VOLUME 1, NO. 4 • DECEMBER 2014
Transcription
VOLUME 1, NO. 4 • DECEMBER 2014
VOLUME 1, NO. 4 • DECEMBER 2014 ays d i l o H py p a H Joint Message from the PRESIDENT and the GENERAL MANAGER By David Rolley and Peter Nguyen W Editor-In-Chief: Philip Hu “We Are One” Staff: Jeff Apkarian, Eileen Bissen, and Mike Davis Table of Contents Joint Message from President and GM 2 Member Appreciation 3 Local 1 Reflections & Goals 4 Help Overturn CoCo Sups’ 33% Raise 5 Steward Training 6 Organized Union Power 7 & 10 “This Board of Sups Has Got To Go!” 8-9 Political Action 11 Community Involvement 12 Pension Reformers Are Coming 13 & 16 Labor: A Short History, Part II 14-15 Cover Art by activist/artist Ricardo Levins Morales www.rlmartstudio.com 2 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 1 e wanted to keep the focus of this issue—the final one of the year—on all of the activity and accomplishments Local 1 had in 2014. So we’re combining our columns, and making room for Local 1-wide features. The most appropriate topic for a shared message is our shared vision. From the very beginning, in fact, from the very first phone call that we shared after Peter was hired as the new General Manager, we talked about our mutual vision that no other union should be providing better representation, organizing, and political advocacy than Local 1. With mutual support, we’ve made tremendous progress for Local 1 in 2014. We started by bluntly and honestly assessing where we were as an organization and then making the tough changes necessary to get us to where we wanted to be. The first order of business was to hire top-notch people, the best we could get, and then give them the resources and training to achieve their full potential. The credentials of all of our new hires are impressive to say the least. Many of them are lawyers or have significant legal training. Others have a proven track record of successfully organizing and empowering workers. Yet others have personal political experience. As a result, our ability to file air-tight Unfair Labor Practice charges, pursue legitimate grievances, organize for better results at the bargaining table, and increase political clout have been dramatically enhanced. We sent four Business Agents to a twoday Arbitration Seminar in San Francisco and nearly a third of the field staff to Chicago to participate in a national multi-union conference where cutting edge strategies and ideas were shared. Local 1 has also upgraded our technology to make our Business Agents and other staff more effective and responsive, all to better serve our members. Early on, an Organizing Team was formed to fight off predatory unions and to seek out new opportunities. This provided both the union and individual staff members the opportunity to grow. Also, a Strategic Operations Team has modernized our communications and political capacity, and you can check our new website (www. peu1.org) for the endorsements we made and the results of the recent election. You can also join us on Facebook (facebook.com/WeAreLocal1) to see the string of election related activities we undertook this year. In fact, please do “friend” us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter (@peulocal1). These days, often times, social media becomes the swiftest way to get the word out about actions and events that require instantaneous response and member participation. We have had great success in securing better contracts for our members; we have begun winning a higher percentage of our arbitrations; and we are far more effective at dealing with the employers on day-today issues. As a result of all this, Local 1 has begun to look and feel like a modern labor organization on the go. We invite you to join in the efforts of our newly invigorated Union. All best to you and yours this holiday season! LOCAL 1 APPRECIATES AND THANKS OUR MEMBERS! WE WISH YOU A GREAT HOLIDAY SEASON! DECEMBER 2014 3 LOCAL 1 EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REFLECT ON 2014, SET GOALS FOR 2015 JOHN BONILLA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BUTTE OFFICE: In 2014, we have seen an increase in participation by our membership which includes health and safety committees in Behavioral Health and labor management committees in the Department of Employment and Social Services. We also have many more stewards than we did at the beginning of the year. However, the biggest victory in 2014 was having one of our own BCEA, Local 1members, Diane Brown, forcing a runoff for the Butte County Assessor’s seat in June. Fast forward to 11/4, it was evident even before all precincts reported that Diane had beaten one of the longest sitting members of the Butte County Board of Supervisors, Bill Connelly, to become the new County Assessor. Looking towards 2015, I see the greatness of the fight BCEA, Local 1 members have in them. It will be a tremendous tool to stand up to the county and telling their employer this tight-knit community of workers has had enough. They will bring home a fair contract via a strong contract campaign that will catch fire, thus increasing member involvement and solidifying BCEA, Local 1’s position as a premier labor organization. CEDRIC PORTER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BAY AREA OFFICES (MARTINEZ AND RICHMOND): The most telling achievement in the Martinez/Richmond offices in 2014 is the evident, measurable improvement in our offices’ ability to advocate for our members. The new crop of recently hired, highly talented Local 1 Business Agents have raised our level of competency and member participation, and produced tangible results which have kept our members working while raising their consciousness. In Merced, we are seeing great activity from both units. The Merced County 4 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 1 Trial Court Employees have reached a contract agreement through interest based bargaining. This unit has an engaged leadership which communicates well with membership. The Merced County Public Employees Unit has finished the first step in the MMBA Impasse Process by submitting a mediated settlement to the County Supervisors. The Unit is now contemplating fact-finding. This group is quickly learning the power of active membership versus their past passive participation. The goal for 2015 is to tap into the newly found member awareness in all of these units to drive bargaining unit contract campaigns to assist Local 1 in delivering much better contracts for our members. an 85%-15% split for non-Kaiser and 92%8% split for Kaiser members. We also successfully arbitrated members’ jobs back from proposed terminations and won grievances that enforced our members’ rights under the contract. As we commence into 2015, we will begin preparations for contract negotiations in the Court and in the County. We will continue to strive in building the union to better serve our membership. We will further our commitment in being a union that not only cares about our members in the workplace but in their neighborhoods. By strengthening our involvement in community actions we will be calling upon our activist to commitment to volunteering. JERE COPELAND, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EL DORADO OFFICE: GARY STUCKY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SUTTER/YUBA OFFICE: While El Dorado County is in some turmoil as of late with the forced resignation of the Chief Administrative Officer and the revelation that there might be difficulty with next year’s county budget, EDCEA, Local 1 has seen an increased participation at the County by our members, both in board and site rep representation. As well, new contracts in South Lake Tahoe and El Dorado Hills have been settled, with raises in both contracts. What I would hope for next year (and think we can achieve) is continued strengthening of all our associations through increased member involvement. For the Yuba County contract, YCEA, Local 1 successfully resisted efforts to freeze salaries while preserving the longevity step advancements of our members, which amount to 1.2% per year. We also stopped efforts to shift a large portion of pension costs to our members. For the Sutter County contract, SCEA, Local 1 was able to secure a contract that required the employer to pay the increased cost of health insurance. For the Yuba City contract, we have been at the bargaining table since March and are currently in mediation. The good news is, we anticipate going to fact-finding. Why is that a good development? Because the two newly-elected City Council Members will be on the council at that time. Meanwhile, we have stopped a poorly written Fraud Policy and a GPS Tracking Policy (AKA Employee Tracking Policy), both of which would have been used against our members. For 2015, our goal is to secure a contract in Sutter County with salary increases, a contract in Yuba City that ends furloughs as well as increases salary, and improve solidarity between our members in the Sutter/Yuba area. TED SOMERA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SACRAMENTO OFFICE: UPE, Local 1 went through some tough negotiations in 2014 with Sacramento County and Courts. At the end of the rainbow, we were able to maintain our status quo on benefits and restore our cost-of-living back into the contracts for our county membership. In the Courts, we were able to negotiate one-time monies for our members and maintain their health benefits at REFERENDUM: HELP OVERTURN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SUPERVISORS’ 33% RAISE Local 1 will not stand for self-serving greed. Help us overturn their raise. We have until January 2nd…JOIN THE MOVEMENT Help us overturn their raise. We have until January 2nd to gather 30,000 signatures! Here’s what you can do: 1. Sign the petition 2. Help gather signatures. Come to one of our numerous trainings and then get on it! 3. Donate to this good cause! Please send all donations, along with your name and address, directly to: Local One Issues Committee • ID #970884 PO Box 6783 • Concord, CA 94524-1783 www.peu1.org/referendum Please check on a regular basis for signature gathering locations and training session information. REFERENDUM TO REVERSE UNREASONABLE AND AUTOMATIC PAY INCREASES FOR THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Say NO to Greed 33% Self-Awarded Raise It’s Not Just One Raise Future Raises Automatic and Out of Public View No Transparency or Accountability On Top of 60% Raise in 2007 Higher Salary Than San Francisco Supervisors Higher Salary Than State Legislators Say Yes to Accountability Car Allowance and Higher Pension Denied Employees The Same Counties As Comparables Voters Deserve to Vote On This Raise DECEMBER 2014 5 ORGANIZED UNION MEMBERS HAVE THE POWER TO FIGHT ABUSES By Chung Park, Business Agent, Richmond Office In 2014, Local 1 held 9 independent, full-day steward training sessions, along with several smaller, ongoing trainings that occur on a monthly basis, for our members. Approximately 150 members stepped up, signed up, and got trained. The majority of those who attended the trainings are now serving as stewards in their units. 6 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 1 I t was a little before 6am and the sun hadn’t quite come up yet. I’d been sitting in my car for almost an hour when I see a figure coming out of the house in front of which I had been parked. He had his dog on a leash. I approached him, called out his full name. It startled him just enough to slow his reflexes. “Um, yes,” he said, softly and inquisitively. I threw the envelope containing the subpoena down at his feet and showed him my copy. “You’ve been served,” I declared. I could hear him calling me names and making threats as I drove off. The Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, where I worked at the time, had been investigating this garment contractor for years. Audits revealed he employed about a hundred workers, paid them less than minimum wage and no overtime. Part of the difficulty in serving him was that he had multiple homes in San Francisco; two in the Sunset District (upper middle class area), and the one I served him at just on the outskirts of the ritzy St. Frances Woods area. Records indicated the house was worth about $800,000. This was in 2004. That same year, I also worked a case where an immigrant restaurant worker had to work 70 to 80 hours a week at a fancy restaurant in San Francisco’s North Beach area. Because he was allowed to sleep on a cot in the supply closet, the owner only “promised” him $600 a month. He hadn’t been paid in ten months. Just seven years earlier in 1997, one of my Senior Deputy Labor Commissioners investigated a case where over 70 Thai immigrants were held captive in an apartment complex and forced to sew garments for 16 hours a day, 7 days a week. They weren’t allowed to leave the complex. The final case I worked for the Labor Commission in 2006, we conducted an early morning raid on a farm labor camp in Napa. We found over fifty vineyard workers living in a rundown, two-room house without running water. I often ask myself how these working conditions still exist today. What motivates those in power to abuse those without? Why does Walmart pay their workers such low wages? What makes the fast food industry resist paying their workers a living wage? What motivates Kaiser—the largest HMO in the country—to deny health benefits to some of their own workers? What motivated the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors to give themselves a 33% raise while denying their employees anything higher than a 4% increase? Is it greed? Is it a total lack of empathy? Is it self-importance and entitlement? Is it a lack of concern for fairness? Probably all of the above. But who knows? What is for certain though, is all workers suffering horrible conditions share a common denominator: they were scared or uninformed, and felt that they had no choice but to accept whatever conditions the employer imposed upon them. They were unorganized. Workers who organized themselves to form unions blazed the trail in the first half of the 20th century to fight for and win a majority of the protections we take for granted today: the 8 hour workday; child labor laws; vacation pay; sick pay; pensions; even workplace safety standards. In the 1930’s, Harry Bridges and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) allowed people of all backgrounds regardless of race, color, or religion into the union. They realized that a worker was a worker and the only way to empower themselves was to stick together. “An injury to one is an injury to all,” they advocated. From the post WWII era through the 1960’s, union membership peaked in number and power. It was an era where the working class could truly attain the American dream: home ownership, good education for their children, and security that the next generation would have a better life. Then things changed during the post-Vietnam War era; union membership began to dwindle while salaries for those at the top began to rise. By the late seven- ties, the average CEO of a company made 25 times the salary of the average worker and that trend has continued to the present. Today, the average CEO of a company makes 400 times the average worker. So, what happened? Some blame Reaganonmics. Others blame our social welfare systems. Still others claim union busting. There is a very historically clear correlation here: the more union members there are, and the better organized they are, the better the working conditions and wages. Today, it seems that the dream of owning a home (or keeping our homes) seems unattainable for a vast majority of workers. We survive paycheck to paycheck with a few glimmers of temporary hope. Meanwhile, we see how the rich keeps getting richer and expect us to make more sacrifices. There are elected officials owned by the affluent 1% who are seriously talking about getting rid of the minimum wage. How did we get here? The freedom of workers to organize a union is a human right recognized internationally, yet in the United States: 92% of private sector employers force their employees to attend closed door meetings filled with anti-union propaganda 80% require supervisors to attend anti-union training sessions 75% use paid consultants to undermine organizing efforts 50% threaten to shut down operations if employees organize 25% illegally fire workers who want to organize As a result of these union busting atrocities, today there are less than 15 million union workers in the U.S. This downward spiral will continue unless the labor movement (that is every single union continued on pg. 10 DECEMBER 2014 7 LOCAL 1 DESCENDS UPON CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SUPERVISORS AT 651 PINE ST. T he walls of the Board of Supervisors’ chambers were shaking on Election Day, November 4th, coincidentally, a day where two County Supervisors (John Gioia and Karen Mitchoff) were “reelected” without any challengers. Public Employees Union, Local 1 led the effort to shame the supervisors for “electing” to bestow themselves a 33% pay increase in one fell swoop. We were joined by other labor unions which represented workers in the county. Concerned citizens also joined us by descending on 651 Pine Street. We rallied with strength and conviction—and raucous noise—in the early morning, outside the County Adminis- 8 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 1 tration Building. Unwavering chants of “Shame On You,” “Vote Them Out,” “Board of Sups, You Can’t Hide, We Can See Your Greedy Side,” and “Who’s Got the Power? We Got the Power! What Kind of Power? UNION POWER!” trumpeted through the morning air, helping to wake up (in every sense) county residents passing by. The Board was set to finalize its October 28, 2014 vote to “show leadership” and give themselves a $32,000 a year raise. News media (print, radio, and television) showed up and covered our protest rally. General Manager Peter Nguyen, serving as spokesperson, was interviewed by numerous media outlets. His one abiding message: county employees are disappointed and upset by the supervisors’ clearly, self-enriching action. The protest group took over the side- walk and entrance area to the building. And then, when the time was right, we marched on the Board chamber, chanting “Hey, hey, ho, ho, this Board of Sups has got to go” repeatedly with Nguyen and Director of Organizing, David Partida, leading the chants via two megaphones. The crowd of nearly 50, carrying picket signs, entered the chamber and proceeded to the front, bringing the meeting to a standstill. The chamber reverberated, echoing the disgust of public employees and residents of Contra Costa County. And it went on for over 20 minutes. “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, This Board of Sups Has Got to Go!” Chair Karen Mitchoff attempted to silence the group by banging a stapler against the desk. We chanted louder. “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, This Board of Sups Has Got to Go!” Mary Piepho found the actual gavel and, perhaps having watched too much Judge Judy, believed that a piece of wood wielded by greedy hands would be enough to quell the outrage felt by employees who had very recently been told that they were underpaid by up to 38%. Our response? We chanted even louder. “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, This Board of Sups Has Got to Go!” This Board of Supervisors, knowing their employees were underpaid anywhere from 16% to 38%, still directed their bargaining team to offer only a 1.9% increase to certain groups of county workers. Their reasoning was county employees can only be given a 1.9% increase because there simply was no money. But there was certainly enough money to give themselves a 33% increase. “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, This Board of Sups Has Got to Go!” Clearly, some of these Supervisors have been on this board for far too long, and feel like they are entitled to that elected office, and that they can do no wrong. Or worse yet, they’ve gotten so comfortable that they believe they can do whatever they want and voters will just return them to those seats. “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, This Board of Sups Has Got to Go!” When the banging of the stapler and the gavel failed, the Supervisors turned to the Deputy Sheriffs. Almost a dozen of them arrived in short order and began to stand between our protest group and the supervisors. These deputy sheriffs showed a commendable amount of professionalism and respect for the Constitution and for their fellow public employees. They had a job to do, which was to escort the protesters from the chambers, and they did it. However, they did their jobs honestly, with integrity, and with commitment to serve the public, unlike the four shameful supervisors who voted themselves a gigantic raise. “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, This Board of Sups Has Got to Go!” The salary item on the agenda was moved to the afternoon—a tactic employed by the Supervisors twice in as many weeks to dilute the number of news cameras and bodies present at the meeting. We came back and we made sure the Supervisors heard loud and clear the voices of county workers, retirees, citizens of Contra Costa County and all of those that value democracy and integrity in public service. It’s unfortunate that only one of them truly heard the message. Supervisor Candace Andersen, who had voted no on this matter previously, publicly stated she would waive the majority of her raise, only accepting the same 4% increase county workers received in the last round of bargaining. While John Gioia, Federal Glover, Karen Mitchoff, and Mary Piepho still pushed forward with giving themselves a big raise, Public Employees Union, Local 1 stood up on the front lines and told them we would not tolerate such acts of selfishness. Local 1 will continue to make it known to these supervisors that when you mess with our members’ livelihoods, we will mess with yours. And that’s a promise. “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, This Board of Sups Has Got to Go!” DECEMBER 2014 9 Personal Attention. Personal Attention. Personal Attention. Convenience. Savings. Convenience. Savings. Convenience. Savings. Liberty Mutual has partnered with PEU Local 1 to offer you auto Liberty Mutual has partnered withhow PEU Local to offer you auto andMutual home insurance. Contact today you could1get Liberty has partnered with me PEU Localto1see to offer you auto and home insurance. Contact me you today to see group savings onme ourtoday already competitive rates—and be you could get andexclusive home insurance. Contact to see how could get how exclusive group savings on our already competitive rates—and be sure togroup mention PEU on Local exclusive savings our 1. already competitive rates—and be mention sure to mentionsure PEUtoLocal 1. PEU Local 1. Personal Attention. Personal Attention. Convenience. Savings. Savings. Convenience. Melissa Messer Melissa Messer Liberty Mutual Insurance Melissa Messer Liberty Insurance (916)Mutual 294-9518 Ext. 59004 Liberty Mutual Insurance (916)Melissa.Messer@LibertyMutual.com 294-9518 Ext. 59004 (916) 294-9518 Ext. 59004 Melissa.Messer@LibertyMutual.com www.libertymutual.com/melissamesser Melissa.Messer@LibertyMutual.com Liberty Mutual has partnered with PEU Local 1 to offer you auto CA License # 0E09122 and home insurance. Contact mewww.libertymutual.com/melissamesser today to see how you couldwith getPEU Local 1 to offer you auto Liberty Mutual has partnered www.libertymutual.com/melissamesser CA #110498 0E09122 Client #insurance. andLicense home Contact mebetoday to see how you could get exclusive group savings on our already competitive rates—and CA License # 0E09122 exclusive group savings on our already competitive rates—and be # 110498 sure to mention PEU Local 1. Client # 110498 sure to mentionClient PEU Local 1. Discounts and savings are available where state laws and regulations allow, and may vary by state. To the extent permitted by law, applicants are individually underwritten; not all applicants may qualify. Coverage provided and underwritten by Liberty Mutual Insurance Discounts and savings are available state laws Boston, and regulations allow, and may varyMutual by state. To the extent permitted by law, Company and its affiliates, 175 where Berkeley Street, MA 02116. © 2012 Liberty Insurance applicants are individually underwritten; not allare applicants may qualify. Coverage provided and underwritten Liberty Insurance Discounts and savings available where state laws and regulations allow, andbymay varyMutual by state. To the extent permitted by law, Company and its affiliates, 175 Berkeley Street, Boston, MA 02116. © 2012 Liberty Mutual Insurance applicants are individually underwritten; not all applicants may qualify. Coverage provided and underwritten by Liberty Mutual Insurance Melissa Messer Melissa Messer Company and its affiliates, 175 Berkeley Street, Boston, MA 02116. © 2012 Liberty Mutual Insurance Liberty Mutual Insurance Liberty Mutual Insurance (916) 294-9518 Ext. 59004 (916) 294-9518 Ext. 59004 Melissa.Messer@LibertyMutual.comMelissa.Messer@LibertyMutual.com www.libertymutual.com/melissamesser www.libertymutual.com/melissamesser CA License # 0E09122 CA License # 0E09122 Client # 110498 Client # 110498 and savings available where andextent regulations allow,by and may vary by state. To the extent permitted by law, Discounts and savings are available where state lawsDiscounts and regulations allow,areand may vary by state state.laws To the permitted law, applicants are individually underwritten; not all applicants may qualify.Mutual Coverage provided and underwritten by Liberty Mutual Insurance applicants are individually underwritten; not all applicants may qualify. Coverage provided and underwritten by Liberty Insurance Company and its©affiliates, 175 Berkeley Street, Boston, MA 02116. © 2012 Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and its affiliates, 175 Berkeley Street, Boston, MA 02116. 2012 Liberty Mutual Insurance continued from pg. 7 member—which is us) stands up and works to reverse this trend. Unfortunately, most union members today have grown accustomed to believing nothing can be done. Most destructive of all, some members “third party the union.” They believe that the “union” is just an entity to whom they pay dues. They believe that just paying dues fulfills their commitment as a union member. But then, they turn around and blame the “union” for anything and everything that they are unhappy with at work. Those who think this way often believe, if they are unhappy at work, the solution is to switch to another union—once again treating their union as a third party, thereby undermining their own power. This mentality only creates apathy. The lack of ownership from union members who do not participate and the willingness to identify problems and place blame but 10 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 1 not enjoin in solutions is in large part what has diminished union power. Unions get their power from only one source: their members. It’s their members’ activism, dedication, and drive that constitute the union’s power and effectiveness. We have forgotten that about a hundred years ago, before there was social security, before there was unemployment insurance, and before there were state and federal regulations that gave us the right to organize, workers rose up of their own will, and stood together, and risked everything to fight for their right to make a decent living. They risked their lives; they actually bled and sweat—and some literally died—to demand a better life for themselves, their families, and their children. Their sacrifices paved the way for the protections we enjoy today. Yet, as those hard-won privileges are being eroded away, most of us have not been willing to sacrifice a day’s pay, or a few hours at night, or give up a weekend, for the cause. For our own power base. We must recognize that each and every member makes up the union. We must stop bickering about individual differences and embrace the ideas of solidarity. We are all in this together. We are one. What must we do as members? Begin by attending unit meetings. Attend Shop Steward Trainings to understand union rights. Help advocate for fellow workers. Learn and embrace what the union is doing overall. Most importantly, we must recognize that the “rights” won by past union activists are not guaranteed. In fact, they are being deteriorated with each election bought by Big Business. We are union members; this is the legacy we inherited. We have a responsibility to improve our lives and the lives of the next generation of workers. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION LOCAL 1 POLITICAL ACTION Local 1 showed new vigor this year and exercised more political involvement, leading to overall positive results for our endorsed candidates, which will ultimately lead to better working relationships and improved contracts. DECEMBER 2014 11 VENTURA COUNTY PENSION FIGHT WILL BE GOING STATEWIDE SOON Local 1 Involved in Our Communities UPE Local 1 BA Jim Sellars at Loaves and Fishes Local 1 staff donating to Buy A Bag Executive Director Ted Somera at Loaves and Fishes O n Tuesday, November 18, the Local 1 “ big board” was treated to an in-depth, informative presentation by Chuck Hughes, Chief Deputy District Attorney from Ventura County. Hughes shared with our board the firsthand experience public employees of Ventura County had with being targeted by the pension reform movement. Ventura County is a defined benefit, “37 Act” county, much like many counties where Local 1 members work. In his presentation, Hughes mentioned that Ventura has a pension responsibility of $4.1 billion (as of June 2014), and is currently 80% funded. Historically, it has been 95.6% funded. “We are a very responsible, very frugal county, and our pensions were or two extreme statistical outliers and then presented it as system-wide abuse. In Ventura, they highlighted as the poster child, a recently retired sheriff. This sheriff was making approximately $230,000 a year while working. He retired to a $280,000 a year pension. Pension reformers seized upon the fact he was collecting more in pension payments than in salary. To make things worse, this sheriff then sued the county for an additional $75,000 in a supplemental pension plan to which he believed he was entitled. The pension reform propaganda machine then went into full effect. One of the County Supervisors Chuck Hughes presenting became the face and spokesperto Local 1 Board son of the campaign. The reformers put out mail pieces with visuals of soundly funded,” Hughes said. money raining from the skies and And yet, their county was still targeted someone stuffing money into their suit by the pension reformers. jacket pocket. Next to these images, they Pension reformers in Ventura used the continued on pg 16 standard playbook: they zeroed in on one How to Get Started with your Buy A Bag Fundraiser Phil Hu & Peter Nguyen touring Los Medanos College campus upgrades made possible with construction bond You can help the Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano turn a $1 donation into multiple dollars worth of nutritious food by participating in a Buy A Bag fundraiser. • Please make checks to: Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano. • Please mark Buy A Bag or BAB on the memo section of each check. • Mail or deliver donations to: Food Bank of Contra Costa & Solano, Buy A Bag, PO Box 6324, Concord, CA 94524 BUY A BAG I donated because every $1 can provide multiple dollars worth of nutritious food! Name: 1. Contact the Food Bank and get your colorful, Buy A Bag paper cutouts in one of two designs. Find the registration form here. 2. Choose a price for each Buy A Bag $1, $5 or $10 3. Ask co-workers, customers, friends and family to Buy A Bag 4. Have them write their name or a message on the Buy A Bag 5. Post for everyone to see in your office, business, school or religious organization. BA Madeline Jen Kin demonstrating to keep DMC open 12 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 1 Kennedy-King Scholarship Awards Banquet 6. Bonus step: Send us photos of your Buy A Bag display and share in Food Bank communications and social media! • All donations must be recorded on a Buy A Bag spreadsheet. An electronic spreadsheet will be emailed upon request. Please fill in all contact information requested on your spreadsheet. Use a new spreadsheet each time you turn donations in to the Food Bank. • Cash donations must be converted to a check or money order before mailing. • To receive an acknowledgment for tax-deductible donations, contributions must be $10 or more; these will receive a thank-you postcard. Donations of $100 or more will receive a thank-you letter. FOOD BANK FACTS: EACH $1 DONATED ENABLES THE FOOD BANK TO DISTRIBUTE THE EQUIVALENT TO TWO MEALS 1 IN 4 PEOPLE RECEIVING EMERGENCY FOOD ARE CHILDREN To obtain Buy A Bags, or, if you have any questions, please call Kathy Gleason at 925-676-7543 ext 218, or email at kgleason@foodbankccs.org. • If a contribution of $10 or more is made in cash, include a complete name and mailing address plus amount donated on the submittal form—if check is submitted, that address will be used for a thank you postcard or letter. • To receive a thank-you postcard or letter for 2014 tax purposes, donations must be received by the Food Bank by December 31, 2014. www.foodbankccs.org www.foodbankccs.org PO Box 6324, Concord, CA 94524 Toll Free: 855-309-FOOD (3663) DECEMBER 2014 13 when only 11.3 percent of workers were unionized. The steady decline in union membership can be explained by the current anti-union ideology in this country. THE LABOR MOVEMENT: A SHORT HISTORY PART II By Eileen Bissen, Business Agent, Martinez Office (EDITOR’S NOTE: SO WHAT’S NEXT FOR LABOR?) WORLD WAR II The Second World War was a boon time for labor unions. Wartime labor shortages and increased wartime production needs put labor in high demand. Labor unions seized the opportunity to consolidate their power. Union membership exponentially increased during and immediately after World War II. By the end of the war, it is estimated more than 12 million workers belonged to a union. The good times would not last though. With the increase in union membership came a concerted effort, through anti-union legislation, to curtail the power unions had gained. Filipino workforce had started against grape growers in Delano, California. Under the leadership of Chavez, Huerta, Vera Cruz and Itliong, a multiethnic alliance of Latinos and Filipinos worked in concert to protest years of poor pay and working conditions. The strike and grape boycott garnered international attention, becoming known as “La Huelga” (The Struggle). At the height of the boycott, more than 14 million Americans participated by refusing to buy grapes. The struggle was not over, however. In 1970, in an effort to keep the UFW out of California lettuce and vegetable fields, growers sought a sweetheart deal that would benefit growers at the expense of workers. The Teamsters, in a self-serving move, betrayed their UFW union brothers and signed a backdoor deal with the growers. As a way to enforce their new deal against the UFW, Teamsters often resorted to violence, which is exactly the opposite practice of leaders like Martin Luther King, Jr and Mahatma Gandhi. THE TAFT-HARTLEY ACT (1947) Republican majorities in both houses of Congress—the first since 1930—wanted to cure what they saw as union abuses permitted by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), also known as the Wagner Act. The Taft-Hartley Act, designed to amend much of the NLRA, was enacted over President Harry S. Truman’s veto in 1947. The Taft-Hartley Act, a product of an anti-union climate in the United States following World War II, declared all closed shops illegal, forbade secondary boycotts, and disallowed unions from contributing to political campaigns. Fanning fears of Communism and scapegoating Labor at the same time, one provision of Taft-Hartley specifically required union leaders to take an oath that they were not Communists. Expectedly, Taft-Hartley eroded a number of union gains. EXECUTIVE ORDER 10988 LEADS TO SURGE IN COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS Between 1946 and 1962, the number of state and local employees nearly doubled. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10988, granting federal workers the power to unionize. That 14 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 1 Executive Order set off a flood of collective bargaining laws passed by state governments in the 1960s and 1970s, which bettered the lives and working conditions of many public employees. Between 1959 and 1984, approximately 35 states granted collective bargaining rights to at least some public sector workers. Even today, collective bargaining remains a vital cornerstone of union workers’ rights. CESAR CHAVEZ, THE DELANO MANONGS, RFK & MLK: WORKERS’ RIGHTS EQUAL CIVIL RIGHTS In the early sixties, Cesar Chavez emerged and changed the face of the labor movement. Along with other civil rights and labor leaders, he dovetailed methods from the civil rights movement to garner public attention and support for the plight of workers. Chavez grew up as a migrant worker in the fields of California, enduring deplorable conditions he would spend the rest of his life trying to rectify for others. He eventually rose to prominence for his involvement with the United Farm Workers (UFW), which he cofounded with Dolores Huerta. Chavez, the born leader and captivating speaker, and Huerta, the skilled organizer and tough negotiator, made a dynamic team, but they were not the only labor leaders behind the UFW. To form the UFW, Chavez and Huerta joined with Philip Vera Cruz’s Agriculture Worker Organizing Committee (AWOC). Vera Cruz, a Filipino-American labor leader, farm worker, and activist for the Asian American Civil Rights Movement, served as a long-time vice president of the UFW. Cruz and Larry Itliong, also FilipinoAmerican, and a self-taught labor leader and founder of the Filipino Farm Labor Union (FFLU), convinced Chavez and Huerta to join a strike the predominantly PRESIDENT REAGAN UNILATERALLY FIRES AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS Strikes by workers as a leverage tool, so prevalent between World War II and 1981, would soon come to a halt. In 1981, an infamous labor dispute between air traffic controllers and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ended with the President of the United States delivering an ultimatum to workers and breaking their union. The Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO), the union representing the air traffic controllers, sought an across-the-board annual wage increase and a reduction in work hours. In response to the $770 million package sought by the union, the FAA made a $40 million counteroffer. On August 3, 1981, air traffic controllers walked off the job after talks with the FAA collapsed. President Reagan unilaterally branded the strike illegal and two days later, fired more than 11,000 air traffic controllers who ignored his order to return to work. This act set off long-lasting implications to labor. Private employers saw it as the beginning of the end for collective bargaining and strikes, and routinely replaced strikers with “scab” workers—often times less trained or untrained—rather than negotiate fairer deals. Today, Reagan’s firing of the air traffic controllers is heralded by anti-union politicians, like Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin, as the roadmap to eradicating public sector unions. What Reagan did was essentially remove the one, final equalizer—a strike—which objectively, was what kept all employers from simply ignoring collective bargaining and imposing whatever terms they desire. ANTI-LABOR FORCES TRYING TO ELIMINATE UNIONS ALTOGETHER If we were to write the headline for the current status of the labor movement, what would it say? Sadly, it would likely reflect the steady decline in the union membership, despite the troubling rise in low-paid jobs, unemployment and underemployment, declining wages and crippling health care costs. While the unionization rate hit its peak at 35 percent after World War II, in 2010, union membership in this country fell to 11.9 percent, the lowest rate in more than 70 years. Things worsened in 2012, Frederick Douglas said, “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” So it’s the workers. It’s always been the workers. Organized and unionized workers must take the lead and not wait for “friendly” elected officials to “do the right thing.” If the history of the labor movement in the US has taught us anything, it is that workers are taken advantage of and working conditions deteriorate in the absence of strong unions. On the other hand, wages increase and working conditions improve when workers have strong unions advocating on their behalf. Strong unions have one thing in common: strong and active members willing to act, willing to participate, and willing to take action. Today, despite the plight faced by workers, union membership is at a historic low. Where do we go from here? The answer is that labor unions must rebuild and thrive, or perish. Union members must step up, commit, and invest. Unions are under severe, concerted attack by wealthy corporate forces, extreme, ideological forces, and a weak-kneed, feeble media that has forgotten its role as the fourth estate. Labor must either band together and stand up to these forces now, or wait… Wait for what? Wait till these forces absolutely crush Labor, snap the backs of workers, break the spirit of the working class, and then take us back to the days of robber barons, poverty wages, and indentured servitude. And perhaps, after 30 to 50 years of those “Darwinian Capitalism” conditions again, will the heart, passion, and courage of the working class be stoked enough to rise again. The choice is ours. “Labor cannot stand still. It must not retreat. It must go on, or go under.” –Harry Bridges, Labor Leader, International Longshore and Warehouse Union DECEMBER 2014 15 Non Profit ORG US Postage PEU LOCAL ONE PO BOX 6783 CONCORD, CA 94524-1783 continued from pg 13 printed in big letters: “Alarming Pension Facts,” and “End Pension Spiking.” Their specific goal was to create a countywide ballot initiative. Their desire was to completely get rid of defined benefit retirement plans in the county and start using defined contribution plans. With the runaway sheriff as example, the hit piece mailers, and the general fear and anger stirred up by the gross misrepresentation that all county employees were getting this paradise pension, residents and voters in Ventura began lining up behind the reform movement. Counter messaging went into effect by a coalition of law enforcement unions and other labor organizations. They put out actual numbers of the majority of pensions being paid out to county retirees: after 19 years of service, the average pension was $42,000 a year; after 26 years, it was $62,000 a year. For the newer employees who were placed on to the second tier (worse) pension plans, after 15 years, they would only collect $23,000 a year. By and large, 95% of county retirees make nowhere near $100,000 a year in retirement, let alone $280,000. But those facts did not deter the pension reformers, nor were the antagonized voters particularly inclined to consider anything—no matter how factual or reasonable—outside of the poster child example. Hughes noted, “when they started gathering signatures to eliminate defined benefit retirements for new employees, the PAID MSI A packed board meeting gatherers had no trouble at all.” The pension reformers got nearly twice the number of signatures needed to place their initiative on the November 2014 ballot. Ultimately, the initiaLocal 1 President David Rolley, Chuck Hughes, and GM Peter Nguyen share a quick moment after the presentation tive was removed from the November ballot by court order because legally, a county can- ballot, he gave the pension reformers an not withdraw from a state pension system. opportunity, and a time window, to appeal “If not for the courage of one Ventura the ruling. The group did not challenge the County Superior Court Judge to affirm the ruling. The coalition formed to fight back law, this initiative would have been on the against the reformers believes it’s because ballot and it likely would have passed,” they are now regrouping and recalibrating said Hughes. their plan. For Local 1 members, this is a very Initially, the reformers would have significant matter because many of our taken this fight county to county had the members work in Alameda, Contra Costa, Ventura County initiative worked. Now Merced, and Sacramento Counties. that it hasn’t, they plan to make one masEven more important is the fight that sive push on the state level. is yet to come. When the judge removed “The Reformers Strike Back” is yet to this Ventura initiative from the statewide come. And we need to be ready.