved, just like he did at the convention!

So have a great Friday and go check it out! It's buzzing up!

Not to be missed - Part two!

2009-10-01T16:52:00.000-07:00

Here's the rest of Perez's run-down of the most important stories of the last month...

5) Another creature for "The Island of Doctor Stern".
As reported with far more detail and clarity by Herman Benson, SEIU took "Justice for All" a mile or two further at the start of September, combining four California property services locals into a new district council called United Service Workers-West. Because the new organization is a council (not a local or international union), it's subject to different rules - Stern can appoint its officers for the next four years, and impose bylaws which take control of the local unions' finances and (inevitably) bargaining. Expect to see more of this type of thing, all theoretically democratically authorized at the Puerto Rico convention!

6) Sonoma County contract vote especially disgraceful.
4,000 Sonoma County homecare workers had to attend an SEIU meeting to vote on their new contract, giving them only a two hour window at only three locations. They had no chance to see the new contract before voting on it, but were able to hear an SEIU sales pitch. At least one homecare worker reports being physically shoved out of the voting room and prevented from voting. The full contract is still not available, and of course, SEIU aren't releasing turnout numbers for the vote! What we do know is that the homecare workers now face a $2 an hour wage cut in a year's time, and will lose their Kaiser insurance and be switched to a cheaper plan.

Update: Read more about the situation in Sonoma County on this new blog by a homecare worker (who believes the turnout to have been about 6-8%).

7) 1199NY sick of picking up Andy's tab.
While major locals have pushed back on Stern's incessant demands for staff/money/left cover before, this is the first time it's really been public.

"There is significant sentiment within the union that is questioning the way the dues money is being spent," said one 1199 leader, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "There are a lot of people who don't want this war."

8) Bruce Raynor still a millstone/albatross.
The "Workers United" mess is still a quagmire, and Stern and Raynor are still sinking deeper in together! The raids aren't going well (PDF), WU is laying off staff, and Perez hears Raynor is just flat out unpopular at 1800 Mass!

It's good to be back! Did Perez forget anything? Emails to the usual address: perezstern@gmail.com...

Not to be missed!

2009-09-30T15:00:00.000-07:00

In no particular order, here's the first part of a quick rundown of the biggest stories of the last month...

1) Kaiser Layoffs
First and worst, this one's just sickening. Turns out Zombie UHW (specifically Mary Grillo and Veronica Chavez) signed off on the Kaiser layoffs in a backroom deal on August 4. The agreement shows that SEIU agreed to limits on workers' rights to challenge layoffs and set aside job security protections in the contract. Adding insult to injury, to date Zombie UHW are still urging workers to picket to protect their jobs, and Kaiser seem fine with that - contract specialists are regularly spotted making the picket signs on Kaiser property.

2) UNITE HERE rejoins the AFL CIO.
Unsurprisingly, UNITE HERE formally rejoined the AFL CIO on September 17, the last day of the organization's convention. Perez predicted the end of Change to Win back in March (really, you could tell it was over when SEIU started reusing the acronym for Change that Works), but it's great to see new strength for the AFL CIO come out of it.

3) Alejandro Stephens looking at serious prison time.
Former Local 660 President Alejandro Stephens is looking at up to 45 years in federal prison after pleading guilty to taking part in a scam involving late LA County Fed secretary-treasurer Miguel Contreras's (now defunct) "Voter Improvement Project" non-profit. Apparently Contreras hired Stephens as a fake consultant, and sent him money that came from charitable foundations (including Kaiser Permanente) under the guise of "voter outreach" that never happened. Annelle Grajeda is also named in the documents as having assisting Stephens with the fraud by helping her son pass $10,000 from the non-profit along to him. Stephens's own plea bargain leaves Annelle out of the sordid story, but names her son.

To be clear, this case is not the original set of accusations that Grajeda helped Stephens double dip from SEIU and his old job with the county, but a whole new can of worms apparently opened during that investigation.

4) The end of UHW?
After being destroyed in all but name this spring, will the UHW-W name now also be consigned to history? That's what Debbie Schneider apparently threatened to Zombie UHW staff at the beginning of September when she emphasized how vital it was that they win upcoming elections (oh dear). According to Debbie, major losses could mean the break-up of UHW members into other locals, and Zombie staff joining Kaiser workers on the unemployment rolls. Makes sense, especially as SEIU bosses have apparently been aggressively spending down the local's bank account since the take-over.

Part 2 tomorrow...

First things first....

2009-09-29T18:18:00.000-07:00

Congratulations to HHS workers at Los Alamitos Medical Center and workers at The Sequoias Portola Valley who voted to make NUHW their first union this week!

Results for the NLRB run votes were 35 for NUHW to 7 for "No Union" at Los Alamitos on Monday, and 40 for NUHW to 20 for "No Union" at The Sequoias today. The elections were scheduled last month after BS blocking charges from SEIU were thrown out.

After realizing they wouldn't get enough votes to be an effective spoiler, SEIU pulled their name off the ballot at Los Alamitos last week (they never even tried at The Sequoias). There's now growing pressure on them to back off on other elections where it's clear they have no real interest in representing workers (like Kaiser?). Still, it sounds like SEIU swung into action as the boss's volunteer skunk team, reportedly calling workers the night before the election to say...

"I'm calling from the union, tomorrow is the election. Do you know what the next step is? Strike to get a contract!".

No word on who was behind that (failed) stroke of genius, but Amado David is famous among organizers who've worked with him for trying similar last-minute stunts.

No word (yet?) either on who's responsible for one of the most myopic, sour, and revealing "SEIU-UHW" (or is it "UHW-SEIU"?) emails to date - SEIU's last minute pronouncement that because Los Alamitos and Sequoias workers were forming a union for the first time rather than leaving SEIU for NUHW, it all didn't really count anyway! While SEIU seem proud to make it plenty clear that if workers aren't part of a massive chain or another union they're not worth the trouble, the picture looks a little different if you're actually one of those workers!

Well, rock on to the new NUHW members who'll now have the right to a voice in their workplace, and rock on to the SEIU communications department for letting their true colors show and putting (pre-trusteeship fake) "Pops Hardy" in charge of their email outreach!

Perez will be back....

2009-09-26T12:37:00.000-07:00

...and making up for lost time early this week! Many thanks to all my well wishers and contributors...

Dave tries to go "old school" on UNITE HERE Local 2!

2009-08-24T08:21:00.000-07:00

This is from last week and should have been posted earlier. As one reader put it, it's "important and disgusting"!

Well, here's one way to "stop with the politics"...

2009-08-21T18:56:00.000-07:00

Just walk out!

Here's SEIU management slinking out of bargaining with international staff union UUR... That's Judith McCullough doing the talking, with Michelle Healy sitting to her right. Who are the other two?

Update: That's Mets fan and former 32BJ staffer Arun Ivatury sitting (and sighing) to Judith's left.

And here's UUR's report...

Dear UUR Brothers and Sisters,

SEIU has walked away from the bargaining table with UUR a full day and a half early (see attached video). This is another example of SEIU’s bad faith bargaining. Below is background on what transpired.

Your UUR bargaining team came to the most recent scheduled bargaining sessions with SEIU prepared to bargain and immediately get into the nuts and bolts of our contract so we can get it settled as soon as possible. However, given the tone and statements of Judith McCullough’s memo on behalf of SEIU called “UUR Bargaining” dated July 24, 2009, it was necessary to make one last stab at establishing ground rules based on the fact that SEIU’s memo unilaterally attempted to establish managements version of ground rules for bargaining with NO input from UUR.

It’s been clear to our membership that trust has been broken with SEIU over the last year or so. You, our members, have told us that transparency at the bargaining table is vital to instilling confidence in the process of bargaining with SEIU. Therefore, it has been imperative to your bargaining team to make every attempt at transparency from the table and to you the members of UUR.

After receiving SEIU’s final proposal on ground rules, we agreed to accept 99% of SEIU’s proposal. Our decision to agree to 99% of SEIU’s demands on ground rules was based on the fact that we wanted to get to the nuts & bolts of the contract as soon as possible. Here is a list of some of the issues UUR was willing to accept from SEIU’s ground rules proposal in order to get to the nuts & bolts of the contract:

1. UUR would carry the burden of all travel expenses for bargaining sessions.
2. UUR agreed that there would be no recording or transmitting of bargaining sessions.
3. UUR agreed to separate SEIU’s responsibility to facilitate paid time off for bargaining team members to attend bargaining from the ground rules proposal.

*Refer to attached final proposals to see SEIU’s final ground rules compared to UUR’s final ground rules. They are practically identical, yet SEIU still refused to agree.

The only change we made to SEIU’s final proposal on ground rules was sticking to our position that UUR members have the right to observe bargaining sessions between SEIU and UUR. As we all know being trained by SEIU, observers having the right to attend bargaining sessions are a basic tenet of SEIU’s strategy at the table for SEIU members. At this point we would ask for nothing less for our members. Transparency will ensure that you, our members, know what is happening at the bargaining table and is what you have asked of your bargaining team in these contract negotiations.

Like you, we are disappointed in SEIU walking away from negotiations. But, it’s not totally surprising considering some of SEIU’s recent union busting tactics against UUR and our members that has created the current atmosphere of distrust. For example:

1. Unilateral layoffs of close to 1/3 of UUR members

2. The pre-emptive layoff of a UUR member (Brad Gonzalez) for just mentioning UUR in a staff meeting at Local 5 in AZ.

3. SEIU’s denial of UUR members rights under the contract to be placed in the SIT program (violation of Article V, Section 7 of the contract). Instead, SEIU unilaterally decided to keep them as Organizer I and continued with layoff procedures. Marquis Queen and Helen Sanders are examples of two of the 19 UUR members who were denied entrance into the SIT program.

4. SEIU’s use of divide and conquer tactics. For example: Over 60% of those who were laid off were people of color and / or over the age of 40. Also, 100% of the 19 people denied self promotion to the SIT program were people of color and / or over the age of 40. Ask yourself…Is this what Ana Burger meant when she stated “We’re getting rid of the people that need to be gotten rid of.”

5. Denying members on layoff their rights under the contract to bump and replacing them with temporary staff. For example: Marquis Queen

6. SEIU’s attempts to bankrupt UUR and our financial solvency when it comes to representing our members. For example: Contrary to 25 years of past practice in bargaining, SEIU has put the entire cost of bargaining on UUR which includes travel from work assignments, lodging, expenses and docking bargaining team members salaries (in violation of the contract under Appendix H).

7. SEIU’s blatant attack on UUR’s elected leaders and bargaining team. For example: Chief Steward Sarah Solis, UUR President and bargaining team member Malcolm Harris and bargaining team members Denise McClendon, Marquis Queen, Quincy Sanders, and Gina Rivert. All of whom are people of color as well.

8. Another divide and conquer tactic is the use of temporary, contract, and Local staff to do Organizer I International work while at the same time they are laying off Organizer I International UUR members.

9. So many more examples to mention, but these are some of the most recent and glaring.

Who and what is next in SEIU’s arsenal against UUR? Many people have either been laid off or left employment in reaction to SEIU’s use of some of the worst union busting tactics imaginable. Like you, we are ready to get back to the table and settle our contract. We all want to feel good about the work we do and get back to building a progressive Labor Movement we can all believe in again. UUR is committed to remaining in Chicago through Friday prepared to bargain in good faith with SEIU. Our goal is to win a good contract for all of us. The question is…Is SEIU prepared to come back to the table to bargain in good faith and in a timely manner?

This is a call to arms. This is a time when we, as union members, need to stand up, stick together and show our solidarity, just like we ask the workers to do that we organize everyday. So, you as union members must take action to show our strength as a Union. We all know this is how we show unity and strength. These actions may include, but are not limited to: observing bargaining sessions, participating in public actions in support of getting a good contract, participation in the CAT team, creating a plan to strike if necessary.

Perez will be back tomorrow...

2009-08-20T08:43:00.000-07:00

Blank expressions.

2009-08-19T11:18:00.000-07:00

Last week SEIU organizers were handing out their business cards to workers as they toured USC University Hospital. Take a look at the cards, and fill in the blanks! Is SEIU just giving up on ever having permanent staff at Zombie UHW?

It sure looks like it! As well as the high turnover, there's the fact that as SEIU's BS blocking charges get closer to being thrown out by the NLRB, SEIU are sending anything with a pulse to Californiraq. Expect to see many more like Sharon Fuller-Bowman, an international staffer.

But does anyone know who Jesus Sanchez is? He seems to have caught on to the SEIU style, and won't even give up his work phone number on his business card... after all, why would he want to be bothered by actual calls from members?

Notes on the Kaiser layoffs...

2009-08-18T13:44:00.000-07:00

From a reader at Kaiser Roseville...

"People are getting pink slips as we speak. In some areas, like the business office, the contract is basically being followed to the letter; this is presumably because the redeployment process had already started some months ago.

However, in other areas, the contract is being violated left-and-right, but the workers are now being told that they are NOT going to be laid off, but there will be voluntary reductions in the workforce (try to square THAT circle...)

The Purple People have once again set up an information table outside of MOB 1 conference rooms on the third floor, and are "counseling" people presumably on the upcoming "strike" vote. I haven't gone down there yet, because I still get my blood boiling at any time I see purple shirts. No security has shown up on the floor, yet. I'll wait until my NUHW steward shows up before I act - there may be news coming out of Roseville soon! :)"

Keep an eye on awesome member blogger Adios Andy for much more...

Bad faith and harassment continued...

2009-08-18T11:24:00.000-07:00

As Perez mentioned yesterday in our report on SEIU's continued attempts to smash UUR, management harassment of the few remaining international staff continues...

Here's chief steward Sarah Solis's's email to UUR members...

-----

Dear UUR Brothers and Sisters,

Over the last two weeks SEIU has started its attack against our President, Malcolm Harris. On July 22nd, 2009 Malcolm was removed from Local 500 after being there for nearly half a year. His removal was due to accusations of poor work performance, disrespectful exchanges with management and for not doing his expenses. Michelle Healy, his supervisor at the time, issued a Verbal Warning to Malcolm on July 30th, 2009.

On July 27th, 2009 Malcolm arrived at a Workers United campaign in Pennsylvania. He was asked what his opinion of the campaign was. Malcolm expressed a critical analysis of the campaign and was subsequently removed. Malcolm's new supervisor, Secky Facione, issued Malcolm a written warning on August 6th, 2009 for expressing his opinion about this campaign.

On July 29th, 2009 Malcolm arrived at the Pennsylvania Childcare Campaign, for which Victoriana (Vicky) Baca is the coordinator. On July 30th, 2009 Malcolm experienced car trouble and took his car to a mechanic. He then contacted Vicky around 7:30am notifying her that he might be late to the office where he was supposed to meet with the team at 10am. Vicky suggested Malcolm take public transportation. Malcolm expressed that he felt this was an unreasonable suggestion given the fact that he was unfamiliar with the transit system. Vicky then asked him to arrange a ride with a coworker, which Malcolm did. Nonetheless, Vicky sent Malcolm a text message around 8:30am notifying him that he was to leave the campaign. On August 10th, 2009 Secky Facione and Vicky Baca held an investigatory call with Malcolm regarding allegations of insubordination.

We've all expressed our opinions about campaigns. Were you ever written up for doing so? We've all been late in doing our expenses from time to time. Were you ever given a warning for being late on expenses? We've all had car trouble and had to come into work late. Were you written up afterward?

I am sure the answer is NO, NO and NO! SEIU IS DESPERATE! They are looking for any way they can get rid of UUR leaders who take a stand. We must remain united! UUR plans to file a ULP. However, we need to take immediate action. Show your support for Malcolm by demanding a stop to these BOSS TACTICS and insisting management stay focused on the real issue at hand, NEGOTIATIONS!

Copy and past the following email below and send it to management by FRIDAY, AUGUST 14TH, 2009. Feel free to add your own personal touch.

Never giving up,

Sarah Solis
Chief Steward

.................

TO: Secky.Fascione@seiu.org, Michelle.Healy@seiu.org, Victoriana.Baca@seiu.org, judith.mccullough@seiu.org, unionofunionreps@gmail.com

SECKY, MICHELLE, VICKY AND JUDITH,

YOUR BEHAVIOR OVER THE LAST TWO WEEKS HAS DISAPPOINTED ME TO NO END. INSTEAD OF WORKING TO REBUILD A RELATIONSHIP WITH UUR AND NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT, SEIU IS FOCUSED ON DESTROYING US BY ATTACKING OUR PRESIDENT MALCOLM HARRIS. WE ARE TIRED OF YOUR BOSS TACTICS AND RIDICULOUS ACCUSATIONS. THEY NEED TO STOP NOW!

IF SEIU IS TO BE A LABOR UNION I AM TO BE PROUD TO WORK FOR, THEN YOU WILL RESPECT US BY GETTING BACK TO THE TABLE TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH AND LEAVE MALCOLM TO DO THE IMPORTANT WORK OF ORGANIZING.

- Union Activist

-----

If not now then when, UUR?

Perez looked up "bad faith" in the dictionary, and there was a picture of SEIU...

2009-08-17T09:18:00.000-07:00

SEIU managers still aren't bargaining with international staff union UUR. Like any bad boss, they're dragging the process into endless memos, ridiculous counter proposals, and threats of discipline.

In late July, ground rules were the supposed sticking point, with SEIU demanding that UUR bankrupt itself before they would chip in even a penny to pay for the staff bargaining team's missed work time or travel. UUR has recently been able to fund an organizer, needs money in reserve like any union, and would of course need to come up with the other 50% in SEIU's proposal...

After some back and forth on this and the rest of the suggested rules, here's Judith McCullough's summary of just what a bad boss SEIU is...

-----

July 24, 2009
TO: Malcolm Harris, UUR
FR: Judith McCullough, SEIU
RE: UUR Bargaining

I am writing to set expectations about future bargaining between SEIU and UUR following our meeting on July 20 and 21.

We were disappointed that UUR chose, after months of no bargaining, to spend our entire time together rehashing preliminary ground rules for bargaining. In March, we had agreed to set aside discussion of ground rules to concentrate on bargaining a new contract.

We believe that we should focus our time, attention and energy on settling terms of a new contract. There are numerous challenges that can be addressed in a new contract, and the sooner we get to discussing these substantively, the sooner we will arrive at a settlement. On August 19, we will come prepared to discuss terms of the new contract but not preliminary “ground rules.”

UUR again raised the possibility of recording our bargaining sessions. I want to be clear that we do not consent to any such recording. Putting aside the legality and ethics of one party electronically recording bargaining over the objections of the other party, SEIU and UUR have never recorded or broadcast bargaining in the past and such activity would impede out ability to negotiate a contract. UUR’s continuing interest in this is disconcerting, especially as UUR introduced a secret telephone recording between a member of your bargaining team and a worker at our recent arbitration hearing.

We think SEIU headquarters is the most logical location for bargaining, especially given the current work assignments and locations of UUR team. In addition, the mediator is assigned to the Washington/Baltimore region and he will not be able to assist us in meetings out of the D.C. area. Nonetheless, the UUR team insists on alternate locations. In order to move contract bargaining along and to try to reach an agreement on a contract, SEIU accepts your proposal to alternate meeting locations between Chicago and Washington.

In the “rough and tumble” of bargaining, things are occasionally said in the heat of the moment which others may find offensive. Exchanges can be in blunt terms. We will live with that. But UUR’s behavior on Monday went far beyond appropriate bounds. It was deliberately insulting, offensive, and provocative. And this is not the first time. You are on notice we will not tolerate any further episodes.

-----

And here's UUR's response...

-----

August 11, 2009
To: Judith McCullough —SEIU
Cc: John Ronches --SEIU
Fr: Malcolm Harris—UUR

Re: Response to memo re continued bargaining

We apologize for the lateness of our response to your memo of July 24, 2009 concerning bargaining. We are also disappointed. We are most disappointed because after months of not being at the table to bargain, SEIU continues to want to arbitrarily set the terms for bargaining – and in this case seems to be headed in the direction of bad faith bargaining.

We came to the table prepared to start fresh and establish some reasonable ground rules for behavior and conduct. We presented four proposals that conceded much to SEIU, but SEIU’s counters went unchanged. We had a long discussion regarding SEIU’s assertion that when we come to the table everything starts at zero, including ground rules, and all must be bargained. That is the reason that we presented ground rules proposals, and SEIU countered (see the attached SEIU counter proposals). If, in fact, we started from zero, then there was no agreed upon basis for conduct; and, therefore, we are quite surprised by your reactions to our conduct.

In addition, concerning the issue of meeting elsewhere instead of in DC, SEIU seems to have had no end of “concerns.” Yet each of them, one after the other, has been addressed. At the table SEIU was concerned about finding meeting space – UUR agreed to find it. Then, in your letter, SEIU was concerned about the federal mediator’s assigned geography – that was resolved when he agreed to meet outside of DC. Now, there are concerns “given the current work assignments and locations of UUR [sic] team.” Besides the fact that there are no UUR bargaining team members who are currently in the DC area, it is not for SEIU to determine what is most convenient for our team. In short, your concerns are unfounded and, indeed, disingenuous.

In the “rough and tumble” world of bargaining, as you put it, ground rules lay a foundation for conduct. If SEIU has decided that ground rules are not necessary, then you should be prepared to operate without those and move forward. SEIU will not unilaterally set the terms under which we bargain. Either we will come to a mutual understanding determined by ground rules, or the federal mediator’s presence will continue to be required. Anything else we will view as bad faith bargaining on your part.

-----

It's clear as the conference room walls at 1800 Mass. that this is SEIU's big push to smash a weakened staff union.

And now management are targeting UUR president Malcolm Harris directly, removing him from an assignment near DC, and much more... come back tomorrow...

Stop with the politics?

2009-08-14T16:12:00.000-07:00

It's hard this week.

While many of us are thrilled to say TGIF (even if we work the weekend, there will be fewer SEIU staff around!), many Kaiser workers are now having to think about leaving their jobs for the last time. Adding injury to injury, they also have to think about how the destruction and arrogance of the past six months mean that the official union sitting down with their bosses has shut them out, shouted them down, and sealed a worse deal than ever before. And then yesterday, Perez heard that SEIU staff called security on a group of laid off workers who were crying in the hallway at their hospital.

It must be so much easier to "stop the politics" on a Friday if the union is just a game to you, a career, a business opportunity - rather than your best hope of being on an equal footing with the bosses who direct most of your waking hours. And it must be extra easy if you have a nice little place to get away to, preferably one that's paid for with members' dues money.

Just a dream? Not if you're Andy Stern, Eileen Kirlin, and husband and SEIU war room head Steve Rosenthal, who share a beach house on the East Coast. Easily affordable if you put Stern and Kirlins's salaries together with the $893,760 SEIU paid Rosenthal's company last year. Seems like a million miles away, doesn't it?

But there's nowhere Perez would rather be than in Californiraq with his friends at Kaiser and everywhere else. Money can't buy you love (and it can't buy you sunshine either)!

TGIF.

Bay to breakdown.

2009-08-14T09:30:00.000-07:00

Have you heard about the whirlwind tour of San Francisco Zombie UHW Homecare director Leon Chow is running next week?

Starting this Saturday he'll be riding the purple Barney bus (or maybe just sending his scab staff) on a program he's calling "seven districts in seven days". The Barney will be outstaying its welcome in a different part of the city each day, while staff "invite" homecare workers for a friendly chat about the union and to sign a "pledge card" for SEIU.

Let Perez know if you see it!

Try, try, try again!

2009-08-13T14:16:00.000-07:00

Here's a reader report on SEIU's latest blatant "do-over"! Could we get some UN observers out here in Californiraq?

"A vote notice was posted a month ago at Kaiser Santa Clara for a steward election to confirm one nominated person. The election was held with people watching and the person was overwhelmingly NOT elected.

Well, I guess then SEIU gives you a second chance! They posted another vote notice 3 days ago (since of course the new and improved Kaiser Division decided that they only need 3 days to post a notice). The election was scheduled for 3:00pm to 5:00pm for swing shift staff.

But it seems that swing shift staff went to vote at 3:15pm and were told that the election was over, because of course your favorite employee scab Diane Barton said so! Well, the members wanted to know why the day shift stewards got to vote, and why the steward from the Medical Office Building got to vote, but the steward form Swing Shift could not vote and neither could they.

Of course, SEIU announced that the election was won by Steve Khurla, the person everyone voted against the month before!

Can You Say "Rigged Election" at Santa Clara Kaiser?"

Kaiser layoffs kick-off...

2009-08-13T08:24:00.000-07:00

Despite annoucing more big profits in the first half of the year, after months of secret meetings with SEIU, Kaiser is now gearing up to lay off more than 1,000 workers, mostly in Northern Californiraq.

The severence deal - negotiated without rank and file members' involvement - gives workers half the previous time to make decisions on their options, delays healthcare benefits, provides no training or career guidance, and requires workers to accept an alternative job 50% further from home than in previous agreements.

Now Kaiser and SEIU are annoucing their deal to workers together, and here's how it's going down at Roseville this week...

"The HR people at ROS have basically taken over some of the conference rooms for all-day "meetings". Security is present down the hallway whenever employees are meeting with the HR folks in the conference rooms.

Just saw two of the Purple Gang openly arguing in the hallway with HR reps about who gets to give their presentation "first." The Zombies were insisting that they go first, and that their presentation would take 15 minutes (which is ridiculous, after all how long does it take to say, "you're fired, and we're not gonna do jack shit for you"). When the HR reps noticed that people were tuning into the conversation, they took it back into the conference room.

What the Zombies SHOULD have been saying to the HR business reps was that these layoffs are wrong, they violate the contract, and that HR should go back to the table with the representatives elected by the rank-and-file."

Know your enemy!

2009-08-12T12:28:00.000-07:00

Report from a reader who hadn't been planning on staying anonymous!

"Last night I came back from the cafeteria at USC University Hospital where I work to find two housekeepers whispering to me that SEIU was downstairs having a "captive audience meeting" with other housekeepers.

Another coworker told me that the SEIU organizer was thrashing me, Michael Torres, not listen to Michael Torres, and so forth!

So I casually sauntered my way downstairs to find a few EVS workers sitting around and two SEIU "peeps" speaking to workers about why it's important to stay with SEIU and blah blah blah...

The SEIU dis-organizer had no idea who I was when I walked in and said hello to everyone! My coworkers said later that they were all laughing inside because this young SEIU soldier was bad-mouthing me yet did not even know my face! How on earth can you trash someone and not even know they're standing three feet away from you? Being the class act that I was. I excused myself from the meeting and said I would return - had to tend to patients!

So yes, they're spending $$$ and its shameful that they are not getting what they pay for in organizers!

One for the contract hall of shame...

2009-08-11T09:42:00.000-07:00

Does that exist? It should.

Everyone in the labor movement knows that not all contracts are perfect, not all of them are even good. Sometimes workers can't maintain enough strength against the boss, sometimes something else goes wrong... But then there are the contracts that are truly horrifying, contracts that set dangerous precedents or where both the boss and "the union" benefit at workers' expense. These are contracts you gawk at like a bad car wreck, until you remember that someone is trapped and suffering in there, and it could just as easily be you or a loved one!

Here's one of those contracts... It's a new tentative agreement covering Kaiser security officers in Northern California. A quick summary...

FIVE tier wages rates mean officers across the region will be paid at very different levels:
Tier 5: Central Valley: $10.50
Tier 4: Sacramento: $11.00
Tier 3: East Bay: $11.75
Tier 2: South Bay: $12.25
Tier 1: San Francisco $13.00
TWO days of sick leave a year.
During the first three years of employment the officers must pay for part of their own coverage and they must pay the whole premium for family or spouse coverage - hundreds of dollars most won't be able to afford (look at those wages again!). Starting with their 4th year of employment they must still pay part of their own coverage, and a smaller amount for family coverage.
Security Officers will have to pay 2.3% dues per month, so that $10.50 per hour is really more like $10.24! Do you think SEIU are sorry this contract turned out so bad?

No other Kaiser worker pays as much in dues as these security workers, and no other Kaiser worker earns as little (Perez hopes there shouldn't be a "yet" on the end of that sentence)! Put that together with the five tier pay and the huge dues, and it's a real bad sign for Kaiser workers in Zombie UHW.

What a star!

2009-08-10T10:08:00.000-07:00

Word is that one of the new "resources" dumped into Californiraq is SEIU rising star Grant Lindsay! Grant is the aspiring operative who was more than happy to testify under oath about the sexuality and relationship status of an NUHW volunteer he'd met once at a party!

Grant's back at Zombie UHW now (he left for 721 a couple of years back), and Perez hears he's already showing off the drive and can-do attitude that won him his special reputation in the movement!

Readers say that last week at Providence St Joseph Medical Center in Burbank, Grant followed two female members into the women's restroom so that he could continue harassing them about SEIU! Even when the women told him to "get away", he persisted!

He'll go far (we wish)!

Edit - Correction from an eye-witness...

"Grant Lindsay did NOT go into the bathroom; he DID follow two of us (including a member) into the basement of the hospital, and when we went into the bathroom, he stood at the door waiting for us to come out.

Security came and our member explained how Lindsay was following us and she didn't know who he was and wouldn't leave us alone. Me and member walked off and meet with a group of workers in the hospital garage while Lindsay was detained by security."

Dave plans a quick getaway!

2009-08-09T21:21:00.000-07:00

Perez hears that Dave Regan will be making a reluctant trip to LA this Monday to address the unhappiness of members at Cedars Sinai hospital. As we've mentioned before, workers at the famously anti-union hospital have been dealing with an escalation of attacks from their bosses since the trusteeship, and are seriously unhappy with Zombie UHW's response.

From what readers say, Dave was planning to be at the hospital Monday afternoon... until he heard that most of the workers who want to speak with him work the afternoon shift! Now clever Dave has apparently switched his plans around to include only morning meetings with hospital bosses and Zombie UHW staff. Workers can't make it? Too bad!

Watch out Dave! Have your driver step on the gas! Don't let the people who pay your salary catch you!

Just because you're paranoid...

2009-08-07T12:07:00.000-07:00

Perez hears that SEIU scabs Sam Ogren and Ron Smith got an A for effort and an F for achievement at Marian Medical Center yesterday afternoon!

First, an NUHW supporter got a concerned phone call from the head of HR, who said she had heard there would be a big action in front of the hospital that day. Thing is, that was news to the NUHW supporter and her coworkers - no action was planned. So where did the story apparently come from? It came from old Perez favorite Sam Ogren!

Then later on that day, Sam and co-scab Ron tried to confront NUHW stewards meeting in the cafeteria. While Ron ran to let HR know, a red-faced Sam took a seat and got busy with his Blackberry (see left)!

Sorry you wasted your time Sam! The stewards were meeting to plan a trip to Vegas, as the HR staff Ron brought down to investigate told you!

(And you're not invited!)

No choice.

2009-08-06T15:07:00.000-07:00

Reliable sources say that SEIU now plans to dump even more resources (whatever that means at this point) into Californiraq, starting as early as next week.

It's hard for Perez not to make connections between this apparently just finalized plunge, and UNITE HERE Local 2's new public commitment to helping NUHW, particularly on the San Francisco homecare workers' campaign.

More news as we get it...

John Wilhelm spells it out...

2009-08-04T12:37:00.000-07:00

Well sort of. Here's an email from Wilhelm to Stern that's being circulated by UNITE HERE...

-----

August 3, 2009

To: Andy Stern
From: John W. Wilhelm

SEIU Raids: the Last Straw

Recently I detailed several blatant raids by SEIU on UNITE HERE bargaining units. I also pointed out that SEIU is probing many more UNITE HERE workplaces, seeking to foment additional raids.

Your only response was that these raids are in "legitimately disputed areas." In each example, I spelled out the history of the unit in question. These units are "disputed" only because SEIU decided to go after them, and thus you have deemed them "disputed."

SEIU raids continue. Last Friday, July 31, SEIU filed a raid petition at the Radisson Ambassador Plaza Hotel and Casino in Puerto Rico. These workers are represented by UNITE HERE Local 610, which has never been part of a Joint Board from the former UNITE. The Local 610 Executive Board voted to stay with UNITE HERE. Local 610's only sin in SEIU's eyes is that its officers, a group of rank and filers, won the Local Union election against a slate supported by Edgar Romney, and that it has remained part of UNITE HERE.

This is the third raid petition SEIU has filed in the last six weeks against Local 610.

You leave us no choice.

-----

...So what now?

The buzzwords guide...

2009-08-03T13:37:00.000-07:00

Is now updated with new reader submitted buzzwords and definitions. Please keep them coming!

SEIU buzzwords explained!

2009-07-31T16:55:00.000-07:00

To "Stop the Politics" this Friday, let's take a minute to try to make sense of it all. Sometimes it feels like as the week goes on, the jargon piles up on Perez, email after embarrassing email! What do words like "Metric" and "Silos" even mean? What is "The Table"?

So here's a brief guide to SEIU buzzwords, many of them sent by an attentive reader (thanks!). Submit your own to the usual address, and Perez will try to keep this list updated on its own page...

Now updated with reader submitted (and unverified) SEIU corporate speak, and examples of how words are used in a sentence!

(Left - a device designed for Member Input)

The Ask
Old, but still used: something you get a politician to do.
"So, we have a meeting with him set up for Monday, but what's the ask?"

Blitz
Brief, high intensity, highly staffed campaign. Usually done at the beginning or end of an election, but sometimes done solely to train staff.
"We should identify a couple of nursing homes we can blitz next month."

Buckets - The latest, a form of silos.

Buy to grow - A deal done with pension money to make organizing easier or irrelevant.

Drill down - Favorite corporate expression for a while.

Gets it
Less formal alternative to "On program".
"We should have Diane make the call, she gets it.

Immortals (the)
Stern appointed local officers. The term is used by local managers, particularly at one West Coast local.

Justice for All - You're with us or you're against us.

Lock and load - Ready to launch a campaign.

Member Engagement - keeping members busy so they don't cause trouble.

Member Input - Customer feedback, always comes after sweeping changes are finalized.

Member resource center or MRC
The SEIU call centers.
"Uh oh, I just got another complaint about the MRC"

Metric - Meaning unclear, but this must be used at least once by a dedicated staffer.

On program
Supports the strategy as presented by SEIU leadership. Can refer to a worker, staffer, or potential supporter like a politician. "Off program" is used just as frequently to mean the reverse.
"If we can't get Joe back on program, we just can't have him at the stewards' meeting Saturday"

Outsiders
Others in the labor movement who disagree with and question SEIU's strategy. Often used on mailers and lit.
"Don't let outsiders attack our union..."

Purple Kool-Aid
SEIU staff are often called "Purple Kool-Aid drinkers" by others in the labor movement because of SEIU's "strict" internal culture and attitude of superiority (it's a reference to the Jonestown Massacre). The term appears here because SEIU staff often call each other the same thing. One reader defines Purple Kool-Aid as "What everyone else drinks".
"Did you see Dan in that meeting? Ugh, what a Kool-Aid drinker!"

Quality Care
Who could argue with that?
"Healthcare workers are coming together to stand for quality care across the state of Florida"

Ramping up - What you do after you have stepped up!

Rebalancing - Something SEIU needs to do.

Right-sizing
Layoffs.
"Looks like there's going to have to be some right-sizing at Workers United soon."

Silos - Compartmentalizing (something SEIU staff do very well)

Smoke and mirrors
Making it look like you have much more support for a campaign than you do.
"So the cards aren't moving as fast as we hoped, but I think we can get by with smoke and mirrors."

Stepping up
Asking staff to do more than they are already doing.
"Your team are going to have to step up if we're going to make this blitz happen."

Strange bedfellows
Bad employers or Republicans.
"Bringing together strange bedfellows to win real healthcare reform."

The Table - An interest group, usually developed by SEIU.

Think outside the box - Very old, was used so excessively it became a joke.

Touching base
Used either to play it casual and conceal your actual reasons for a meeting, or when you know you should talk to someone, but you don't want to!
"We really should touch base over the weekend about what happened with David and that rental car"

Value add - The extra incentive given to the boss to sweeten a deal, eg lobbying or (according to one reader) pension investments.
"But what's the value add for them? We should set up a call with political..."

Worker piece
The section of a campaign that involves building worker support (or the illusion of worker support).
"How will this billboard effect the worker piece?" "Who cares? The shareholders hate it!"

"Working Conference on Innovation and Quality"

2009-07-31T15:02:00.000-07:00

Remember that Public Sector meeting we were talking about? Well, no word yet on the details of the new dues increase, but here's a report from a reader on the rest of the thing...

"So... the conference was interesting to say the least...

Annelle Grajeda's speaking time was kept to a minimum. Someone really clamped down on her ability to be seen at the podium.

Burger and Stern made their appearances (hat waving, Yankees coach-style.) But the room was really... I dunno. I mean, Bruce Boccardy from 888 was there and had to be in groups with folks from 1021, 721, etc. There was a concerted effort to keep people penned and "on message" but you can't stop people from talking to one another.

I watched this kid from Local 500 during mealtime try and talk up 888's work in getting a new executive board off the ground, and saw the laser-like eyes bore into him from other people at the table! Interesting how we're all about love and celebrating during the "conference" but yet you can't even mention the "past".

And then there was a weird moment where they held a kind of emergency meeting with some upper level staff about the situation with UNITE HERE, specifically about a deal being reached!"

All the usual suspects...

2009-07-31T13:31:00.000-07:00

This email from an NUHW volunteer and former Kaiser employee to Kaiser Permanente labor relations gives a pretty good snapshot of Zombie UHW's M.O. there these days. It's not very subtle, and it's not very smart!

-----

From: Kathy Baca
Subject: Bellflower July 21, 2009 incident
To: Arlene Peasnall
Cc: Cristina A Saucedo-Garcia
Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2009, 8:15 PM

Arlene, Christina

As a former Kaiser Employee of 34 years and a member of Local 399 and UHW I have never in all those years experienced the unprofessionalism of Union Staff that I experienced last night at Bellflower. When I was employed by UHW we were required to be respectful and professional in the workplace.

On Tuesday July 21, 2009 I was sitting with a few members having dinner in the cafeteria when approximately 25 SEIU members/staff/contract specialist entered the cafeteria, they all proceeded to sit down and mock us. Their behavior was that of aggression, and intimidation. This is a behavior that has been allowed by Kaiser at all facilities, UHW has cart blanche when it comes to being in the workplace in pacts causing disruption not only in the cafeteria but in patient care areas.

I asked one of the security guards if H.R. had been contacted as that is what SEIU-UHW Reps usually do when I or NUHW supporters are gathered, John Rochin replied, " I have a good relationship with H.R. and I already called them." My understanding was that Christina was on vacation but the Reps have the numbers for the other H.R. Consultants and did not call them, if they had I know H.R. would have been present as they always have in the past. It was evident that Jesse Smith and the other Staff Reps did not want H.R. present to see the harassment, intimidation and fear tactics that they were using.

John Rochin started yelling at me, and one of the members sitting with us (Eleanor Mendoza) got up and told John to stop yelling and then verbally started to attack her, we asked her to please sit down and not allow herself to be baited by them, she was so upset that he would verbally attack a woman. Jesse Smith not once ever tried to intervene and stop John Rochin. As a matter of fact he never attempted to control any of the staff or members. As a result Eleanor Mendoza, ended up in the E.R. last evening with numbness in her face and arm, the doctor said she was having an anxiety/panic attack. this member has her documentation from the doctor and filed a complaint with security.

As we gathered our food to leave John Rochin started yelling to the members, Losers, Losers, Terry Fernandez ran up to us and put her chest up to us waving her UHW t-shirt in our faces, the security guard asked her to step back, then all the SEIU-UHW starting singing we are the union, and shouting we are SEIU, there were food service members in the cafeteria having their dinner, and patient family members sitting in the cafeteria eating as well.

Also, a lost time member from Sunset (nickname Tree) stood in front of a member who is now working as a volunteer for NUHW and said to him " You better not be talking shit, and then proceeded to say to him I am going to kick your ass". This member (Tree) was pacing in front of our table the whole time that we were in the cafeteria. Again, intimidating and fear tactics.

As we were leaving Tree came up to my face, his whole body hovering over me, with maybe an inch in-between us and would not move, I asked security to please have him move but security would not, he just kept nodding his head saying to me okay. This member is over 6ft tall vs my 5ft, he was using it to cause fear and intimidation.

It got so loud in the cafeteria that an evening shift supervisor Pat Villanueva (I believe that is her last name) came into the eating area and asked to keep it low, which of course did not happen but only got louder, especially when we gathered our food to leave, One of the lost timers (Geanice Richardson) ran up to the supervisor to hand her flyer's, and I made a comment, she is a supervisor not a union employee, Pat Villanueva turned around and responded to me, I can take it and read it, (so much for neutrality).

after we left a security guard escorted Eleanor to the security office to file a complaint, when Eleanor was leaving the security office Elma Maynard, and Erika Gutierrez were standing across from the security office with members in the parking structure and the members started yelling that Sal Roselli is a "faggot", Elma or Erika did not ask them to stop.

I am sending this to inform you that all members, or anyone on Kaiser premises be protected from harm and harassment, and if any member/person should be attacked, intimidated, threatened or harmed we will hold Kaiser responsible. Kaiser security is there to protect all.

By the way, I sent an e-mail to you in March regarding the behavior on Kaiser premises at a membership meeting regarding the behavior of Tinesha Thomas that has not been addressed . Yet, when a member files a corporate compliance complaint that is addressed immediately. Seems disparate to me.

I have listed below the names of people that I recognized. Also attached are some photos that were taken and I will send you a video as well when I get it.

Respectfully submitted,

Kathy Baca
NUHW Volunteer

UHW Reps that were present:
Jesse Smith - Director
John Rochin - Bellflower
Elma Maynard - Baldwin Park
Erika Gutierrez - Bellflower
Terry Fernandez - Sunset
Ernesto Rodriguez - Panorama City
Kristy Correll - OC

Contract Specialists;
Nancy Stengel
Sylvia Favaron
Brenda Tippins
Edna Clayton

Lost-timers/members
Darrell Jerome - Orange County
Mary Corson - Panorama City
Marguerita ? - Regional
Gloria Moller - Baldwin Park
Genice Richardson - Bellflower Satellite
Tinesha Thomas - Bellflower

Others who I do not know

Old school friends.

2009-07-30T14:32:00.000-07:00

It's no secret that Dave Regan and Eliseo Medina aren't exactly best buddies, but they seem to be able to steer clear of each other most of the time. Not so their respective factions! Dave brought some of his East Coast team with him, and well, readers say they're just like Dave!

"The Fresno office is in even more trouble now. A staffer named Carlos told everyone in the meeting that he is not there to "kiss no one's ass", not Dave, Andy or Eliseo, and he is not afraid of anyone! He got in a big fight with Eliseo Medina and Eliseo got so mad that he told him to fuck off in Spanish!

Dave Regan brought this guy from New York. He's riding in a rental car while other members ride in a bus, and getting a private hotel room at the Marriott.

There's a big fight for positions in Fresno, and everyone knows Carlos thinks he is the boss. He's been fighting with Lisa for a director position, other staff members had to intervene between them and almost called the police it was getting so nasty. Then Carlos quit the leadership committee and won't participate.

This guy is dirty, he did so many illegal things in Fresno. Through the whole election he bragged to everyone that he would call immigration on Spanish speaking workers. Shame! With that and that there is no Spanish speaking rep for the homecare workers it is no wonder people are saying that Dave and his staff don't like Latinos."

Perez gets a lot of emails like this, and a lot of stories about Dave and Eliseo. Nothing much about Mary Kay Henry though, as apparently she's back in Washington DC full time, doing what she does best!

Welcome...

2009-07-30T12:54:00.001-07:00

To our new readers from Politico!

And here's Michelle with the mop...

2009-07-29T16:43:00.000-07:00

After Professor Nancy MacLean writes back to Javier's "spam" email to tell him (along with many other things) that she would be willing to meet with Andy or Bruce but does not want to hear from Michelle or Jo-Ann, Michelle goes right ahead and tries to explain it all away anyway! She just can't resist throwing in a little snark though..

Update: By request, Perez notes that this exchange was posted without the prior knowledge of Nancy MacLean.

-----

From: Michelle Ringuette
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 12:04 PM
To: Nancy MacLean
Cc: Javier Morillo
Subject: Re: Open Letter Regarding the SEIU-UNITE HERE Dispute

Professor McLean-

I just want to apologize for what Javier accidentally forwarded to you. My tone was flip and I was tired, as it had been a very long few weeks. It was in no way meant to convey the contempt that you suggest here, but I certainly see how it reads that way.

When it was suggested to me that Workers United workers were interested in reaching out directly to signers of the letter, I agreed that it would be a good thing for the workers to be able to speak their mind. Many are frustrated that their struggle has been mischaracterized. I would rather that workers take on employers (the high value target, in my lexicon) who are exploiting this situation, but I respect that they should be free to tell their stories to people who have weighed in.

To your point, I recognize that you are not interested in receiving more emails from us that show that many people want to see this dispute resolved. I am sincerely interested, as I understand that what we do looks like "spin", in how we can share more information with you and others who are committed to the labor movement. I recognize that the barrage of emails feels like spam, hence my snarky use of the term, but I am sincerely at a loss as to how to address your real concerns stated below.

Again, I apologize for what reads like dismissiveness. I would be most interested in listening, not talking, if you wanted to follow up on this.

Sincerely,

Michelle Ringuette

202.341.7057

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 27, 2009, at 11:24, "Nancy MacLean" wrote:

Dear Javier Morillo,

Thank you for your response to my sending of the “Open Letter of Concern about SEIU’s Interference in UNITE HERE.” I welcome your acknowledgment that it is a good thing for faculty supporters of the labor movement to be concerned about the serious trouble it faces at the present moment and appreciate your openness to dialogue. I was taken aback, however, by your mistaken assumptions and patronizing tone. You also, by the way, inadvertently sent along an internal SEIU email chain with the union’s communication officials that disparages signers of our letter and tries to reduce our concern to “misunderstanding.” (That chain appears at the end here).

You are wrong to assume that I and other organizers of this effort believe that the conflict between SEIU and UNITE-HERE is “a simple story of good guys and bad guys” and that we failed to do “research and fact-checking” or try to get SEIU’s side of the story. We understand that there were complicated issues involved in the intra-union conflict in UNITE HERE and that no leaders of large organizations will have flawless records. At the same time, we understand the moral difference between acts committed in aggression and those committed in self-defense. What our letter expressed “concern” about was SEIU’s divisive intervention in a dispute that otherwise would have been addressed by a constitutional, democratic process internal to UNITE HERE. And we well understand, as do others observing this conflict, that Workers United would never have been viable without the monies provided by SEIU and the practical assistance of SEIU organizers on the ground. I and others have read literally reams of documents now from both sides, including the internal memo from the Workers United Chief of Staff which speaks of the need to “manifest the reality of a rival union in the hospitality industry.”

You accuse me and other signers of failing to respectfully listen to your organization’s side of the story. This, too, is untrue. Before our Open Letter of Concern went out, the organizers of the letter and a number of other labor historians had a long meeting with SEIU International Vice-President Tom Balanoff. There was a frank and not unfriendly exchange of views. While all of us respect Tom’s long history of dedicated service to the labor movement, his rationales for Bruce Raynor’s actions and SEIU’s conduct were unpersuasive. They deepened our concern rather than alleviating it. I personally also heard the New England UNITE HERE Joint Board Manager Warren Pepicelli speak very movingly about being party to high-level SEIU/Workers United strategy sessions wherein the planned (and since executed) attack on UNITE HERE was laid out in all its ugliness, in a way that prompted him to a painful break with friends and allies of a lifetime to stay with UNITE HERE because of the principles involved. Others in our group had discussions with people like Mark Levinson and Joshua Freeman.

We have of course also read the e-mail postings from Andy Stern and Bruce Raynor. But we don’t think they tell the full story; indeed, they distort the truth. On the crucial issue of continuing raids in the HERE’s traditional jurisdiction, public NLRB petitions and other reports make it clear that the SEIU claim that it has “ceased all hostilities and incursions” “back in April” belies the on-the-ground reality.

Which brings me to the last point. You seem to have accidentally sent your letter to me in an email string of internal conversation between yourself and SEIU Director of External Communications Michelle Ringuette and the union’s “strategic communications” expert Jo-Anne Mort. That exchange spoke as crudely and instrumentally of your own members (e.g. the plan for “setting a few workers loose” on us) as it did of the faculty signers of the letter (described as “labor notes types” who “aren’t high value targets” but who can be easily ‘guilt-trip[ped]” by “reminding them how isolated they are...from the world of policy, politics, and activism” through spin-control letters and meetings).

However SEIU’s Executive Board chooses to label us, the truth is that the faculty who organized and signed this letter have long been your supporters and allies, and have used every occasion possible–until recent events-- to hold up SEIU (along with UNITE HERE) as the best hope of the labor movement and of our country as a whole on most of the pressing policy challenges we face. We have done this in our scholarship (I myself in two books and numerous articles), in our public lectures to community as well as academic audiences, in our relations with foundations and public officials, and in our teaching and mentoring of students, which has brought you many a staff member and student ally.

You need to know that we are not as clueless and unconnected as your e-mail exchanges imagine. We are not only well-informed about SEIU’s involvement in the UNITE HERE controversy, but also about what many of our colleagues see as a disastrous trusteeship at UHW in California. Due to the choices of its leadership, SEIU really is in danger of losing the good will and long-time support of hundreds of pro-labor progressives, in the academy and out. I cannot believe this is an outcome you want.

The letter organizers would be willing to meet with Andy Stern and Bruce Raynor (cc’ed here to facilitate this), a meeting Bruce Raynor already suggested to Nelson Lichtenstein. We are not interested in speaking with either Ringuette or Mort, having seen the posts below. And, in any case, the point would be to discuss the issues with those who have devised and executed the strategy, not those who merely spin it. In that Mort has depicted us as “labor notes types,” however, we might well want to invite the meeting some actual Labor Notes types and others vitally concerned with the current situation.

As the organizers of the Open Letter of Concern, I, Jen Klein, and Nelson Lichtenstein look forward to hearing whether your leaders are interested in such a meeting in Chicago or New York. Now that we have direct lines of communication, it won’t help SEIU’s cause to continue to bombard signers of the Open Letter of Concern with misleading posts, as seems to be the current plan from Michelle Ringuette’s contemptuous assertion that the signers of our letter “all bought spot on our spam list.” Continued spamming would constitute a breach of the good faith on which productive dialogue depends.

Sincerely yours,
Nancy MacLean

"Really not worth it"?

2009-07-29T11:07:00.000-07:00

A reader writes to note that Jo-Ann Mort, the communications consultant partly responsible for yesterday's academic email fiasco, is paid $1,600 a day for her services to SEIU!

That's more than President Obama earns, and it's more than many SEIU members are paid in a month! That email was worth every penny of dues money though for sure...

According to SEIU's annual filing with the US Department of Labor, SEIU paid $315,687 to Jo-Ann Mort's consulting firm, "Change Communications," during 2008. And Jo-Ann and Bruce Raynor go way back apparently - her profile on her firm's website says that she was director of communications for Unite and the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union, "the predecessor unions to Workers United, an affiliate of SEIU."

Blind item...

2009-07-28T18:28:00.000-07:00

Looks like it's official "stupid email day" on Perez...

Which newish Zombie UHW manager must have been on autopilot when he admitted in writing that the local was indeed a hostile work environment?

This high flyer apparently needs a crash course in employment law after exposing his zombie overlords to a payload of liability!

Say what you really think!

2009-07-28T10:26:00.000-07:00

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear... For anyone still wondering what's really behind the SEIU mask, here's an ugly glimpse courtesy of Local 26 President Javier Morillo-Alicea, consultant Jo-Ann Mort, and repeat Perez star PR hack Michelle Ringuette!

In the process of sending a "spam" email (their words not Perez's) to academics who signed an open letter about SEIU's raid on UNITE HERE, it seems these three stooges accidentally included some emails that were less ready for prime time!

-------

[Dear academic/s]:

I received today the “Open Letter” you mailed to me regarding the dispute between my union, SEIU, and UNITE-HERE. I believe you should have received a response that rebuts some of the claims in that letter from SEIU. I have included it below in case you have not seen it.

I did want to reach out to you directly and thank you for taking the time to write. As a former historian who left the world of academia because I was frustrated by the insular nature of the U.S. academic world, I am always happy to see university professors engaging with the world of organizing, politics, and policy. I mean that sincerely – I truly believe that our country would be a much better place if the world of talented researchers, thinkers, and writers were in constant, vibrant communication with the Labor Movement.

I am, of course, nonetheless disappointed in your letter not because I feel you should not be engaged in debates going on in the labor movement -- again, I applaud that – but because you and the other academic signatories to that letter, I believe, signed onto a set of arguments without doing some of the research and fact-checking you require of yourselves when producing work in your own fields. I won’t provide an extensive “our side of the story” in this email; the letter below addresses some of the more important aspects of our view of the dispute.

I will say, however, that I am honestly saddened that, even though in your letter you and your colleagues proclaim yourselves as “sharing SEIU’s progressive ideals” and as having “marched with its janitors, security officers, and nursing home workers,” that you would not pay those workers the respect they deserve by talking to them, to their union, about this situation before deciding that this was a simple story of bad guys and good guys, with our member-driven union in the role of the villain. As a historian whose work intersects the histories of race, gender, and the social constructions that create them, I am certain you are aware that rarely is historical reality as simple as a story of heroes and villains.

Finally, I want to say that I have taken the time to write this out of respect for who you are and what you do. Although I am no longer a historian, I am w ho I am today because of the work I did as a researcher, writer, and teacher. I write in the spirit of opening a dialogue that could avoid misunderstandings such as this one and which, much more importantly, can bring us together to do the important work we all believe in: creating a world with more justice for everyone.

Best Regards,

Javier Morillo-Alicea
President
SEIU Local 26

July 23, 2009

Dear Professor ******:

For the past several months, the dispute between UNITE HERE and Workers United/SEIU has consumed attention and resources at a time when workers all over the US and Canada need us to do everything we can to fight for them. It is clear this conflict is helping employers and hurting hardworking women and men. This must not continue.

Recently, you signed a letter weighing in on this matter. We are concerned that you may not have been told all the facts, so we want to share some background with you.

SEIU and Workers United have repeatedly called for UNITE HERE to join us in putting the interest of all our members first by resolving the issues between our unions. We must bring this conflict to a swift resolution for the sake of the workers.

As you may be aware, there have been a series of accusations and mischaracterizations made about SEIU by UNITE HERE over the past few months. SEIU called for a “cease fire” back in April, and we honored our commitment to détente. We have ceased all hostilities and incursions on UNITE HERE locals. However, last week at UNITE HERE’s convention, President John Wilhelm used a statement of solidarity condemning inter-union raiding signed by 15 leaders in the labor movementa letter we would have signed ourselvesto attack SEIU. President Wilhelm was quoted in the New York Times accusing SEIU of trying to “hijack” his union. He has mobilized individuals such as your self to sign on to general statements for his political use. And recently, he has made very public and untrue allegations of “raiding” activity despite refusing to submit evidence and engage in Change to Win’s procedures to resolve charges of raiding.

If John Wilhelm truly believes that SEIU is engaged in “raiding” activity, why will he not bring evidence or charges forward for a hearing?

There should be no confusion regarding SEIU's and Workers United’s position regarding UNITE HERE, but we will again make clear where we stand:

SEIU has accepted the framework proposed by UFCW President Joe Hansen, and we stand ready to let President Hansen arbitrate this dispute. SEIU would honor the results of binding arbitration.
SEIU accepts that hotels and gaming are the core jurisdiction of UNITE HERE, and we accept Joe Hansen's recommendation on food service being a core jurisdiction for SEIU. We have said to President Hansen and President Wilhelm that SEIU is not interested in raiding UNITE HERE members or organizing hotel or gaming workers generally. Both UNITE HERE and SEIU in previous discussions with Joe Hansen made requests for limited exceptions in each other's jurisdictions based on unique circumstances. SEIU believes that the arbitrator should develop a principle that applies equally to these disputed food service and hospitality workers and we should all live by the results.
SEIU is not raiding UNITE HERE, and UNITE HERE must end its attacks on Workers United/SEIU and its raids on our members. SEIU called for a "cease fire" last April and we have honored our commitment. However, while we stood down, UNITE HERE escalated its strategy of attacking Workers United members and leaders, interfering with bargaining, and asking employers to escrow dues. For example:
- UNITE HERE organizers have been attacking California laundry shops since December 2008. While thousands of California laundry workers are fighting right now for strong contracts for themselves and their families, employers like ARAMARK are using UNITE HERE's interference to refuse to schedule bargaining dates. Please see Attachment #1 for actual leaflets distributed by UNITE HERE.
- UNITE HERE has contacted more than 1,600 Workers United Employers and urged them to escrow dues and deny access to union representatives. At Atrium Windows in Texas, the company used this to deny manufacturing workers access to health and safety records that workers need to protect themselves from unsafe working conditions. Please see Attachment #2 for letters sent by UNITE HERE asking for employers to escrow dues and cease bargaining efforts with Workers United.
- UNITE HERE is sending organizers into Workers United locals to disrupt bargaining. In Philadelphia, 2,500 Workers United members who provide school breakfast and lunch to students cannot get the school district to negotiate with them despite the fact that their contract has expired because UNITE HERE sent in 20 organizers to challenge their rights to bargain. Please see Attachment #3 to read a letter from the Philadelphia School District explaining its decision to escrow dues.
- UNITE HERE has encouraged employers to stop bargaining for first contracts at newly organized workplaces. At the Courtyard Marriott Niagara, where a worker had been fired for organizing, workers are still waiting for their chance to bargain a first contract after John Wilhelm wrote to the newly organized hotel and told the employer to stop bargaining. Please see Attachment #4 to read a letter from UNITE HERE Local 274 instructing a Workers United employer to stop negotiations with "SEIU's Workers United."

This cannot and should not continue. Every moment we spend fighting one another is a moment that we are not doing everything we can to:

bring strange bedfellows like Wal-Mart to the table to deliver bold healthcare reform,
save workers' jobs,
fight unscrupulous employers like Bank of America,
challenge the Chamber of Commerc e for its anti-worker positions, and
stand for justice for immigrants in this country.

We are in the midst of the greatest economic catastrophe any of us has ever witnessed. Hardworking women and men who were struggling before the global financial crisis are taking a hit that will leave its mark long after the economy recovers. Our members’ hard-won gains – their healthcare, their pensions, their very jobs -- are now imperiled by external forces beyond their control. Unscrupulous employers are undercutting wages and benefits and threatening workers who speak out. And at a moment of promise in Washington, our well-funded and highly motivated opposition is gearing up for a fight to the finish.

We have spent our lifetimes working to give hardworking women and men their shot at the American Dream. The opportunities before us in Washington and around the country give us a chance right now to transform our national healthcare system. To make sure our members are part of the economy recovery. To pass the Employee Free Choice Act. In stead, we are at risk of watching everything we have accomplished become undone.

We simply cannot afford to let this happen to our members.

We have asked President Wilhelm to meet with us to end this conflict so that we can all move forward and be part of the solution as we rebuild our national economy. It is time for us to settle the dispute between UNITE HERE and Workers United/SEIU.

In coming days, we will share with you the letters of numerous leaders from the labor and social justice communities so that you might learn more about this dispute. We thank you for your concern and interest, and we hope you will ask UNITE HERE to end this war so we can focus our attentions on winning healthcare reform, employee free choice, comprehensive immigration reform and economic justice for hardworking women and men.

In solidarity,

Andy Stern
President, Service Employees International Union

Bruce Raynor
President, Workers United

Michelle A. Ringuette
202 730 7234 o
202 341 7057 m

www.seiu.org

-----

From: Javier Morillo JMorillo@seiu26.org
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 12:18 PM
To: Jo-Ann Mort; Michelle Ringuette; Jo-Ann Mort
Subject: RE: would love to touch base with you

So here's my thought -- in addition to the general info spam they'll be receiving from now, I suggest we send to each of these academics a brief communication that;

Shames them just a little bit for signing onto something without knowing all the facts - subtly, of course, while also talking about the productive relationship SEIU and the labor movement have had and should have with academia. I can work on that in a way that also makes the point that theory and praxis can coexist but only when there is open, honest communication (Nothing guilt-trips an academic more than reminding them how isolated they are, in this country, from the world of policy, politics, and activism. It's why I left).
Gives a few key facts. I like today's letter from Andy to Willhelm because it hits directly to the charges in their open letter.
Most importantly, I think we should invite them to something. We say something like "we have members and leaders across the country. Please give us the opportunity to talk with you about the issues your letter brings up as well as our broader concerns about20the labor movement." We can offer a variety of venues -- one on one meetings, conference calls, etc.

Then we organize these meetings. I do think it's important that we dedicate the time and energy to this. Get leaders and members from each state to volunteer to hold the meetings that are requested (I actually doubt few will take us up on it). It would be more work on the front end, but especially for the more prominent names maybe we have this communication signed by leaders and members from their state.

What do you think?

javier

-----Original Message-----
From: Jo-Ann Mort joannmort@mac.com
Sent: Thu 7/23/2009 7:12 AM
To: Michelle Ringuette; Jo-Ann Mort; Javier Morillo
Subject: Re: would love to touch base with you

I still think we sadly need to target Nelson in a positive way-most of these academics really are not worth it-but spamming them sounds like what they deserve!!

On 7/23/09 8:07 AM, "Michelle Ringuette" Michelle.Ringuette@seiu.org
wrote:

And just to add in here, last night we discussed setting a few workers loose on people and lettling them call some of the academics. I know these aren't high value targets, but I firmly believe people shouldnot be permitted to do drive bys. They are all getting a letter this am and they all bought spot on our spam list.

Michelle A. Ringuette
Service Employees International Union
202 730 7234 w
202 341 7057 m

-----Original Message-----
From: Jo-Ann Mort joannmort@me.com
Sent: Thu 23-Jul-09 3:51 AM
To: Javier Morillo
Cc: Michelle Ringuette
Subject: would love to touch base with you

hey Javier,
I am in Israel until next week but I am also working for SEIU while here. Michelle mentioned that you would like to help out re the academic/lefty mess re WU and SEIU, etc-i would love that!! I can call you from Israel if you want to talk or we can talk on email. I would like to start with you writing something that i can place and then, maybe we should think about you and a couple of other SEIU/WU leaders starting to meet with academics and others on the left to talk about moving forward-in a serious fashion. I just went through that list of 200 academics on the most recent letter and most of them are labor notes types-the ones I picked out whom we need to reach out to are Nelson Lichtenstein (for better or worse...), Jack Metzgar, who is a friend of mine and Mark Levinson's but has been hard on this topic , Andrew Ross, whom I already emailed and Andrew has worked very closely with UNITE in the past on sweatshops, and Jennifer Klein who is close to Nelson I know-and I know you talked to her-she is also a former student of Josh Freeman's- and why Alice Kessler Harris is on this list I don't know-we need to get to her too-

look forward to working on this with you.
best,
jo-Ann

Jo-Ann Mort
joannmort@me.com
Israel phone: (0)547-269-886
US phone: 718-954-0352
skype: jomort

-----

I wouldn't bother inviting anyone to anything if I were you Javier!

Perez will be back to normal Tuesday morning!

2009-07-27T16:59:00.000-07:00

Thank you to everyone who checked on Perez last week, and sincere apologies for the gap in posting - it's not for lack of material, that's for sure!

"That's a crime an' a shame!"

2009-07-17T23:28:00.000-07:00

It's not too late for some comic relief to "Stop the Politics" this Friday! Please enjoy this footage of Tyrone Freeman and Monica Russo's unintentional stand-up routine from the 2008 SEIU convention.

While in previous years the convention "action" involved actual action (in 2004 it was a march across the Golden Gate Bridge), at 2008's isolated supermax convention, delegates were stuck in their seats reading spam text messages about private equity - a captive audience while Monica and Tyrone yelled and strutted. Of course, just two months later it turned out that Tyrone was involved in some dubious financial schemes of his own! But hey, at least we have the deliciously bitter irony of this video to remember him by!

Many thanks to the reader who sent the (annotated) videos.

Ok, I know I said we could stop with the politics, but there's an interesting twist to this performance, and to the rest of SEIU's private equity fad (sooo last year!). Perez heard from a reader who says he knows someone in the private equity world, and here's what he says...

"I was talking with someone from a private equity firm that works on health care investments (properties, operations , etc). He told me that SEIU sent a delegation to meet with his firm to discuss how SEIU (a labor union?) can get in on this lucrative business. Apparently, the SEIU people were a bunch of morons (couldn't understand any of the investment strategies/packages) and they were completely rude.

My friend and his colleagues were dumbfounded as to why SEIU would want to involve themselves in making money off of health care properties and services. Anyway, the deal didn't happen, but I found it interesting that they were out there prospecting."

Perez thinks they're just inundated with money, and full of themselves with profit!

Bruce Raynor's bad day in court #1

2009-07-17T10:32:00.000-07:00

Bad, bad, day for new SEIU EVP Bruce Raynor yesterday, as it came out in court that his lawyer Tom Kennedy had apparently been billing UNITE HERE for the advice he gave Raynor and SEIU on how to raid the union.

Raynor might need to find a new lawyer now, as Kennedy has 20 days to convince the presiding judge that he doesn't have a conflict of interest in the case. Never mind, Andy has plenty of lawyers, maybe he can send Bruce Hands-on-Edgar?

On the same bad, bad, day, the court ordered Raynor and his new SEIU friends to "stop interfering" with UNITE HERE's New York building. All this comes as part of the Gillis vs. Wilhelm case, which relates to Raynor's work to disrupt the operations of UNITE HERE and interfere with its assets.

No one on the right side of the "labor movement" likes to see things go to court rather than be settled by organized workers, but this is a real case of "live by the sword, die by the sword"! And from what Perez hears, it's all just getting started...

Does this sound familiar?

2009-07-16T22:58:00.000-07:00

Dear Sister/Brother,

The purpose of this correspondence is to introduce to you an alternative Union for SEIU members who have experienced frustration through poor service, apathy from leadership, inferior collective agreements and a questionable return on Union dues.

A group of concerned Members, Stewards, Chief Stewards, Executive Board Members and Staff Reps have decided the time has come to effect change.

We feel the time is now to initiate change and break away from this big business, corporate model which, for the majority of members has become no more than an ineffective dues collection machine...

But no, it's not NUHW... It's from Canada!

In the past ten days, healthcare workers in Ontario, Canada have begun a member revolt against SEIU, signing cards to leave and join a newly created independent union. Here's what Perez knows so far...

In 2004, SEIU merged six SEIU local unions into a one large local for the Canadian province of Ontario. Andy Stern chose Sharleen Stewart, one of his standard issue appointees, to run the merged local - SEIU Local 1 Ontario.

Since then, Sharleen has apparently driven the local into the ground. Members who used to have the best standards in the healthcare industry, now enjoy substandard contracts, a grievance-handling system that's totally broken, a call center, and a cult of personality surrounding Sharleen.

According to one account, wage rates in some of the local's contracts are so low that workers took home more money when they were non-union and didn't have to pay dues.

So while Perez isn't yet clear what precipitated their decision to get out, members and a handful of former staff set up a new independent union NUHW style, and workers are signing cards to leave SEIU so they can join.

But here's where their story differs from NUHW's... Under Canadian law, workers can switch unions by simply having a majority of workers sign cards or a petition - no opportunity for SEIU to file charges to block their elections. Let's put it this way: if California were part of Canada, then 100,000 UHW members - including everyone in Kaiser, CHW, and at dozens of other employers - would already be members of NUHW, and SEIU would simply be a bad a memory for them.

Of course that doesn't mean SEIU can't try the rest of their playbook on Canadian members, Perez hears that SEIU have dispatched organizers with their usual rap - that workers will lose their wages, health insurance and benefits if they decertify SEIU.

If that doesn't work the (not too far-fetched) rumor is that Andy Stern will try to salvage the mess he created by putting the local in trusteeship. If he does, Perez bets that Sharleen will get a high-paying job at DC HQ just like Annelle Grajeda.

And who would replace Sharleen at the local? Dave Regan? Well no, but according to one report, the front runner for the trustee position is a high-up SEIU staffer who apparently rose to her position after her lengthy affair with newly appointed SEIU Executive Vice President Bruce Raynor.

Isn't it a small world!

The union difference.

2009-07-16T13:57:00.000-07:00

Perez had been wondering who SEIU were using to replace all the "laid off" organizers, and how they were treating them...

"I was hired as an OIT for the summer. I am studying labor relations and I thought it would be a great experience. I resigned within 2 days...after I found out I was doing the work of laid off UUR members for half the price. SEIU International is refusing to bargain with the UUR and has already laid off 70+.

I found the overall atmosphere of the place to be so sad...organizers told me this isn't like it used to be and that if they had the chance again, they would not pick a career with SEIU.

(Update) The organizers I worked with were great. They were really dedicated to their jobs. I could have stuck it out for 6 weeks and really boosted my resume, but I am not a scab...my father (LIUNA) taught me better than that. The UUR members were so discouraged at SEIU stance towards them and I found it ironic that we were going to people's houses, convincing them to support SEIU; we told them that SEIU would stick up for them and make their lives better...yet SEIU is actively destroying the livelihoods of 70+ staffers.

Where are these people going to work? What company is going to hire a former union organizer? Are they supposed to tell their new bosses that they no longer believe in what they fought for for years?

An UUR member put it best..."Andy Stern forgot where he came from"

In a bad state.

2009-07-15T13:07:00.000-07:00

Sadly, it looks like we can add the SEIU California State Council to the long and growing list of decent labor organizations maimed by the Californiraq crisis...

A reader writes to say that the state council is in "complete MELTDOWN" with local union political staff phoning one another frantically trying to figure out what's going on.

Rumor is that highly respected political operative, and SEIU "rising star" Ali Cooper has called it quits and is "going green" (AFSCME green) to help build their power in California. His departure leaves a gaping hole in the SEIU field program. And then there's the exodus of political director Tracy Zeluff, top lobbyist Mary Hernandez and other field and lobby staff.

Add to that that SEIU's reputation in California is down the toilet in the wake of corruption scandal at locals 6434 and 721, raids on CNA and UNITE HERE, and the UHW trusteeship (no wonder the state council have taken to calling themselves "State Council of Service Employees" in their TV ads) and you have yet another solid labor organization floundering in the wake of The International's corruption and greed.

"My dues dollars..."

2009-07-15T08:50:00.000-07:00

Letter from a "removed" UHW steward...

To: The Trustees of SEIU, Greg Moran, Joanie Grieco, and Vickisha Keys Rep chair:

In the recent months since the trusteeship SEIU and its “trustees” (if you can call them that.) have conducted themselves in a less then stellar way. Let me list some of them...

Promises from Greg Maron to our steward council that I would not be removed. (but I was)
Manhandling of stewards and members. (the most recent being Mary Henaghan trying to strangle a member…I could go into Ron Mallory but I don’t have the time nor the fortitude to even go into his laundry list.)
Lies to members about our pension.
Clearly using scare tactics and screaming Layoffs for Kaiser workers when they have not even indicated they want to go there.
Spending millions of dollars on a Fresno campaign that was won by a measly 200 votes. Whos money funded this?? My dues dollars.
Mailers to all members in COLOR, or even worse 50 plus pages mailed to all members. Who pays for this? My dues dollars.

But I digress. This is but one of the reasons I write this letter. It has come to my attention that Ms Greco was recently in some work areas TELLING members I resigned because my husband has health issues. Please stop lying to our members. I am attaching a copy of my REMOVAL LETTER and suggest that you check out your information that YOUR employers have given you before you go around talking about someone you do NOT EVEN KNOW. It has also come to my attention that Steward and Rep Chair Vickisha Keys (who is known for being anti-union herself) is also running around telling members that I am “against our union”. I grew up in a very Pro-Union home. My father was very active in the California Teachers Union and a steward. I have never been against unionism. What I am against (and continue to be) is LYING to members, HURTING members, as well as misusing dues dollars.

I do support NUHW and will continue to do so. SEIU has done nothing to convince me that they have the members best interests at heart. I have and ALWAYS will be a steward that looks out for my members and not my own bottom line. Shame to all of the scabs/stewards who have cashed out to enhance their bank accounts.

In Union solidarity,

Tara Gorewitz

Conflict and creativity at Local 6434!

2009-07-10T16:23:00.000-07:00

After huge "layoffs", it looks like everyone at Local 6434 is getting creative!

First, here's Local 6434 and Zombie UHW (soon to be one?), getting creative in Sacramento with a great action you can do with just a few remaining staff, some "political artists", and a couple of members!

And then here's current and former staff from the local getting creative on the internet!

Local 6434 is in a bad spot, because while things urgently needed to be put back on track after the Tyrone Freeman years, The International (who installed Freeman in the first place), were the last ones to do it. Reforms at the local need to come from members, not DC HQ, and what's happening now just looks like the same old International union busting and power grab.

One laid off staffer writes...

"Despite hard economic times, it's almost a relief. The atmosphere here is almost tactile: a blend of dread, suspicion, anger and sorrow for comrades who were brutally "laid off" or fired. This is the third round of layoffs which (coincidentally, I'm sure) started once some of the staff, tired of being bullied by Stern's International Henchmen (and Hench-women, too!) had the audacity to want to start a staff union (CWA 9000). I mean seriously, John Ronches (Trustee) and company have used every union busting tactic imaginable.

I've read of other locals being smashed by SEIU but damn, this has been a particularly grisly and brutal campaign! They've done everything but call the Pinkerton's on us. They've used a campaign of intimidation, stone-walling, and unconscionable firings. They have waged a one sided propaganda war against the staff union. John Ronches looked many of us in the eyes, and flat out lied.

They have offered staff, some of whom have up to 17 years of service a severance package of a maximum of THREE WEEKS! I guess good ole Andy doesn't much care, but many of us have left our families, homes and familial obligations, regularly for months at a time, doing the 'members' business and the dirty bastards offer us 3 weeks of severance pay, illegally fire our comrades and hang the threat of further lay-offs to those still trying to serve the membership and eke out a decent living.

No, SEIU didn't have the money to give us a raise or Cost of Living Allowance, but spent 10 million dollars in Fresno only to barely scrape 'buy' with a victory. That stuff about SEIU being the evil empire is not hyperbole. May the Force be with YOU!"

And now Perez hears that members are getting involved (no wonder, as management lay off "member satisfaction" staff and promise a "no service" model), and the situation is turning into a significant fight... Stay tuned!

Sam and Ron on their last warning...

2009-07-10T12:22:00.000-07:00

It's a little dishonest, but not uncommon, to lure people to a meeting with the promise of something important or fun (like pizza), only to have the meeting really be about something routine, or dull (like "droning on").

Sam Ogren and Ron Smith however, prefer to do it the other way around! While distributing a flyer for a "pension meeting", members say that Sam and Ron have been quietly admitting to a few members that it's actually a meeting to elect new stewards!

Perpetually confused and frustrated, Sam just doesn't seem to understand unions - a reader reports that last week he approached a former steward and said, "I've never seen a hospital like Marian! How can ten stewards hold a 400 member facility hostage!" Well Sam, it's not helping that you work with new rep Ron Smith, the charmer who was threatening UHW members with an old school ass whipping even before Dave Regan was!

Never a popular guy (never a steward or bargaining team member either!), Perez hears that Ron (sometimes known as "ol' green teeth") did an extra great job late last week...

A reader reports....

"Today Lloyd Taylor was working at Marian West when he was approached by Ron Smith. Lloyd was told in a very obnoxious, loud voice that he needed to leave the facility. Lloyd told Ron that he was working, and attempted to ignore Ron. Ron asked him to step aside and talk to him. Lloyd agreed, thinking it was in regards to a previous phone message left by Ron.

Our "Rep" (and I use the word lightly), proceeded to place himself nose to nose with Lloyd, screaming at him while flipping him off and repeatedly saying "Fuck you Lloyd", not once, but several times. It was loud enough that a man who was having his labs drawn with his three children in tow, heard it. The obscenities sent the lab tech into the hallway to see what the commotion was about and a maintenance employee proceeded to call Security.

Ron proceeded to tell Lloyd to meet him at his house and he would take care of things there. He kept repeating: C'mon Lloyd...You know where I live! Lloyd told Ron there was no way he would meet with him and Ron said "That's because you're a fucking coward."

We don't need or want this bullshit at our hospital! Let it be known SEIU AND Ron Smith, that we will no longer tolerate this behavior! The next time this happens a Police report will be filed! Hal Ruddick... Flannery Hauck... and Paul Matakiewicz, we spoke with you at length when you were here about Ron's temper and lies, and you did nothing! Shame on you!!! You wonder why MMC doesn't want you at OUR hospital? SEIU, your judgment is poor to say the least! We can't trust you to give us a decent Rep. What makes you think we would trust you to ever represent us?

Our Hospital employees are extremely close. Sam and Ron, you never enter our doors without the word spreading throughout that you are here! Employees are called on each floor, and the stewards you fired are called, even at home, the second you enter MMC. We don't like you and we do not want you to represent us EVER!!! We have contract violations that are not being taken care of because no one will deal with Ron. What a shame! Those violations that are taken care of are done by the Stewards that you fired. How many employees have you actually helped, Ron...none! The one you tried to help, got fired! Way to go!

Be warned, that we will file charges the next time Ron harasses anyone again! SEIU....Ron is dangerous to you and to the employees you want to "represent"!

By the way SEIU....Why bother coming to our facility again on the premise of discussing the "Pension" negotiations? It's a waste of our dues! NOT ONE member of our facility spoke to you before (except the one we sent in!) What makes you think it will be any different the second time around? Don't waste our dues money for Sam the Sham and the Ronnette to sit on their asses for twelve hours!

Mr. Cova, pay close attention to what is going on in your Hospital. We have alot of respect for you, and we love our jobs. We have the right to feel safe at work, and right now we do not have that secure feeling. We, the employees of Marian Medical Center are requesting that you intervene!

Hey Ron Smith....Can you spell R-E-S-T-R-A-I-N-I-N-G Order?"

What a great team! Perez is sure everyone at Marian was eager to hear them talk about "pensions" today!

Unity and Love

2009-07-10T08:42:00.000-07:00

By Toni Rangel, Pharmacy Tech, Centinela Hospital Medical Center.

While walking through the hospital hallway the other day, I noticed a t-shirt logo that caught my breath. I do not make a habit of reading people's chests but this one caught my eye. It said "Love and Unity." It was a logo for a local ministry.

This got me to thinking about everything that has happened to UHW in the past five months. The number of brothers and sisters that are missing from my life cut me to the quick. The stories I have heard shock and dismay.

As for the new people coming around, I did not trust them years ago, what makes them think I would trust them today? It is the old faces I will never see again that hurt the most. Now that I am no longer "allowed" to go to the local, there will be emptiness in my heart.

On the other hand, the brothers and sisters that are standing side by side with me are the ones I love the most. When the call went out to defend and protect, they are the ones who met me at the gate. We will be united. We will defend our honor. Honor is not a location, it is a state of mind.

Unity, love, faith, honor, my brothers and sisters, we have it all.

Who are you trying to fool?

2009-07-09T18:43:00.000-07:00

Remember last week when a long list of union leaders roundly condemned SEIU for raiding UNITE HERE? Well, here's Andy trying to assure the International Executive Board that everything is actually just fine and proceeding according to plan!

It's reassuring, until you remember that AFSCME's president just publicly attacked SEIU for committing "piracy on the high seas of organized labor", and that the president of the Operating Engineers called SEIU "corporate raiders" and Stern "the Darth Vader of the labor movement"!

When SEIU just suffered the "Pearl Harbor of the US labor movement", and is now more isolated than ever, who does Andy really expect to believe that everything is just peachy? He even claims that SEIU itself would have signed the letter criticizing SEIU for raiding UNITE HERE!

Can the IEB really be the audience for this extra myopic attempt at spin doctoring? SEIU members are used to being dismissed with this kind of double speak from the PR department at 1800 Mass. Ave, but Perez didn't realize that Andy tries to use the same BS on the IEB. Does he really think that IEB members are that stupid? Or is he just confident that they have about as much backbone as a piece of warm silly putty?

-----

FROM: Andy Stern, International President
TO: SEIU International Executive Board
DATE: July 7, 2009

RE: Update Regarding Workers United, the UNITE HERE Convention and Our Call for Binding Arbitration

I wanted to give you some background on one issue for our IEB call on Wednesday: the statement of solidarity against inter-union raiding released at the UNITE HERE convention last week.

Over the past few months, there have been a series of accusations and mischaracterizations that have gone with minimal comment from SEIU as we have honored our commitment to détente with UNITE HERE. We have declined to date to take the bait, instead ceasing all hostilities and incursions on UNITE HERE locals.

We have talked for weeks with many leaders including those who signed the letter—some who called for and still support our call for binding arbitration—to reinforce that SEIU agrees to the principles in the letter that oppose raiding, respects core jurisdiction, and wants a quick end to the settlement. Many leaders, including the Officers, were disappointed on how this letter -- which we would have signed -- was provocatively used by a handful of HERE partisans.

SEIU and Workers United continue to focus on what is in the best interest of all our members: bringing this conflict to a swift resolution.

In that spirit, we have repeatedly asked John Wilhelm to join us before an independent panel for binding arbitration. In fact, many prominent labor and progressive leaders have joined our call for John Wilhelm to settle this dispute, including AFT president Randi Weingarten, UAW president Ron Gettelfinger, actor and activist Danny Glover, numerous Central Labor Council presidents, Benjamin Todd Jealous and Julian Bond of the NAACP, NUPGE President Jim Clancy and others. You can read their individual letters here.

Because there has been some confusion as to SEIU's position regarding Workers United and UNITE HERE, I want us all to understand where we stand:

SEIU has accepted the framework proposed by UFCW President Joe Hansen, and we stand ready to let President Hansen arbitrate this dispute. SEIU would honor the results of binding arbitration.
SEIU accepts that hotels and gaming are the core jurisdiction of UNITE HERE, and we accept Joe Hansen's recommendation on food service being a core jurisdiction for SEIU. We have said to Joe Hansen and John Wilhelm that SEIU is not interested in raiding UNITE HERE members or organizing hotel or gaming workers generally. Both UNITE HERE and SEIU in previous discussions with Joe Hansen made requests for limited exceptions in each others’ jurisdictions based on unique circumstances. SEIU believes that the arbitrator should develop a principle that applies equally to these disputed food service and hospitality workers and we should all live by the results.
SEIU is not raiding UNITE HERE, and UNITE HERE must end its attacks on Workers United/SEIU and its raids on our members. SEIU called for a "cease fire" last April and we have honored our commitment. However, while we stood down, UNITE HERE escalated its strategy of attacking Workers United members and leaders, interfering with bargaining, and asking employers to escrow dues. For example:
- UNITE HERE organizers have been attacking California laundry shops since December 2008. While thousands of California laundry workers are fighting right now for strong contracts for themselves and their families, employers like ARAMARK are using UNITE HERE's interference to refuse to schedule bargaining dates. Please see Attachment #1 for actual leaflets distributed by UNITE HERE.
- UNITE HERE has contacted more than 1,600 Workers United Employers and urged them to escrow dues and deny access to union representatives. At Atrium Windows in Texas, the company used this to deny manufacturing workers access to health and safety records that workers need to protect themselves from unsafe working conditions. Please see Attachment #2 for letters sent by UNITE HERE asking for employers to escrow dues and cease bargaining efforts with Workers United.
- UNITE HERE is sending organizers into Workers United locals to disrupt bargaining. In Philadelphia, 2,500 Workers United members who provide school breakfast and lunch to students cannot get the school district to negotiate with them despite the fact that their contract has expired because UNITE HERE sent in 20 organizers to challenge their rights to bargain. Please see Attachment #3 to read a letter from the Philadelphia School District explaining its decision to escrow dues.
- UNITE HERE has encouraged employers to stop bargaining for first contracts at newly organized workplaces. At the Courtyard Marriott Niagara, where a worker had been fired for organizing, workers are still waiting for their chance to bargain a first contract after John Wilhelm wrote to the newly organized hotel and told the employer to stop bargaining. Please see Attachment #4 to read a letter from UNITE HERE Local 274 instructing a Workers United employer to stop negotiations with “SEIU’s Workers United.”

I know this is not where members need us to focus our time, so we have consciously resisted moving resources away from healthcare, free choice, budget battles and contract fights. We have invested our efforts in encouraging final and binding arbitration. If you’ve followed recent headlines, you know that SEIU is hard at work:

bringing strange bedfellows like Wal-Mart to the table to deliver bold healthcare reform,
saving Hartmarx workers' jobs,
fighting unscrupulous employers like Bank of America,
challenging the Chamber for its anti-worker positions, and
standing for justice for immigrants in this country.

I am proud of this union, and I know that together, the work we do makes a real difference in our members' lives and for the future of hardworking women and men all around this country and Canada.

The ball is now squarely in John Wilhelm's court. Workers United and SEIU have taken every measure, made every effort and gone to every extreme to end this ugly dispute. This will be settled eventually. The only question is how many workers will go without contracts or endure attacks by their bosses in alliance with UNITE HERE in the interim. It is time for binding arbitration with Joe Hansen or any neutral party. We can find a final binding settlement or we can continue to let this dispute hurt workers. SEIU has made our choice.

Mo Money Mo Problems!

2009-07-08T17:44:00.000-07:00

About that rumored dues increase...

The latest Perez hears, there will be a "special assessment" starting as soon as SEIU can figure out the details. The assessment will end at the beginning of 2010, but then there will be a permanent mandatory increase (got to pay for those $250 a night hotel rooms!). One local staffer reports that dues at his local are set to go up by $0.75.

Everything will apparently be finalized at the ominous sounding meeting detailed below.

Oh, and for anyone wondering what Annelle Grajeda is up to these days, here's your answer...

-----

To: Public Services Division Leadership Board
From: Annelle Grajeda/Eileen Kirlin
Update on Division Leadership Assembly

The Capital Hilton Hotel, 1001 16th Street, NW, Washington, DC
Friday, July 17 begin @ 1pm – adjourn afternoon on Sunday, July 19, 2009

Sleeping Room Rate is $216.40 per night (including tax) - Single occupancy; $239.30 per night (including tax) – Double occupancy

Here's an update on the July DLA. Based on feedback from leaders on the Division Leadership Board regarding budget concerns and other issues related to the economic crisis, we have decided to convene a different, more targeted event. The Working Conference on Innovation and Quality will bring together those locals who are at a point where they are ready to pilot a program around quality and innovation. The conference will provide support, ideas and tools for doing so. Not all locals are prepared to launch a pilot on quality services and you may choose not to participate in the conference; however, we want to assure you that materials, tools and support will be available and ready when you are.

Who You Should Send

This will be a working conference and it is our expectation that locals will leave with very clear next steps and direction. Therefore, you should send the people from your local - staff and members - who are most open to thinking about new and innovative approaches and who have the willingness and capacity to help move a program once they return. We are less concerned about titles and positions, and more about having a group of people who are excited about figuring out this part of the union's vision and work.

We think it is best if you can send a team because the likelihood of actually implementing something increases when there is a committed group behind it. We'd like you to limit the number of people to five, however, if you have good reasons for sending a larger group, please contact Bob Lawson at robert.lawson@seiu.org

BY JUNE 5th, please let Juanita Frazier (Juanita.frazier@seiu.org) know who you will be bringing. If there is a specific sector you have ideas for a pilot in, please let us know that as well.

Additionally, for planning purposes, we wanted to let you know that there will be a post Free Choice working meeting in June. We hope that locals will send the key people working on Free Choice organizing.

Juanita Frazier
Public Services Division
Phone: 202-730-7306
Fax: 202-350-6620
Office Address:
1800 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Please note: New email address: juanita.frazier@seiu.org

DANGER! BEWARE!

2009-07-08T12:01:00.000-07:00

Your union treats you like a child!

Here's the front of SEIU's latest mailer to Kaiser members in Orange County (the reverse is boring, but I'll post it if readers would like me to). Dramatic huh? Who needs democracy when you have Photoshop?

(edit) By reader request, here's the back:

Even more excitingly, today Perez is able to bring you a sneak preview of SEIU's next few mailers...

Remember kids! Stay away from those petitions!

Can't get no (member) satisfaction...

2009-07-06T16:43:00.000-07:00

Here's an update on those layoffs at Local 6434 from a reader...

"First they let the coalition staff, political staff (except one former International player who was conveniently promoted two weeks before) "member satisfaction" staff, and call center staff know they were all laid off as of June 30. Then they came back on June 23, and told the coalition and political staff they were laid off early, because management thought they might steal union documents.

One funny thing about it though, they only told that to the women in those departments. At the same time they told the women they were out the door, they were offering two men in the same departments new jobs with the union.

The kicker is that in order to get whatever paltry and embarrassing severance they finally offer, the newly unemployed will have to sign a statement that they won't sue the union."

So what are SEIU managers so afraid of?

Limited to two per household...

2009-07-06T15:29:00.000-07:00

Rumor has it that demand is expected to be so high for tickets to the Bruce Raynor roadshow that they will be distributed via an online lottery process similar to that used for the Michael Jackson memorial service in LA tomorrow!

Ok, not really, but Raynor is apparently making the rounds with SEIU locals, introducing himself and "Workers United" to the executive boards and trying to convince them not to worry about all this nonsense in the press because SEIU is stronger together with an extra 100,000 members (maybe) and the renewed hatred of the entire labor movement.

So get your tickets now, and don't worry that Stern just appointed an Executive Vice President (one of only six, and not up for election until 2012) who apparently stole $12 million from his former union!

Who says SEIU don't listen?

2009-07-06T12:29:00.000-07:00

Look at the difference between the sad little mobile billboard circling the UNITE HERE convention last week...

And SEIU's new (full page) advertisements in The Nation (see this great letter by Randy Shaw)...

It looks like after a reader suggested that "When unions fight, workers lose" had a more apt alternate meaning, someone at SEIU took note! Well, it's a start!

Sunday reading.

2009-07-05T16:24:00.001-07:00

While I don't usually make posts out of links to (more) mainstream news sources, there's been so much great reporting and commentary around the UNITE HERE convention this week that it only seems right to give you a run down of it...

SocialistWorker.org
UNITE HERE pushes back against SEIU
Lee Sustar reports on the UNITE HERE convention in Chicago.

In These Times
Solidarity Reunited?
Unions rally around shrunken UNITE HERE as it takes on its former ally.
By David Moberg

Democracy Now!
“Change to Win is Dead”
Juan Gonzalez on Labor Movement Struggle (video)

BeyondChron
AFL-CIO Condemns SEIU Raids on UNITE HERE
by Randy Shaw‚ Jul. 01‚ 2009

Los Angeles Times
Obama's curiously close labor friendship
SEIU chief Andy Stern enjoys unusual access to the White House, but some in the fractious labor movement question its value.
By Peter Nicholas, June 28, 2009

In These Times
Can a Union Divided Stand?
UNITE HERE dissolves in conflict … with a little help from SEIU.
By David Moberg

And for balance, here's SEIU/"Workers United"'s take on it all!

Please let me know if I missed anything you think other readers should see.

Inappropriate Activity...

2009-07-03T14:41:00.000-07:00

Memo from management to security guards at Alta Bates Summit Medical Center...

Try the North Pole next time!

2009-07-02T07:54:00.000-07:00

So where's Andy this week while the whole labor movement publicly turns on him?

Conveniently, he's about as far away as he could get - on a junket to Australia with Anna Burger and some local leaders, trying to persuade the Australian union movement that SEIU is some kind of example to be followed.

-----

Taran Shephard tshephard@actu.asn.au
19/06/2009 3:23 pm

Attached, you will find an invitation to the next ACTU OECC Organiser Forum, to be held at the Trades Hall Auditorium on Wednesday 1 July, from 2 to 4pm.

We hope you and your Organisers will be able to join us for the event.

Please RSVP on the attached Excel form to smartinez@actu.asn.au, by Thursday 25 June.

Since 1995, the Service Employees International Union has served as an exemplar of a union prepared to do extraordinary things in order to win for workers in North America. Australian unions have studied their techniques and adapted many of them to our circumstances. From the SEIU we got Organising as a union change agenda, Lead Organisers, committee building, mapping, the use of research, dedicated growth organisers, and much more.

On 1 July, we will be visited by a delegation of SEIU Local Union Leaders, led by Andy Stern, SEIU President and Anna Burger, Chair of Change to Win and Secretary of the SEIU.

Please join us at this special seminar, where they will talk about their union's fight to ensure Obama was elected and their current fight to ensure that workers - and not employers - can decide that workers can have a union contract. The members of the delegation will welcome questions from the floor.

Wednesday 1 July 2009
2pm - 4 pm
Trades Hall Auditorium
Ground Floor (entrance via 377 Sussex Street, or Cnr Goulburn and Dixon Streets)

RSVP: Silvia Martinez - smartinez@actu.asn.au on attached Excel form by Thurs 25 June.

ACTU OECC Sydney Office,

Level 3, Trades Hall Building, 02 8268 9700

--
Australian Council of Trade Unions

-----

After this week, Perez wonders if he'll try to stay. They still have the internet down there you know Andy!

Left out.

2009-07-01T22:14:00.001-07:00

Here's the sorry waste of dues money that was SEIU's delegation to the UNITE HERE convention this week! This truck circled the hotel where the convention was held until it got a ticket!

The reader who sent this picture wonders whether it should have read "When Unions Fight Each Other, Workers Lose", or whether Stern and Raynor are just trying to build support for their collusion with bosses?

And on another note, what's with all the mobile billboards lately? Why are they the hot new thing at SEIU - does someone's spouse own a billboard truck company?

No one wants to dance with Dave!

2009-07-01T14:48:00.000-07:00

Perez hears that Old School Dave was in Los Angeles yesterday, meeting with members at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center.

Sounds like Dave was planning on doing all the talking but ended up being confronted by members who told him that their staff rep was MIA - nowhere to be found when they had problems, and that they were sick of watching SEIU "executives" waste their money on expensive hotels, while Cedars management continues to abuse workers.

Regan's buzz words and promises about his grand organizing plans fell flat; he's now promising a general meeting on July 15, where he'll be unveiling a shiny new vision for hope and unity! SEIU had better use the next two weeks to come up with something good!

Fresno fallout.

2009-07-01T12:08:00.000-07:00

An SEIU staffer reports on the aftermath...

"The Fresno office is a mess, they do not even have a Spanish rep for the homecare members. Rebecca (Malberg) the director is not even there, she has been spending more time in Oakland and the Fresno office is in chaos. Maggie the Hmong organizer says that she goes to the Hmong community, but it is not true, she is using two poor Hmong people to do her job.

There is a big fight inside the Fresno office for positions, but what the members don't know that Dave Regan is planning to bring his own people to run the entire Fresno office. Lots of people that work there haven't received their pay checks. Go inside the Fresno office and you will see the big mess they've made all over, they don't even know what they are doing! Hello Andy! Pay these people and go away!

In Fresno SEIU made illegal moves and forced people to go to the post office. They even took the ballot, marked it and took it to the post office themselves. Over 40% of Fresno people didn't vote in the elections, and if SEIU would have played clean I bet they would have lost. I am so sorry I supported SEIU, and I feel ashamed now, but I need to concentrate on the members and give them my best."

"They say arbitrate..."

2009-06-30T18:52:00.000-07:00

More "binding arbitration" for SEIU from the rest of the labor movement!

Thank you... and fuck you!

2009-06-30T12:22:00.000-07:00

30 staff at Local 6434 just returned from mandatory 14 hours a day, seven days a week scabbing in Fresno to find themselves laid off. SEIU told staff it wasn't about money, they just wanted to go to an "All field, no service" model. But of course, they made no effort to reposition staff into the new roles.

Staff at Local 99 still have jobs however - they'll be sent to Sacramento for three months starting July 1 to try to "administer an old school ass whipping" to Sacramento County homecare workers trying to join NUHW.

How much clearer can it get to SEIU staff? You're disposable cannon fodder for Stern and Regan's collapsing empire.

SEIU unites the labor movement!

2009-06-30T10:22:00.000-07:00

The UNITE HERE convention kicked off yesterday, with labor leaders telling delegates what they really think!

(Picture by a reader)

"The raider is known to some as Darth Vader of the Labor Movement"
-Vince Giblin, President of the Operating Engineers (who referred to Stern as Vader 36 times)

"For another union to come onto your turf and take advantage of what you’ve built, that is piracy on the seas of organized labor."... "What SEIU is doing is bullshit!"
-Gerry McEntee, President of AFSCME (Who then led a chant of "Bullshit!" from the crowd!)

"What happens in this fight WE have with SEIU will determine what kind of labor movement we have. When someone comes after UNITE HERE, they come after the Laborers."... "We didn’t join Change to Win to raid and hijack another union’s members."
-Terry O’Sullivan, President of LIUNA

"A two headed fight: a fight with the boss and a fight with the boss’s lackey union."
- John Wilhelm, President of UNITE HERE

SEIU meanwhile sent a truck to circle the convention center sadly with a sign saying "Binding Arbitration Now!"

Perez thinks they just got their "binding arbitration"!

Don't leave...or else!

2009-06-29T13:55:00.000-07:00

Perez had almost forgotten about them both, but it looks like deputy trustees Hal Ruddick and Lisa Gude are in the spotlight again - this time in both Illinois and Californiraq!

Hal and Lisa, who are from SEIU Healthcare Illinois-Indiana, have been previously featured for the lies and intimidation they've used to try to impose the trusteeship. For those who missed it, Hal is the one who was caught red-handed by CHW's elected bargaining committee in the middle of a secret conference call, as well as the one called out repeatedly on his lies by workers. Lisa distinguished herself by scheduling secret contract negotiations with nursing home bosses and excluding elected bargaining committee members from the negotiating table.

So what are these two Chicago deputies up to now? Well, Perez hears they're using their skills to manipulate their own staff and create headaches in their home local...

As Perez hears it, in January Lisa and Hal brought a number of organizers from SEIU Healthcare IL/IN to work on the trusteeship of UHW. Now some of these staff are tired of being "deployed", and want to retreat to Illinois. But of course, UHW is short on staff, and the trustees don't want them to leave. So in order to manipulate them into staying in Californiraq, Hal and Lisa have begun telling them about impending job cuts at the mid west local. '"If you go back to Illinois now, you'll get laid off. Better to stay here in Californiraq."

Oh, but it turns out there are no planned layoffs at the local! Apparently, Lisa and Hal forgot about those things called "cellphones." After they lied to staff here in Californiraq, telephone lines started buzzing and managers in Illinois had to quash rapidly spreading rumors about layoffs.

So at the end of the day, Hal and Lisa accomplished a two-fer: not only were their lies exposed to staffers here in Californiraq, but they also undermined their own local in Illinois and burned more bridges with their former co-workers!

What a real gift Hal and Lisa have a real gift for clear-headed strategic thinking! Perez is so glad they're in charge of negotiating for the futures of thousands of UHW members!

Well qualified!

2009-06-29T09:23:00.000-07:00

A reader writes to say that it's fitting that Linda Temple, former administrative assistant to the UHW Organizing Department is playing a leading role in the post trusteeship Zombie UHW and is apparently Amado David's right hand woman.

Apparently her last job was working as a clerk at a warehouse where she helped the boss bust the union and helped fight her fellow employees' basic rights to organize and improve their lives. At pre-zombie UHW she openly admitted and talked about her anti union activities to the disgust of other staff.

So no wonder Amado David hired her back! Her experience is exactly what SEIU is looking for these days!

Out of the frying pan...

2009-06-27T10:15:00.000-07:00

Perez was surprised to hear the rumor that former public sector organizing director Neneki Lee's new West Coast job will be the unglamorous role of staff director at Local 99 in Los Angeles. Neneki, who was also trustee of Local 1984 in Georgia, just moved out to Californiraq with partner Laphonza Butler, who Stern will appoint as the new president/trustee of Local 6434.

Neneki is likely to have her hands full at Local 99, where management is locked in difficult negotiations with the staff union - staff recently voted down management's "last, best and final" offer. The main sticking point is health insurance, staff want to get rid of Local 99's two-tier system, which provides a deluxe PPO plan for managers, and a Kaiser plan for everyone else! The staff union requested that everyone be allowed to enroll in in the PPO plan, but management rejected the proposal.

Since staffers voted down the "last, best and final" offer, Local 99 Executive Director Bill Lloyd has started boss-style one-on-one meetings with staff members. Hey, Neneki - guess what your first assignment will be?

Confessions from within The Evil Empire...

2009-06-26T15:48:00.000-07:00

From a galaxy far, far, away (but quite a bit like our own), to "Stop the Politics" this Friday, Perez is proud to bring you...

Confessions of A Storm Trooper!

The following reflect the sentiments of a storm trooper during the period in which he was employed by The Evil Empire. The following are excerpts from the journal he kept during that time.

January 5, 2009
My first official day as a storm trooper for the empire has proved uneventful. I was fitted for purple body armor and indoctrinated as to the origins of the empire and its leader, the one referred to as the Dark Lord. I was also taught the manner in which to address the “subjects” of the empire. Apparently, the interests of the empire are strengthened by those who pay tribute to the empire; in exchange for some type of service that the subjects are expected to primarily be able to perform on their own?

I was also informed that I would be provided a fuel allowance for my star cruiser, lodgings in the galaxy’s finest hotels and empire memorabilia to disseminate throughout the galaxy to the empire’s subjects. I’m not sure yet as to why I would need to stay in a hotel for an “extended period of time.” I guess only time will tell...

January 24, 2009
Took part in my first “Blitz” today. Apparently, when targeting potential subjects that have failed to demonstrate the required enthusiasm to pay tribute to the empire they must be convinced/forced into compliance by an army of storm troopers. I participated in a number of house visits throughout the day and have been informed that harassing people in the wee hours of the morning is an “effective way to contact and persuade” subjects as to the benefits of paying tribute to the empire. I was encouraged to jump fences, camp out in front of targeted subjects homes and “assess” (funny, it sounded as is the subjects were numbers and not actual human beings) as many of the targeted subjects as possible. I’m not sure if the empire is capable of ascertaining the difference between “persistence” and conditions that elicit restraining orders...

February 6, 2009
Great news! I have been informed today that I am to take part in the empire’s battle against the rebel forces which seek to upset the power balance in the galaxy! I have heard so much as to the intensity of the struggle between the rebels, who foolishly seek to establish a democratically operated organization which seeks to represent the concerns of the galaxy’s workers. I have been informed by my commanders that I will be working in another part of the galaxy for an undetermined amount of time...

On a slightly less positive note, my commanders are fond of calling meetings to discuss the overall status of the empire, unruly subjects, potential subjects and introducing new methods of “role play” designed to make dealing with the empire’s subjects easier (as I have been told that sometimes subjects can become audacious enough to question the empire’s affinity for not providing any services or accountability for its actions). I’m beginning to wonder why there is so much unrest among the subjects of the empire; perhaps they just don’t understand that with so many subjects across the galaxy addressing the individual needs of any particular galaxy worker is an absurdity. Besides, once the Dark Lord has spoken there is no point in challenging his awesome authority or fear inducing rhetoric...

February 9, 2009
Arrived at the scene where I will be fighting the rebels after a 30 minute lesson as to the intentions of the self-righteous rebels and the contract which has caused the conditions of the rebellion. I’m not sure if I understand the contract in its entirety (hell, I’m convinced my commander doesn’t even understand it) but I am expected to defend it in the interests of the empire and stop the advance of the rebels by any means necessary...

March 2, 2009
I have been battling the rebels at a galaxy health center for several weeks now. Thus far, they have yet to demonstrate the financial ability to compete with the free spending ways of the empire. In fact, there is only one rebel who occasionally frequents the health center in which I am currently fighting...and if rumor is correct, the rebel is not even getting paid for his efforts! To think that one would work without pay- what could be the reasons behind such folly? There’s no way that the rebel actually believes in the convictions of his organization or that the galaxy’s workers should actually have a voice in the organizations which represent the conditions between them and their employers?

Also, I have been told that I am “listening to the subjects too much” and that the objective of my fighting is not in efforts to improve the conditions for the empire’s subjects but to defeat the rebels so that the subjects continue to pay tribute...

April 4, 2009
Worked a Saturday in order to chart the galaxy workers which work at the health center where I am fighting the rebel forces. I was confused as to the motives behind such activity as I already have a list of all the galaxy workers for which I am responsible. I asked why an entire day was devoted to enlarging a list I already possessed and was told “it’s always been this way” and that my lack of enthusiasm for our corporate encouraged arts and crafts fetish was not appreciated. I wonder how the subjects would feel if they knew that thousands of their tribute dollars each year went towards Arts & Crafts Saturdays? It’s a good thing we’ll never be audited...any semblance of financial accountability is the last thing the empire needs. Besides, the Dark Lord is also engaged in a battle with galaxy hotel workers and is far too great to address the concerns of his ungrateful subjects.

I have begun to grow weary of the long hours of which I am subjected to because I am “on salary” as well as probation and “should just be happy that I have a job.” My commanders have proved incapable of demonstrating any sense of time management and seem perplexed as to why working 50+ hours a week away from home is not welcomed with blind obedience and a smile. My fellow storm troopers are too scared to say anything and I have been reprimanded (both in front of them and privately) for daring to challenge the authority of the empire...

May 11, 2009
Today I participated in my first Subject Appreciation Day (The mere thought of it is laughable as well as insulting!). My commanders are convinced that hot dogs and key chains are adequate means of silencing the groveling of the subjects, at least temporarily. Rather than performing an organizational self-critique my fellow storm troopers and I barbecued in a parking lot and distributed the empire’s memorabilia.

Unfortunately, I have fallen out of graces with my commanders who now regularly chastise me for exhibiting a lack of visible support for the empire. In fact, I have even been accused of “working for the rebel forces”, being far too “friendly” with the subjects and failing to realize that subjects who don’t love the empire have only themselves to blame. I am having a tough time being evaluated by commanders with less education, people skills and compassion for the subjects of the empire than many of the young storm troopers which it has hired. Unlike the lowly storm troopers, my commanders answer to nobody. They routinely change established deadlines due to their inability to meet them, have no qualms making those beneath them work at all hours of the day and night and seem content in their smug evaluations of the inadequacies of exhausted storm troopers...

June 5, 2009
I resigned from the empire today. I turned in my body armor, brief case and “sensitive documents”. I always wondered why employers were so hesitant to provide health care coverage for their employers and I now know why. Continuing to work for the empire would have undoubtedly led to a series of strokes and/or heart attacks in the very near future and done immeasurable psychological damage; as consistent lying and the daily manipulation of others can not be good for one’s mental health.

I could no longer work under the evil and hypocritical veil of oblivion which governs the day to day actions of the empire. I am now content to except the inevitability of my employment at a coffee shop or book store which can only pay me a small portion of what I was making working for the empire.

I can only hope that the rebels are successful in igniting rebellion among the subjects of the empire and that the Dark Lord does not succeed in increasing his sinister grasp on the throats of the galaxy’s workers...

Should Perez start searching under his couch cushions?

2009-06-26T12:25:00.000-07:00

Is there any truth to the rumor that SEIU in Californiraq are about to launch a "special assessments" program, raising dues to make up for their deficit spending?

Answers to the usual address...

Dave and Eliseo get "creative"!

2009-06-26T08:36:00.000-07:00

What to do if no one in the real press is covering your pyrrhic victory in Fresno the way you'd like them to?

What to do if every article on the election says "SEIU borrows business' anti-union tactics" or "Is Fresno SEIU's Vietnam?" instead of the nice things you wish they'd say?

Well why not write your own "article", just like Dave and Eliseo (or their PR hacks in Washington DC) did for an email to their list this week? You can just pretend it's a real article, and it can say anything you like, even lies!

-----

From: Eliseo Medina and Dave Regan, SEIU UHW trustees online@seiu-uhw.org
Subject: What Our Victory in Fresno Means
To: xxxxx@xxxxx.xxx
Date: Thursday, June 25, 2009, 10:04 AM

Now that the dust is settled, we thought you'd be interested in this article about the Fresno home care election victory, what it signifies, and what it means going forward.

Fresno Members Choose SEIU UHW
Old-Guard NUHW Officials Show Their Disrespect for Home Care Workers
By Eliseo Medina and Dave Regan

In a closely watched union election in Fresno County, home care workers have spoken: They want to stay united in the Service Employees International Union -- United Healthcare Workers-West (SEIU UHW). Their votes show they want a strong, united union so that together they can focus on what's really important -- fighting the proposed cuts to home care services at the state and local levels to protect consumers and workers.

The recently concluded mail ballot election was between SEIU UHW and NUHW, which was started by old-guard union officials who were removed from office in SEIU UHW for, among other things, improperly diverting $3 million in members' dues to a bogus non-profit organization. The old-guard officers include former president Sal Rosselli...

Who's it?

2009-06-24T13:15:00.000-07:00

So if Dave is thrown under the Barney bus as Perez predicted yesterday, who will Andy set up as his next Californiraq trustee? Let's consider some possibilities...

Mary Kay Henry? Unlikely. Trustee was a long-shot career move when Dave took it on, it's looking like an even worse bet now. Besides, Perez thinks she's too preoccupied with positioning herself to battle Anna Burger for the SEIU presidency when Andy finally resigns. Mary Kay wouldn't want to be stuck in California, away from "face time" with influential people elsewhere in the country.

Dennis Hickey/Rivera? Nope. He was initially supposed to be a trustee of UHW, but backed out the day before the trusteeship - Perez bets he's still thankful every day!

Gerry Hudson? Possible, but that was the rumor before Dave and Eliseo took the jobs and it never happened. Gerry looked super uncomfortable at the Fresno rally, but at least he'd have his "sister" Mary Kay around. He has some serious liabilities though, In 2007, he refused to honor petitions signed by thousands of California nursing home workers and instead bargained secretly with the state's nursing home bosses. He's also never led a local union or bargained a contract, but that isn't usually a barrier to a Stern appointment!

Tom DeBruin? Probably not. While Tom has experience running a small local in Pennsylvania, he's best known in California for his role on Stern's secret "skunk team" that colluded with anti-union bosses to try to implode UHW. He also didn't fare too well as a "monitor" at UHW before the trusteeship (CHW workers kicked him out of their bargaining), but he was at least willing to try when few were.

David Rolf? Rolf is the dark horse candidate! A strong Stern loyalist, he was sent by Andy to run Local 775 in Washington. Rolf sent a large number of staff to the Fresno campaign, has worked in California and had a little cameo at the Fresno rally. However, it's a big liability that he engineered a secret 10-year deal with nursing home bosses that sells out residents and locks workers into horrible "template" contracts. Rolf's other liabilities? He's just as arrogant as Regan and has a personality that's as icy as Anna Burger's.

Looks like it'll be a tough selection process for Andy. Maybe he should just come out here himself?

File this under "Huh?"

2009-06-24T08:07:00.000-07:00

Does Andy Stern have more diverse expertise than we thought, or is it all just a bizarre mistake? Perez isn't quite sure...

Thanks to a very observant reader for spotting this!

Fres-Sooner or later!

2009-06-23T18:28:00.000-07:00

Sarah Jones (speaking) and other Fresno homecare workers at their press conference this Monday.

Half of Fresno's hotel rooms were being extra deep cleaned this past weekend, as the last SEIU scabs finally left town! While it can't have been a big shock to those running the campaign, readers say SEIU's close and dubious margin of victory was a shock to most at SEIU.

It's been said many times over, but I'll say it again, $10 million to lie, threaten, and intimidate your way to a 200 vote margin is no victory. While obviously everyone at NUHW wanted a huge win, and homecare workers are now faced (at least for now) with a union that's failed to stop their wage cuts and still promises to shove them into Local 6434, there's no doubt that this is the worse possible outcome for SEIU, which is now on the defensive against legal challenges and just plain looking bad to everyone!

Here's how homecare workers say SEIU clawed their way to that "victory"...

Threatening to deport a member (a US citizen) and his father and consumer (a legal resident).
Yelling and physically threatening - "I was at the door of a fellow homecare provider, explaining why I was voting for NUHW," said Phally Pov, a provider and NUHW volunteer. "An SEIU organizer saw us and ran around the corner. Minutes later two huge men pulled up in a car, jumped out, and started coming toward us and yelling. They yelled over me and wouldn’t let me talk with the provider. I noticed that the men smelled strongly of marijuana. I was afraid for my safety, and the provider I was visiting was visibly shaken. They threatened the member that if he voted for NUHW he would lose his benefits. When they were finished yelling at us, they handed the other provider a t-shirt and told him he’d better vote for SEIU-UHW."
Vandalizing - "I saw a man in purple walking up to my door," said Lesalie Kyle, a provider in North Clovis. "I had an NUHW sign behind my locked screen door because I didn't want SEIU harassing me at home. He rang the bell, and when no one answered he kicked my screen door in and put a bunch of SEIU flyers in front of the sign."
Stealing NUHW signs put up by providers (readers say that CalTex crew scab Al Chavez has been bragging about doing just that).

There's a lot more where that came from, and unsurprisingly, NUHW are filing charges and demanding a re-run of the election. They're also asking that the state count hundreds of ballots send in late by workers who didn't get a ballot and had to call for one - it's actually possible that those ballots could tip the count!

No wonder that the media are now calling Fresno "SEIU's Vietnam", although Perez thinks that's the whole of Californiraq! (here's a situation so bad it deserves mixed metaphors!)

The Fall Guy?

2009-06-23T16:38:00.000-07:00

Inevitably, Perez hears that Andy is none too pleased with Dave Regan's performance as UHW's trustee, and may now be considering giving Dave the axe...

By any standard, Dave has been a big flop. He spent $10 million of members' money in Fresno, and declared a landslide victory after just five days of the 15-day voting period. If the election results are overturned, it will be because of the vandalism, threats, and intimidation committed by SEIU organizers after Dave instructed them to administer an "old school ass whipping". Police reports and victims' testimonials are again the fruits of Dave's machismo, just as they were at the Labor Notes conference in Dearborn, (quips abound about Dave's body count, but that's a story for another day...) If election officials order a re-run of the Fresno election, chances are slim that SEIU will be able to pull together another $10 million and 1,000 volunteers from locals across the country, but doubly so if Dave stays on as the face of the trusteeship.

Aside from bungling the Fresno election, Dave has been totally ineffective on the political front. Failing to stop devastating cuts to homecare workers' wages, he was outsmarted and outmaneuvered by NUHW, which won approval for a plan to stop cuts for homecare workers in Sacramento and San Francisco Counties.

But perhaps Dave could have blamed Rebecca Malberg for his homecare failures if it hadn't been for his violent, butt-whipping YouTube performance, which has apparently earned SEIU bad PR (literally) across the globe. It's not too helpful for SEIU's plummeting image as a "21st century progressive union" when one of its top officers is all over the internet yelling about driving stakes into the hearts of rank-and-file members!

So you can understand why Dave's stock is not too high in the penthouse offices of SEIU's DC HQ. Perez hears that Mary Kay Henry has already begun a whisper campaign to undermine Dave among SEIU's top leaders, just as she's reputed to have done with previous rivals. Just how long can it be before Dave becomes the fall guy for SEIU's failures in Californiraq?

Fresno update...

2009-06-19T17:05:00.000-07:00

As of 5pm the count stands at 2569 to 2769, but the PERB will not say which union is down by 200 votes! There are still about 500 assorted challenges to be dealt with, and this may or may not get wrapped up tonight.

No sign of Mary Kay or Dave at the count, poor Rebecca Malberg seems to be SEIU's most senior staffer there. Readers say the mood from both sides is serious and quiet, but SEIU look especially pale.

Something's been punctured, but it's not "the heart of the thing that is NUHW"!

Update at 7pm...

The vote is still not final, but it's clear that SEIU will take the official count by about 200 votes (at $3,600 each!). It's likely that NUHW will then file challenges based on all the kind of things we've seen on the blog the past few weeks, and very possibly overturn the election.

What a terrible return on SEIU's $10 million investment - 200 votes is just about a coin toss!

So in summary... for NUHW and their supporters this is both a big disappointment and a very good sign, for Fresno homecare workers it's a huge loss, and for SEIU it's a disaster that Perez predicts will have a string of consequences!

Victory for democracy on another front!

2009-06-19T11:00:00.000-07:00

Charges withdrawn in Local 888 elections!

Oh Susana

Fingers crossed for Fresno!

2009-06-19T08:14:00.000-07:00

(From NUHW members at Doctor's Hospital in San Pablo)

So who's going to win?

2009-06-18T16:46:00.000-07:00

That's what everyone really wants to know about this week, isn't it?

Well the short answer is that Perez doesn't know for sure, but he does know who's going to lose. As John Wilhelm would say, "let's recap"...

Last week Perez heard that SEIU felt that if their numbers were right they'd win, but that no one senior trusted the numbers. Since then Perez has heard a much lower estimate of the total votes cast, which makes SEIU's numbers obviously way off. And while NUHW were basing their numbers on a very conservative count of votes actually mailed, and that count was coming from volunteers and members who were there because they cared about winning the election and building the union, SEIU were apparently using a vague mash-up of phone polling of "support", and numbers coming from staff who were under pressure to produce numbers and keep their jobs, and often just didn't want to be there.

And despite the premature dance party, and email victory announcement, the signs don't look good for SEIU this week. Dave has been lying low, and none of Zombie UHW's public pronouncements sound like those of a campaign looking to get the vote count certified and move on. Against the recommendation of an impartial arbitrator the Fresno Board of Supervisors voted this Wednesday to go ahead and cut homecare workers' wages anyway, an outrageous decision that clearly violates the union contract, but SEIU have been silent. What’s going on in there? What are they waiting for?

There are plenty of Monday morning quarterbacks at SEIU, and Perez bets they’re already hard at work figuring out how it all went wrong. From their perspective at least, SEIU should have been able to “put a stake through the heart of the thing that is NUHW” with this campaign. Homecare campaigns favor those with ample money and staff, and leadership among workers just doesn’t work the same way or count for as much as it does in a hospital or nursing home. Perez vomited into his mouth a little to see the SEIU claim that many homecare workers “didn’t even know they were in a union” because the former leader of UHW failed them so badly - senior SEIU staff know better than anyone just how little relationship most SEIU homecare members in other states have with their union, and how exponentially better things were at pre-zombie UHW. Many people believe that a huge part of the reason SEIU chose to “organize” homecare providers in the first place was that they saw them as easy dues units who could be brought in by political deals and glossy mailers, and would find it next to impossible to organize themselves to improve their union or leave it. In short, the Fresno campaign should have set NUHW’s weakest points against SEIU’s strongest, and made NUHW’s strengths almost irrelevant.

It’s predictable then, although still kind-of shocking that SEIU reportedly spent about $10 million on the Fresno election. That's $1,000 per worker, or alternatively, every cent that every Fresno County homecare worker has paid in dues for more than two years. NUHW meanwhile, spent about $20 per worker, and unless SEIU win by a 50 to 1 margin, it's going to look like exactly what it will be - a bought election. Big money didn't win over the teachers in Puerto Rico, or the EAA city workers in Los Angeles, but SEIU have still thrown money at this campaign because it's all they have. Now, unless they win so big they can make it look like they didn't need to spend the money, they're going to look weak AND dirty. Anything less than a massive vote for SEIU will be a clear sign that many members want out… and while NUHW isn't going away, what's to stop other unions too from figuring that if they can just bring just few more resources to the fight, SEIU is easy pickings?

Perez doesn’t know if that $10 million includes the wages of staff pulled from locals across the country, but that was a failure as well. First there's the open staff rebellion reported here the past few weeks - when have SEIU ever had to resort to posting guards at shopping malls to try to keep organizers in the field before? And then there's the grumbling from local leaders, the locals that refused to send staff, the locals that wiggled out of it as best they could, and the locals where managers joked together about sending the worst staff and lost-timers they had! You don't have to be a secret NUHW supporter to resent seeing your staff dispatched to fight the Fresno ground war… locals have their own unions to run and organizing to do. At Local 99 in Southern California, it looks like sending six reluctant scabs to Fresno against the protest of their staff union cost the local a decertification for 200 Head Start workers in Orange County - by eight votes! And as Obama starts to slip on some major campaign promises, what has the trusteeship done to the accountability campaigns, supposedly the union's all-out priority this year?

So, how much staff goodwill, and how much currency at the locals can the international possibly have left? Perez often hears that Andy Stern has lost the leadership he had a couple of years back, with junior staff disillusioned by the layoffs, senior staff seeing him as out of touch and full of BS, and locals tired of signing over money and control for nothing in return. A source says that mid-western healthcare locals are eying the whole Californiraq consolidation experiment in horror, and refusing to let the merger plan happen to them, or to give over more control of their finances. Many at the international see those locals as the heart of SEIU. What will happen now?

Think of poor Dave Regan, who left one of those solid locals to become the face of the trusteeship. Fresno started badly for him when he made himself the center of attention with his now famous "Wouldn't usually come to this cow-town"/"We're going to stomp them" speech, and it only got worse. One reader told Perez that Dave is now furious with Andy, feeling he's been stabbed in the back, sent to Fresno to die without the resources he needed to have a real shot at winning. Dave took a big gamble taking Californiraq on, and Perez hears that close friends have been telling him it was a bad move, and he should have stayed safely in the mid-west.

The “victory” announcements from SEIU at the end of the first week of the campaign were jarring for NUHW supporters who were still hard at work talking to homecare workers. But what else can you do when you need to return most of your staff to their locals by pre-arrangement and wrap up the main phase of your campaign? After pushing the start date of their blitz back a couple of times, SEIU had just a week to try to grind unwilling staff and mostly inexperienced members (dangerous when your script skirts a thin legal line) through getting as many votes as possible. How else to send them home?

Word is that many at the International moved on quickly from strategizing for Fresno to worrying about the hospital elections coming up. Obviously they don't see Fresno as a stake through NUHW's heart, but what's much more interesting is this: apparently senior international staff just don't trust anyone at Zombie UHW for an accurate report, and they have been secretly checking on UHW staff’s numbers and assessments. And the results say that things are much, much worse for SEIU at Kaiser and in the hospitals than Zombie UHW had reported.

Everything Perez hears says that SEIU feel they’ve burned a lot of non-renewable resources to get through Fresno – their reputation in California and their standing in the labor movement for starters - the Fresno campaign and the simultaneous attack on UNITE HERE have made it clear that SEIU’s downward spiral is the whole movement’s problem! And then there’s staff motivation, member support, local goodwill, money… SEIU just don’t know how they’re going to be able to do it all over again. While the mailers are still glossy and the robo-calls still pour in, this hasn't been the kind of slick campaign SEIU have become known for. It has been an edgy, nervous, make-do and try to hold it all together type of thing. There’s been a lack of palatable leadership, and major slip ups on some obvious things – like whoever thought it was a good idea to let Dave Regan and Nathan Selzer be the faces of this campaign?

So what can we expect to see tomorrow? Well, word is now that the count could be over by 1pm, but Perez suggests that you don't hold your breath for a firm answer. Even if the result is dramatic enough not to come down to challenges, it’s still very likely it will go to court.

On the one side there are clear signs that (unsurprisingly) SEIU broke election laws over and over. Beyond the obvious and well documented illegal threats, there are the multiple jaw dropping stories from the field, most of which Perez passed on posting so as not to taint any possible legal challenges or charges. These are stories about violence, intimidation, and open ballot theft. Some of them are documented with police reports, and there are a lot of them. And then there are the hundreds of workers who reported not receiving ballots (cow town or not, just how bad can the Fresno post office really be?)

And of course SEIU have what they always have (at least for now), money and lawyers. That ridiculous blitz was the money phase of their campaign, and now we can expect the lawyers to come in. Their strategy has always been to try to "starve NUHW out". One "high level" SEIU person is reported to have said that the public will get the election results from Iran before we get the results from Fresno.

So right now Perez is about 80% sure that NUHW have the numbers, and everything he's seeing and hearing says that SEIU aren't confident at all. But even beyond the result of the count tomorrow, there's just no way to see Fresno as anything other than a disaster for SEIU. Junior staff and some members might be gung-ho enough to boo Dolores Huerta on video, but there are many smart people in SEIU (and beyond) who can see just where all this is leading…

Perez bets Dave is glad today that he opted-out of that spicy food last night!

While the rats are away, the mice at play!

2009-06-17T12:23:00.000-07:00

It looks like while all the attention was on Fresno last week, SEIU scabs left behind at Walnut Creek had themselves a petty vandalism spree! Well, who can blame them, given the bad example set in Fresno?

A reader writes...

"I missed (lost timer) Carol Criss and (Zombie UHW rep) Joanie Grecko's visit on Thursday, but per my coworkers, they became very agitated when they saw NUHW materials on the wall of my cubicle and snatched them off in a near rage!"

Apparently Joanie and Carol were at Walnut Creek to hold a meeting under the supervision of scab SEIU staffer Angela Hewitt (office 510 869 2283, cell 301 659 6478)...

"The meeting was sold as an update to the deployment, but nothing new on that, they went into their "SEIU good, NUHW bad" sell. My coworkers equated it as being in a used car lot with hard core sales pitches. Probably good that I was off, as it may have gotten ugly, as I would have called them out on every single lie.

After being informed of the numerous lies told, I printed out the NLRA for my coworkers, as well as a copy of our contract specialist's removal letter. She did NOT resign due to "personal reasons", as they tried to spin it.

Per our lead, who was very upset to learn about what they did in my cubicle, "they are no longer welcome to come in here." She was also furious that they used the ruse of talking about the deployment as a way in, then went into the purple Kool-Aid hard core sales pitch. Oh, and two of my coworkers said about Joanie Grecko, with her aggression and HARD stare: "She creeped me out!"

Oh, but look what Carol and Joanie missed in their hurry to clear the cubicle!

Perez will be back tomorrow!

2009-06-16T12:51:00.000-07:00

With new stories about Fresno, Virginia, and everything in between...

How dirty are SEIU?

2009-06-15T10:59:00.000-07:00

So dirty apparently that they tried to sneak someone's divorce papers out of the office by labeling them as Change to Win campaign documents!

-----

June 11, 2009
To: Change to Win Leadership Council
From: John W. Wilhelm, President

I have received Anna Burger's letter advising me that I will replace Bruce Raynor as UNITE HERE's representative on the Change to Win Leadership Council. As a founding member of Change to Win, I am honored to be re-joining the Leadership Council, and I look forward to working closely with you.

As we evaluate UNITE HERE's future relationship with Change to Win, as well as whether or not UNITE HERE will continue to participate in Change to Win's dispute resolution process, I have deep concerns about whether, in fact, Change to Win's leadership and staff is impartial toward UNITE HERE.

The current dispute between SEIU and UNITE HERE initially appeared to be an internal dispute within UNITE HERE, and would have been resolved by UNITE HERE's Constitutional processes. It became apparent in February 2009 that, in fact, this dispute is an unprecedented intrusion by SEIU into UNITE HERE's affairs. Now that the officers of UNITE HERE have regained control of our own offices, we have discovered documentary evidence that SEIU's involvement in UNITE HERE's affairs began in 2008, if not sooner.

It is disturbing that Change to Win officers and staff have been deeply involved in this intrusion into UNITE HERE's affairs. Anna Burger and Tom Woodruff have been involved in exhorting UNITE HERE members and affiliates to secede from UNITE HERE in violation of UNITE HERE's Constitution, as well as in the strategy of SEIU's unrelenting attack on UNITE HERE.

Michael Zucker, a Change to Win staff member, has been a key architect of the campaign for SEIU to raid UNITE HERE.

All of this can be documented, if any of you desire that.

I would have thought that Change to Win would have learned from the history of other organizations that a labor federation may not properly insert itself into the internal affairs of one of its affiliates, let alone allow itself to be harnessed by one affiliate in a campaign to take over or destroy another affiliate. Yet this is precisely what has happened in Change to Win.

The partisanship of the Change to Win staff was further demonstrated by something that happened at UNITE HERE headquarters in New York City on Monday, June 1. Several of the former UNITE HERE employees who resigned from the Union put various files in boxes and taped them shut. They marked the boxes to indicate that the contents belong to the Change to Win drugstore campaign. They sought to take the boxes out of the UNITE HERE headquarters but were prevented from doing so. Pat Szymanski asked, and Richard McCracken agreed, to let the boxes be transported away from UNITE HERE, but only after loyal UNITE HERE employees reviewed their contents to be sure that they did not include any contraband--documents not related to the drugstore campaign. It was also agreed that Change to Win lawyers would be present to watch this process, allegedly in accordance with a court order about Change to Win's maintaining control of the drugstore campaign documents. The process took place as agreed. Contraband was indeed found: the divorce records of a UNITE HERE officer and lists of past residences of two other UNITE HERE officers, all of whom have remained with our organization and are leaders in its current work. This was "opposition research" for the SEIU campaign to disrupt our organization. It was bad enough that the attempt was made to sneak these documents out of our office by people working on the Change to Win drugstore campaign. But what is most alarming is that the Change to Win lawyers reviewing the inspection of these documents insisted that these documents had to be turned over to Change to Win! There is no possible way that this opposition research had any connection to the drugstore campaign. No one could have asserted so in good faith. For lawyers to assert Change to Win ownership of such records betrays them as co-conspirators.

This partisanship in the Change to Win leadership and staff must be corrected. I would appreciate the view of the Leadership Council members, individually and collectively, on whether, and how, this will be corrected. Until then, as I am sure you can appreciate, UNITE HERE is not prepared to proceed with arbitration under the Change to Win processes.

I hope these issues can be fairly addressed, so that UNITE HERE can work with all of you in Change to Win to address the great challenges, and the great opportunities, that we face together, and to utilize Change to Win's dispute resolution processes with full confidence that they are fair and impartial.

cc: Change to Win Key Staff

-----

Oh wow!

"In the house..." - SEIU Rally Part Three.

2009-06-13T23:00:00.000-07:00

And here's the third and final video. The end cuts off Dave's speech, and overlaps with the video here.

Here's where Mary Kay gets the mic (glad we got all the member speakers out of the way early, so the EVP's have plenty of time!). Dave keeps a close eye on her too, as if he's worried she'll make a dash for the presidency!

"Who's got the power? We got the power" screeches Mary Kay, looking overjoyed, like she just won an award.

Really, you got the power? Not homecare workers? I guess we'll see...

And then the locals sending scabs are listed as the camera pans back and forth across the excessive balloons. And then of course Dave comes up for his censured "old school" speech. The rest is history!

(SEIU Rally Part One)

(SEIU Rally Part Two)

(Video by Mike Rhodes)

"Our special gift" - SEIU Rally Part Two.

2009-06-13T22:45:00.000-07:00

Here's where the SEIU scabs boo Dolores Huerta - what kind of a mindset does that take?

But anyway, here's a rare public appearance by generally MIA EVP Gerry Hudson to distract you. Except that Gerry isn't in uniform, and he seems to be searching for a friendly face...

"Anybody who knows me, knows I never go anywhere without my sister! So, I'm here with Mary Kay Henry... as always! And we want to spend a minute talking about the obvious... that's our special gift, hers and mine... stating the obvious!"

So he goes on to state the obvious - "It's hot in Fresno" - for several minutes. He seems to be trying to stall, and it's awkward to watch. Sometimes he looks like he is smelling a bad smell. Regan is behind him the entire time, watching skeptically and swaying!

(SEIU Rally Part One)

(SEIU Rally Part Three)

(Video by Mike Rhodes)

"Look at this beautiful army" - SEIU Rally Part One.

2009-06-13T21:09:00.000-07:00

Very late (Perez's fault), but still very informative, here's part one of SEIU's Fresno campaign kick-off rally. It's awe inspiring, but not in the way they intended!

In this first part, see an exclusive preview of the new SEIU uniform (mandatory for all remaining staff by the fall), and hear some excellent alternative slogans, "Quality Care"? ...how about "Take them down like Chinatown"!

But remember that we doorknock too!
That's the (unintelligible) of purple to choose.
They're looking for us to lead!
To show them the way back to where we are.
They will hear the vigor of our feet doorknocking.
They will hear the ring of our phonebanking.
Alright?
They will feel the lighting when it strike, when we take them down once again!
C'mon now!
Listen up (?) people!
It's time to go out there and take them down like Chinatown!

(SEIU Rally Part Two)

(SEIU Rally Part Three)

Many thanks to Mike Rhodes, Editor of the Community Alliance newspaper in Fresno, for the video, shot at considerable personal risk!

No purple spectacles in Californiraq!

2009-06-12T16:46:00.000-07:00

This amazing cartoon was drawn by an NUHW supporter...

Many, many, thanks to the artist (and apologies for the delay).