Wednesday, November 25, 2009

SEIU rarely has anything new to say, ever

Shown below are the latest mailers from SEIU.  The first contains a little bit more information than their previous mailers specifically the 60 new contracts. I'll go over my "UHW Report" emails from the last year (November 4, 2008 to present) and see if this claims bears out, but I think their claim is unusually high.


 "The odds are really against us."

It's funny, in a junior high/first break up kind of way. She (the workers) moved on a long time ago but he (the Zombies) has his head in the clouds. That SEIU still thinks they and Memorial workers still constitute an "us" is comical to say the least. Don't the Zombies know it's over? The "break up" happened in January, and the workers aren't on the rebound, they are trading up...way up!

"Let's not get stuck with a union that can't win a first contract.

NUHW has won 3 representation elections so far and contract negotiations are under way. It's a matter of time before the founding members of NUHW have a contract.

However, the desperation for recognition continues.

 Almost a year after forming::
  • Hasn't negotiated a single contract
    Unfortunately this is true because the Zombies are so paranoid about losing any of it's prisoners, I mean "prospective members" that they will delay an election just to prevent workers from possibly joining NUHW . In their eyes no union is better for the workers than NUHW. Imagine the insecurity of mind that views this as an acceptable their own efforts just to prevent the workers from choosing NUHW. In an effort to prevent the exodus the Zombies have filed frivolous blocking charges every step of the way. For example the Zombies ...
    • Has no members under contract
    The tide is turning and the Zombies are about to pulled in by the undertow.
    • Has dozens of staff leaving
    One pre-trusteeship UHW employee filed for unemployment, and in a desperate attempt to discredit NUHW, the Zombies published this one person's claim paperwork mailed to UHW. How does that become dozens? Unless of course the Zombies are inflating their numbers as they did in the Fresno homecare vote. Remember that absolute majority (more than 50% of members) they claimed, and then then 40-ish% voter turnout? Even a 5th grader could see the impossibility of this claim.
    •  Is going broke and facing a substantial judgment in Federal court.
    •  Struggling to stay in business
    If they are going broke and struggling to stay in business then why is NUHW hiring? Two more claims shot down.

    First contracts usually give the newly inducted workers the biggest gains since they typically start with nothing. Also, "up to 18% raises" means somewhere between 0% and up to an including 18%, but less than 18% for most people. An average wage increase of say 13% would be a more accurate description. It looks like the Zombies are using the same creative language as they did in the recent Sonoma County homecare contract: does "contingent upon available funding" sound familiar?

    3 comments:

    1. SEIU's ridiculous campaign to win the battle at Memorial appears to be similar to the phony campaign being orchestrated by the Repulican Tea-Baggers. Lies and more lies. The Purple Plague hasn't won shit for healthcare workers. It was under Sal Rosselli's and the old UHW vanguard that won outstanding contracts--not the corporate style top-down SEIU scabs.

      I can hardly contain myself. NUHW will definately kick SEIU's ass at Memorial. What a great day that will be. Workers will finally get the chance to vote for the union of their choice.

      ReplyDelete
    2. The biggest problem with all their leaflets is that the people who won all those great contracts are now associated with NUHW -- both staff and workers. Do they really think workers are too stupid to know that? They have it exactly backwards ... don't get STUCK with SEIU.

      ReplyDelete
    3. Struggling to stay in "business"? A union isn't a business, its a collection of workers fighting for their rights. Only SEIU (and management) thinks of unions as strictly "businesses".

      ReplyDelete