Wall Street Journal: California Labor Wars

Well now the Zombies cover has been blown! Finally, an SEIU staffer had the courage and decency to step forward with his recollection of what he and likely all of the other scabs in Fresno were asked to do against their own sense of decency. What we all suspected happened in Fresno has been written up in the Wall Street Journal. I wonder how the Zombies will play this one down and if another election for Fresno homecare workers in the works. I say save everyone a whole bunch of trouble and just let the battered homecare workers of Fresno have what they wanted all along: NUHW!

Pure. Psychological. Bullshit.

As predicted the Zombies have begun their onslaught at Memorial with the following 2 propaganda pieces. The first is a mailer paid for with my dues money; the second was handed out mindless, I-sold-my-soul-to-the-devil-so-I-can-get-a-paycheck Zombies at the hospital.

A few things about this cartoon-ish mailer jump out at me.

1. Given the Zombies preference for sellout contracts, can they point to a single contract they've negotiated since the trusteeship that truly improves workers lives?
2. "NUHW represents no members under contract" ... yet!
3. The Zombies have been hemorrhaging cash and staff for months now, one wonders do they have any cash left to pay their bills? If not I'm sure they can tap into the $87.7 million loan SEIU took out from Bank of America. It's time for SEIU to STFU!
4. Couldn't they find any member at the hospital to quote? I guess not since they dropped the ball twice this year!
   
5. To the member quoted above (Julie Adams): Did she make her statement before the trusteeship? Does she still work at there since the layoffs Kaiser and the Zombies orchestrated, but denied involvement.

And then there is this recycled piece of garbage.

1. It seems SEIU has finally acknowledged that NUHW is a union.
   
2. The $3 million they "took for their own purposes" was meant to be spent defending itself from Andy Stern and his crew of dissent crushing lap dogs. There is no Federal law preventing a local from defending itself against it's parent union.
   
3. Why would anyone who left SEIU want to return? I'd rather work at McDonald's than work for SEIU.
   

Ugh...need I say more?

SEIU gets off its high horse and finally agrees to election

Remember when Zombie UHW trustee Eliseo Medina said twice that an election at Memorial with NUHW on the ballot simply was simply unacceptable? Remember his resolve and his strong wording, including: "NUHW should step aside", that "it's future viability of as an organization is questionable at best" and here's where it becomes really lame that they (SEIU) has "no grounds to trust that such people would abide by an agreement that calls for honest and ethical behavior" (scroll down to the 3rd page)? (I know, I know...)Well, apparently he's pulled his head out of his--I  mean out of  the clouds and the Zombies have agreed to go ahead with the election with both unions listed on the ballot. And they said it couldn't be done!

However, it should be noted that the article doesn't say how or if SEIU will behave in the days running up to the election. My guess? A full court press by SEIU to bully and trick workers into voting for them. Think of it as our own little Fresno, complete with voter intimidation and fraud. However I think victory is close at hand given BeyondChron's Randy Shaw analysis of the fight in Fresno and it's parallels to the Vietnam War. Will the Zombie's learn from their mistakes? Not likely.

Thanks to North Bay Business Journal Staff Reporter Ashley Furness for another excellent write up on our struggle to escape the deathgrip of SEIU.

Major news on the horizon...

I don't want to post until I see the something of substance but when speaking with Sal Rosselli, interim President of NUHW tonight at the panel discussion he stated a legal action next week could turn Zombie UHW upside down. I don't mean in the way they are doing now with sellout contracts, member intimidation, and so on but I mean run around in a sweat-drenched panic like your hair is on fire because as a Zombie staffer it's less painful than the hell your Zombie overlords are about to put you through kind of life changing news.

Now was that a mouthful? It sure was. Run-on sentence? Almost.

Shown below is what I predict will be a typical Zombie UHW staffer will look like once the legal action is widely known. (My apologies to those with artistic sense that are offended; "The Scream" seems appropriate to me.)

Have a good weekend y'all. I'm going to go watch "Capitalism: A Love Story" with my wife of 5 months.

Take Action: Surviving State Benefit Cuts

Courtesy of the IHSS Coalition website. I'm sure SEIU isn't doing much to help it's members fight the budget cuts. They had all their people fighting to keep 10,000 homecare workers under their thumb in Fresno while neglecting to care for the 65,000 home care of who will be subject to forced fingerprinting and background checks.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009  1-4pm
Livermore Library, 1188 South Livermore Ave.
Livermore, CA (Call the library for directions: (925) 373-5500‎.)

For more info or to RSVP, contact Community Resources for Independent Living by November 12 (to allow for any necessary accommodations). Phone: (510) 881-5743  Email: info@cril-online.org. 

This workshop will feature experts from Social Security, Disability Rights California, Bay Area Legal Aid and the California Health Incentives Improvement Project.  Topics will include overview of programs, filing appeals and working together as a community to fight for our rights.

When Zombie Trustee Elesio Medina writes, nobody cares

Elesio is doing it again. That annoying thing he does with his mind, hands and lips: expressing an opinion and "facts" that nobody cares save for only him and a few of his closest colleagues believe to be true. Shown below is his response to the letter from 15 clergy.

He states the Zombies can not "in good conscience take any action that would suggest 'NUHW' is a legitimate alternative to" blah blah blah...who cares?! So I ask: if NUHW is such a pathetic alternative to SEIU an election ought to be in their favor, right? So why don't they allow an election without further mailings, phone calls, unwelcome house visits and let the members decide?

Medina also feels that "workers best interests would have been served had they been able to unite with SEIU-UHW". This is very telling of SEIU's tact for unionization: join us or we'll prevent you from joining any other organization. Clearly a competition for workers with another union is unacceptable and must be defeated at all costs despite worker perference, and employer support. How often does an employer support is workers ability to choose if and which union represents them?

You'll note even the hospital possibly indicates it is tired of SEIU but using the word intervene (I assume in the "interfere" sense).

Medina boldly but stupidly states "we are trying to do what's right". Is the same kind of "doing what's right" that homecare workers experienced back in September? Medina's final sentence states that by joining SEIU members "can keep making forward progress instead of going backwards". Yet going backward is exactly what happened to 1,600 Kaiser pharmacy tech members.

In case you're wondering what the Zombies have done for Memorial...

...just go to their website and search for Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital. This is discouraging as much as it is unsurprising. I think I'm going to throw out my Hands off Our UHW t-shirt, now that there is truly nothing worth saving in Zombie UHW.

Send in the whaah-mbulance!

It looks like things are heating up in the battle for union representation at Memorial. Shown below is Zombie UHW trustee Eliseo Medina's letter stating Zombie UHW is unwilling to agree to ground rules for the representation election unless NUHW is excluded from the ballot. (Click on the letter below and scroll down to page 3 to view Medina' response.)

Let's dissect and expose this letter for what it really is: a desperate attempt at keeping the underdog from winning in a landslide election.

Medina states that NUHW standing as a labor organizaiton "is little more than wishful thinking."

So, if NUHW is merely a fantasy of the workers it should be pretty easy to defeat, right? Well have no fear my brothers and sisters at Memorial, I have it on good authority that the workers at Memorial are united against SEIU, as shown in Don F's comment to the "Zombie UHW pesters Memorial workers with another weak mailer" entry. Scroll down to read his first comment.

Medina goes on to state "officials of NUHW have engaged in the improper stewardship of SEIU-UHW members' dues and misuse of union resources."

Hmmmm is Medina blaming NUHW for the money spent so far fighting and LOSING to NUHW, enslaved members, and prospective members on every front, over every little detail all in the name of member representation and defense, occasionally losing because of NLRB/PERB decisions?

Finally he states: "We have no grounds to trust that such people would abide by an agreement that calls for honest and ethical behavior."

Ok, that last one tears it. Where's my ass whippin' stick? (Settle down, the link is not an actual stick). Mosey on over to Perez's blog and see all the crap the Purple Plague pulled in Fresno's homecare representation election back in June only to barely win the election, (though some votes have yet to be counted)!

Finally, an election for Memorial workers...in DECEMBER?!, 43 DAYS from now!

So much for an election in 2 weeks! The good and thoroughly-annoyed-with-SEIU folks at Memorial have 43 days of Zombie UHW-induced hell ahead of them.

 
Keep checking here at the Red Revolt for the latest and greatest on the fight for NUHW representation and against the Zombies. I'll be here watching and publicizing every mistake/threat/misstep Zombie UHW makes against the workers they abandoned long ago.

CDCAN: Breaking News: SB 69 passes Assembly 60 to 0, bill heads to Senate, then Gov.

 SB 69 a bill to delay the implementation of the new sneaky and devastating requirements to IHSS (homecare) workers, had passed the California Assembly, now it's on to the Senate and finally the governor -- all 3 of which need to sign off on the bill to make the bill law and provide relief to IHSS providers (workers), consumers and the county governments that would have to orientate and process fingerprints for 838,000+ providers and consumers (clients).

Here's the email in case you have a few mins to spare. It's lengthy but quite detailed.

BREAKING NEWS:

ASSEMBLY PASSES SB 69 BY VOTE OF 60 TO 0;  WOULD DELAY NOV 1^ST IMPLEMENTATION OF IHSS WORKER REQUIREMENTS – BILL HEADS NEXT TO STATE SENATE

Bill Amended by Assemblymember Evans Faces Major Hurdle in Getting Approval from Governor – Assembly Budget Committee Sets November 5^th 09:00 AM Follow-up Informational Hearing on IHSS – Same Day as Olmstead Advisory Committee Meeting

SACRAMENTO, CALIF (CDCAN) [Updated 11/02/09  10:33 PM  (Pacific Time)  -  The Assembly after a long marathon session in both houses that focused on the state’s ongoing water crisis, passed a bill on a different crisis that impacts its most vulnerable population, approving amendments by Assemblymember Noreen Evans (Democrat – Santa Rosa) to SB 69 that would delay the November 1^st implementation of several new requirements for In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) workers.

The bill won support from both Assembly Democrats and Republicans – including support from Assembly Republican Leader Sam Blakeslee (Republican – San Luis Obispo).

The emergency “clean-up” legislation passed on a vote of  60 to 0.

It heads next to the State Senate, which resumed its floor session just before 8:30 PM this evening. While the State Senate is still in session as the Assembly approved SB 69, it is not certain if they will remain in session this evening long enough to take action on the bill.  Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (Democrat – Sacramento) indicated earlier this evening that the State Senate would return to session on Tuesday. 

Assemblymember Evans, nearly half of the state’s counties and a wide range of disability and senior advocates have said the November 1^st implementation of the new IHSS worker (provider) requirements  is causing widespread “panic and confusion” among California’s most vulnerable population.  Evans and supporters of the bill say a delay is needed to allow the State to complete information, guidance, materials and for the counties to prepare and train staff and to conduct outreach so the new requirements are implemented without harming the people it was intended to protect. 

Both the Assembly and State Senate were in caucus most of the afternoon and evening on how the Legislature will address the State’s water crisis.  The Assembly was in caucus for most of the time after it formally convened at 12 noon and reconvened its floor session after 4 PM  - an hour later than what was scheduled and then resumed its floor session just before 10:30 PM. 

New IHSS Requirements Part of Budget Deal

The new requirements, passed last July by the Legislature controlled by the Democrats and approved  by the Governor as part of the 2009-2010 revised state budget, included mandatory fingerprinting and criminal background checks, orientation, for all IHSS workers. 

Those requirements were included, along with unannounced home visits and fingerprinting of IHSS recipients (with specific exemptions), in ABx4 19, (the “x4” stands for 4^th special or extraordinary session) that legislative Republicans and the Governor said were needed to provide tools for the state and counties to combat fraud and abuse in the IHSS program. 

The bill however had an earlier effective date – when the bill was enacted (July 28, 2009) which the Department of Social Services pushed back to November 1, 2009. 

Last week at a joint informational budget hearing by the Assembly Budget Committee and the Senate Budget Subcommittee #3 on Health and Human Services, Schwarzenegger Administration officials, represented by John Wagner, director of the Department of Social Services and Eva Lopez, deputy director, said the State intended to move forward with the November 1^st implementation date, saying that it would be releasing final or clarified instructions and information that should address the concerns raised by the counties and advocates. 

The Department of Social Services is the state agency that oversees the IHSS program statewide, which will in 2009-2010, serve over 462,000 children and adults with disabilities – including developmental, persons with mental health needs, the blind, and low income seniors.  Over 376,000 persons provide the in-home services as providers (workers).

Counties – who have responsibility to administer the IHSS program locally -   and disability and senior advocates however raised major objections saying that the Schwarzenegger Administration is moving too fast without providing clear instructions, translated materials, answers to concerns and conflicting information, and necessary funding for counties to implement the new changes,   

Santa Clara County Joins Long List of Counties Who Say They Cannot Comply With New IHSS Requirements

Meanwhile Santa Clara County indicated it joined nearly half of the State’s 58 counties in sending an official letter to the California Department of Social Services indicating it cannot comply with the new requirements for IHSS workers by the November 1^st start date. 

In a letter dated October 28, 2009, Will Lightbourne, director of the Social Services Agency of Santa Clara County wrote that "…Santa Clara County will be unable to implement the new IHSS provider enrollment mandates by the November 1, 2009 deadline” citing several specific reasons.  Among the reasons listed was that the county “…has not received all of the necessary directives to comply with the required elements including fingerprint/background check process and provider orientation now has the county received necessary translated materials in languages including Vietnamese, Spanish and Russian representing our diverse provider population.”

Lightbourne echoing other county officials across the state wrote that his county is “…routinely stymied in discussions how to implement the various mandates due to draft instructive documents, contradictory instructions, and newly required forms still in draft form [all from the California Department of Social Services]. 

He concluded his letter saying that budget reductions to the Santa Clara County Public Authority will limit “our ability to comply” with the new law and that his county will be able to comply with the new IHSS requirements when “…Santa Clara County is provided with all the documentation, authorizations, and translated materials necessary, and the enrollment mandates [requirements] have been legally vetted…”

Los Angeles County, which has the most IHSS recipients and workers within a county in the state and probably in  the nation, sent a letter last week that flatly said it could not comply with the November 1^st implementation date.

For a copy of this and the other letters from counties to the Department of Social Services, go to the CDCAN website at www.cdcan.us

NEXT STEPS

·         Official text of the bill (SB 69) as approved by the Assembly this evening (November 2)  will be available on the State’s official legislative website later this evening and also on the CDAN website at www.cdcan.us. 

·         The bill heads to the State Senate, and then, if it passes there without any changes, heads next to the Governor.

·         The measure needs 2/3rds vote in both houses to pass as an urgency or emergency bill (a bill that takes effect immediately after it is approved by the governor) which means 27 votes in the 40 member State Senate.  Democrats hold 50 seats in the Assembly, with 1 independent and 28 Republicans and 1 vacancy (72^nd Assembly District).  Democrats control the State Senate with 25 seats to the Republicans 15. 

·         If the Governor signs the bill – which is not certain – the measure would take effect immediately.

·         The Assembly Budget Committee has officially scheduled a follow-up informational hearing on the IHSS crisis for November 5^th, Thursday morning at 09:00 AM, at the State Capitol in Room 4202, though the hearing date and time is subject to change. 

·         The scheduled hearing is the same day as the Olmstead Advisory Committee meeting, which is scheduled to begin at 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM at the Department of Rehabilitation building in Room 242.  The Olmstead Advisory Committee advises the Secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency on the state’s implementation of the landmark 1999 US Supreme Court “Olmstead Decision” under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act.  The US Supreme Court decision required the states to take steps to avoid the unnecessary or unjustified institutionalization of persons with disabilities, mental health needs and seniors.  The  lawsuit was filed by two women with disabilities from Georgia – Lois Curtis and Elaine Wilson – against the then George State Commissioner Tommy Olmstead who headed its health and human services agency.