SF leaders condemn SEIU tactics

|
(103)
SEIU President Andy Stern, perhaps the nation's most powerful union boss, has become a lightning rod for criticism.

San Franciscans seem to be turning against Service Employee International Union and its national President Andy Stern this week, first with the vote by SEIU Local 1021 members to oust Stern’s leadership team, and now with a letter signed by a broad array of top political officials condemning SEIU tactics against the National Union of Healthcare Workers.

As the Guardian reported last year, NUHW President Sal Rosselli and his management team broke away from SEIU’s United Healthcare Workers after a protracted conflict that culminated in a hostile SEIU takeover of the local, placing it under a Stern-controlled trusteeship. NUHW had criticized Stern's autocratic leadership style and undemocratic methods while SEIU accused Rosselli of using union funds to undermine Stern's decisions.

Since then, a majority of SEIU-UHW workers statewide has filed petitions asking to decertify with SEIU-UHW and affiliate with NUHW, which has won seven of the nine elections that have been held so far. So SEIU filed various complaints with the National Labor Relations Board to try to block those elections, while NUHW has complained of worker harassment and ballot meddling by SEIU.

Earlier today, SEIU-UHW sent out a press release touting an NLRB ruling that clears the way for elections at 51 facilities around the state covering 6,845 voters, blaming NUHW for “violating members’ democratic rights” in opposing those elections.

But NUHW leaders say SEIU-UHW has been “cherry-picking” selected sites where they think their chances of winning are good and keeping their NLRB complaints in place to block other sites, often dividing up bargaining units in the process to raise fears in workers that they might lose bargaining clout if they switch unions. NUHW is a relatively small organization compared to the massive SEIU.

NUHW leaders say they want a fair, up-or-down vote among all of the SEIU-UHW members statewide who have asked for elections, and they’ve asked SEIU to sign a Fair Election Agreement to prevent harassment and intimidation, something that SEIU often asks employers to sign.

Supporting that request is an open letter signed by 116 San Francisco political leaders from across the spectrum, including every member of the Board of Supervisors except Sup. Carmen Chu, Assembly members Tom Ammiano and Fiona Ma, Sen. Mark Leno, Democrat Party chair Aaron Peskin and nine other members of the DCCC, all four major candidates for the Dist. 8 Board of Supervisors seat, United Educators of San Francisco President Dennis Kelly, and representatives from a board array of unions and grassroots organizations, including UNITE-HERE, POWER, Young Workers United, Chinese Progressive Association, Coleman Advocates, and many others.

Interestingly, in addition to his critics on the left within the labor movement, Stern is also being criticized by conservatives right now after President Barack Obama appointed him to his National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.

The Guardian has forwarded the letter and allegations to SEIU-UHW officials and is awaiting a response, which I’ll post in the comments section when I hear back.

 

The letter reads:

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED community leaders of San Francisco, are deeply troubled by allegations that the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) committed multiple, serious violations of state labor law during the union representation election between SEIU United Healthcare Workers – West (SEIU-UHW) and the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) for 10,000 Fresno County homecare workers this June.

These allegations, made in sworn testimony before the California Public Employment Relations Board, include that SEIU officials directed staff to open, mark, and alter workers’ ballots; threaten the deportation of immigrants; and tell workers they would suffer the loss of wages, benefits and hours to scare them into voting for SEIU. The complaint alleges further that SEIU organizers physically removed ballots from workers’ mailboxes and homes.

Caregivers in San Francisco have complained of similar intimidation and harassment at the hands of SEIU officials trying to block union representation elections requested by them and tens of thousands of other California healthcare workers who have petitioned to join NUHW.

Over the next year, as thousands of San Francisco homecare workers, private sector nursing home workers, and private sector hospital workers make their choice for union representation between SEIUUHW and NUHW, we are committed to see that these workers can make their decision democratically, without intimidation, harassment, threats or coercion of any kind, from any party.

NUHW officials have communicated to us their willingness to enter into Fair Election Agreements, which are common in California’s healthcare industry, and which SEIU officials have long championed throughout the nation, to govern their campaign conduct and protect caregivers’ freedom of choice in their upcoming union representation elections.

Therefore, we are asking that you and San Francisco’s healthcare employers join NUHW in negotiating Fair Election Agreements to establish ground rules for these elections and guarantee that workers can choose their representatives for themselves. Please know that regardless of your decision, we will stand united to ensure that San Francisco’s healthcare workers have the fair elections they deserve.

Comments

SEIU-UHW spokesperson Adriana Surfas sent the following reponse, which she said was all the want to say about the matter, taking no further questions:

 

In their continuing effort to pursue personal power over the interests of the 150,000  members of SEIU-UHW in California,  NUHW is once again trotting out allegations  they made after losing an election to represent 10,000 home health care workers in Fresno. 

Here are the facts:

  • SEIU-UHW was certified as the winner of the election by the California State Mediation and Conciliation Service last June. An NUHW protest of the election result had so little merit that it was summarily dismissed without a hearing.
  • NUHW submitted charges four months after the election that were based on the non-credible stories of unreliable “witnesses.”  They have done nothing to advance these charges with the appropriate authorities, but have used them repeatedly to try and generate media attention and public support.
  • The Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) has taken no action on the bogus charges and it is not even clear that they will consider them.
  • Many of the allegations were made anonymously and lack any credibility. The few allegations that are made by named workers are by people who were not even listed as eligible voters in the election. 

  • The chief accuser – a person who worked as a temporary SEIU employee staff person during the campaign – previously vowed to cause “trouble” for SEIU because he was not offered full time employment at the conclusion of the campaign.  Despite defending SEIU against false accusations throughout the Fresno election campaign, including denying that SEIU in any way threatened workers’ immigration status in an interview he gave on Spanish language television, he since changed his story 180 degrees and now says he was asked to participate in a variety of illegal and unethical activity.  It is more than mere coincidence that his concerns about his behavior while working for SEIU only surfaced after he was not offered full time employment and expressed his anger about it.
  • None of the people making these allegations were able to connect the actions and statements they supposedly heard from SEIU staff to an actual person, despite saying that that the SEIU representatives wore  name tags or badges.
  •  The allegations surrounding threats on immigration are particularly deceitful and malicious. SEIU has more immigrant members than any other union in America and has been one of the most active organizations in the campaign for immigration reform. Hundreds of SEIU supporters and staff in Fresno were themselves immigrants or sons and daughters of immigrants, and would not for one minute have put up with a strategy that threatened workers’ legal status.
Posted by steven on Mar. 02, 2010 @ 4:27 pm

The corrupt SEIU leadership is desperately trying to salvage their crumbling reputation and diminishing empire. SEIU's racist, malicious and intimidating assaults against Spanish speaking homecare workers in Fresno last summer was the epitamy of the SEIU strategy for winning elections by any means necessary. These despicable acts are well documented by the media, law enforcement, homecare workers and leaders like Dolores Huerta. Adriana Surfas' feeble and unconvincing response to the letter signed by over one hundred San Francisco leaders demanding fair elections between NUHW and SEIU is a slap in the face to democracy and the way things are done in the United States. And Adriana should not forget that the charges against SEIU staff regarding the Fresno incidents are scheduled to be adjudicated later this year. SEIU will be found guilty of intimidation and assault against homecare workers of color.

NUHW RISING! UNITE HERE RISING! SEIU DIMINISHING!

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 7:10 am

Now this post is a joke, I just got back from a conference (not my usual thing I am new to this) in L.A. and people of color were TREMENDOUSLY represented, I also recall a black history section as well. As to the FALSE charges in Fresno, I believe is was NUHW supporters that were wearing purple shirts, going from door to door doing what you claim and also trying to sway the vote their way. THEY STILL lost. He who points the finger, is pointing 10 fingers back at himself.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 10:05 am

The joke is on you and SEIU. If you're new to "this sort of thing" you sure have picked up SEIU's playbook tactics in a hurry. Lies and more lies. And by the way, you should know that SEIU only appears to be diverse--at least as far as the membership is concerned. However, diversity is just a word for SEIU staff when it comes to elections. If you're black, brown, white or any other color--and you're an NUHW or UNITE HERE supporter--then you're placed on a hit list and you'll be lucky to escape with your beautiful skin in tact.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 1:26 pm

You are very very wrong. As a steward under the former leadership and now a steward under the trusteeship I can tell you that everything that has been said about the illegal activities with the NUHW is TRUE! I not only saw for myself but was ASKED by the former leadership to engage in illegal tactics over the year prior to trusteeship. I WILL be testifying at the coming trial, and can only hope that criminal charges are filed. BTW I refused to do as the former leadership demanded why, because I have a conscience and I have dignity. The facts remain that the NUHW has spent the last year confusing as many members as possible, members that have english as a second language. Oh sign here, what's is it? oh it's for your union, oh OK. What they were signing were decert petitions. The have done this to thousands of members. I know the truth I was there I saw and heard what they wanted done, they wanted to dismantle this union and they used members dues ILLEGALLY to do it. This is all a violation of their oaths which is why the US Secretary of Labor (a Presidential cabinet member) recommended trusteeship. If Sal wasn't guilty then explain to me why he refused to let an outside independent source look the books over? He refused and resigned, this alone should tell you that he is guilty of wrong doing. If you are innocent then wtf let them look at the books, your innocent right???????

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 6:06 pm

I think you mean "he who points the finger is pointing three fingers back at himself." When you point, usually your finger and thumb point away and the other three point back.

When you're pointing away from yourself, the most fingers you could possibly point back at yourself would be eight, nine if your pointing thumb is double-jointed.

He who is pointing the finger and pointing ten fingers back must hath eleven fingers or a friend to help.

Posted by also, anatomy fail on Mar. 17, 2010 @ 1:31 pm

YEAH!!!! NUHW wore purple shirts telling people to vote for NUHW!!! How stupid can SEIU be !!!! First off we wore RED shirts and proud of that MAYBE YOU MISSED DAVE REGAN SPEACH. THE ONLY WAY SEIU CAN WIN IS BY THREATS AND INTIMADATION TO THE WORKERS !!!! Well it's not working because we the people are the union and one thing SEIU seems to forget is its our dues money that pay their wages And we the members are suppose to just sat back and keep our mouths shut NOT GOING TO HAPPEN,WE WILL GET OUR UNION BACK WITH OUR NEW NAME NUHW SO BITE ME !!!!

Posted by guest: Janice NUHW SUPPORTER AND PROUD OF IT!!!!! on Apr. 27, 2010 @ 8:19 pm

Sounds like something a Not United Healthcare Worker would say
Typical hypocritical BS
Have uncle sal pay for his crimes against the members he stole from
He is THE LEADER SCABS.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 05, 2010 @ 1:38 pm

As a Kaiser Permanente employee and SEIU-UHW member, I find the continued efforts to politicize the decertifications a serious disservice to union members. Where were these elected representatives, and concerned citizens, while contracts were allowed by Sal and the Executive Board to expire leaving members in jeopardy? Where were they when Sal and the Executive Board over-turned the members democractic vote regarding a pro-rated, based on hours worked, dues structure? Where were these people when Sal and the Executive Board reallocated the Education Funds, giving Sal control as it's Trustee?
NUHW is only operating under a self-interest to divide the union members. They know that clearly the Kaiser Permanente Contract belongs to SEIU-UHW, and that they would not win what we(the actual members) have fought 40 years to achieve. NUHW is willing to place members at managements' mercy, to install themselves back in power.
Clarity will prevail, and on March 22nd a court will hear the case regarding the miss use of our dues money by Sal and the former leaders.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 02, 2010 @ 7:53 pm

In response to your points above:

Q) "Where were these elected representatives, and concerned citizens, while contracts were allowed by Sal and the Executive Board to expire leaving members in jeopardy?"

A) Allowing certain contracts to expire is how a union brings multiple employers to the bargaining table at the same time. It's how you create leverage. It's called strategy. And it's why UHW negotiated the country's best contracts in the health care industry—before the takeover. Now, SEIU's approach is to go into negotiations and immediately agree to whatever the employer puts on the table. That's why their contracts suck, and why UHW's members have taken a hit in wages and benefits ever since the trusteeship.

Q) "Where were they when Sal and the Executive Board over-turned the members democractic vote regarding a pro-rated, based on hours worked, dues structure?"

A) Quite a few years ago (long before the trusteeship) there was a vote on the dues structure for UHW. The proposal was to go from a flat rate structure to a percentage-based structure. Union-wide, workers voted to go to the percentage structure, which of course, means lower dues for members who work fewer hours. But, your co-workers in Kaiser voted against the percentage structure. They were also quite vociferous in their opposition. But, that's what democracy is all about. You get to vote your conscience and speak your mind. So, when the Executive Board of the union voted to allow Kaiser to stay on the flat rate structure, it was out of respect for, and in deference to, the vote of the members. What you are characterizing as a disregard for democracy is actually an example of how truly democratic UHW was before the trusteeship. Now, a vote of the members mean nothing. UHW trustee Dave Regan has absolute, dictatorial authority.

Q) "Where were these people when Sal and the Executive Board reallocated the Education Funds, giving Sal control as it's Trustee?"

A) The issue of the Education Fund is a long settled issue. SEIU continues to flout these charges to try to smear NUHW's leaders, but here are the facts: 1) SEIU brought these charges to federal court... the judge threw them out. 2) SEIU asked for a trusteeship on these charges... the hearing officer said they didn't merit one.

I have a different question: Why did the Executive Board agree to pay trustee Dave Regan $270,000 a year? Oh, that's right, there is no Executive Board. They didn't agree. Andy Stern removed the elected officers. Dave Regan gave himself that raise.

So where's the outrage over exorbitant salaries, undemocratic decision-making, authoritarian rule, and concessionary contracts? You can find it in the votes of the thousands of workers who have already voted to leave SEIU and join NUHW. This isn't about Sal. It isn't even about Andy Stern or Dave Regan. It's about the workers. The workers are the union. It belongs to the them. That's why the workers are taking their union back.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 02, 2010 @ 9:50 pm

I find NUHW 's lies are putting to many good people and their families in jeopardy to lose thier job, home and more thier VOICE. Look at Kaiser Proffessionals they lost their contract and the right to sit with management to be in partnership. If you do n ot believe me call Kaiser professional's and ask them how much they like NUHW now. I worked side-by-side with Sal organizing hospitals and found him thinking he is above GOD.... know one is or ever will be and he needs to pay all thoses people whom lost their jobs because they walked away from all those contracts. HE ALSO NEEDS TO GIVE US THE MONEY HE TOOK FROM OUR UNION NOT HIS......

I am SEIU-UHW WEST AND ALWAYS WILL SUPPORT OUR UNION NOT HIS...

Posted by Guest costanza-montellano on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 11:34 pm

Woah wait a minute you are so wrong it isn't even funny! If what you say is true, then what do you say about the multiple grievances that disappeared and were never found? 2 of them were mine! Sal and his gang began to rip this local apart 2 years ago, he couldn't care less about the members, I was there when they were at our hospital trying to recruit people to come to the shops and destroy grievances and computers, I heard it with my own ears THEY ASKED me to help them do it. This was not started by Andy Stern it all started when US SECRETARY of labor a member of the Presidents cabinet said that he would ONLY recommend trusteeship if Sal would not allow the books to be looked at by an independent party, SAL REFUSED! Excuse me, if you are innocent you have nothing to hide, this is but one thing that pointed to his guilt in my eyes, that and HEARING first hand how they WANTED TO DISMANTLE the local. How can anyone support a person that took millions of dollars that was OURS? I realize Sal was around forever I have been in the local since 1984 and this isn't the first trusteeship that I have seen. Sal is the only man that I know that can take a car with no engine, no tires and sell it to you all and you end up say yes Sal may I have another and trying to drive off. He was corrupt massive time in office will do that too you. Keep it up people and there wont be any union, Kaiser, Sutter, HCA, Tenant are all looking at this and licking there lips!!! Are you really that stupid? I can't wait for 22 March for the trial to start maybe then you blind people will see SOME light.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 9:47 am

Wrong, wrong, wrong.. Expiring dates at the same time is good, you don't let them expire past those dates while not negotiating. 3 months before expiration you put together your bargaining teams and begin to bargain. You DO NOT wait until after the contracts have expired sometimes months to start negotiating, and you certainly do not make offers across the table that are a single sentence long demanding 25-30% raises etc. You have a schedule and you have a timeline to bargain. No one in health care EVER gets 25-30% and they have more than 2 or 3 bargaining dates if they ARE SERIOUS in representing us as members!! When the trial is over later this month, Sal and his people could very likely see criminal charges filed against them. What they did was nothing short of RACKETEERING, ya know John Gotti type? What they did was illegal YOU CANNOT use our dues for personal gains. You talk of self appointments, what about the self appointments over the years made by Sal in the Presidency, Vice Presidency and Executive Board?? His latest appointments are President of NUHW and John Borsos Vice President. You talk about democracy yet here he is appointing, where are your union elections?? I can tell you our union elections WILL take place in June under a NEW constitution and NEW bylaws that will never again allow this to happen. In our NEW constitution and bylaws we WILL have term limits, will YOU? I bet not!!!! Oh lets not forger about Sal's salaries over the years, 250k last year plus 100k for vacation!!!!

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 10:22 am

"You can find it in the votes of the thousands of workers who have already voted to leave SEIU and join NUHW." you talking about the kaiser professionals in s. ca?...who now have nothing...

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 8:58 pm

"You can find it in the votes of the thousands of workers who have already voted to leave SEIU and join NUHW." you talking about the kaiser professionals in s. ca?...who now have nothing...

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 8:58 pm

SEIU-UHW trustees are bringing this local to ashes, they are expending members union dues like if it belong to them, an open check book for the trustees to expend. In the last year of the trusteeship these thugs have destroy every single worker-member program just to focus in eliminate the workers choice to change union and as Dave Reagan put it in Fresno " To drive a stick into the heart of that thing that is NUHW". What Reagan is missing in this struggle is that the reality is that workers of SEIU-UHW if have the opportunity to vote, they will get rid off the chain round their neck as is SEIU-UHW trusteeship and the SEIU International altogether. People in California know that these trustees have never work a day in their lives before the trusteeship to build our local and our union. That they not even know how to takecare of our union because it is a gift given to them and they do not know how it was created and by whom. Before the trusteeship members union dues were sent to the SEIU International at a rate of 30,000,000.00 per year just to belong to SEIU, a hefty tax that was never late or interrupted, yet the International made a case in a internal judicial event with the judge bought and paid for union members, to made a decision to inmoraly put the former union in trusteeship or face breakage of the membership and little by little dismantle the most vibrant and member driven union. Without shame or remorse they take prise of the work that was done by real leaders and with the help of corrupt, dishonest and violent paid staff they begun a campaign of intimidation and descive. But members will prevail and give the boot to SEIU-UHW and SEIU International so hard that they will be able to travel the world.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 02, 2010 @ 9:36 pm

In response to your points above:

Q) "Where were these elected representatives, and concerned citizens, while contracts were allowed by Sal and the Executive Board to expire leaving members in jeopardy?"

A) Allowing certain contracts to expire is how a union brings multiple employers to the bargaining table at the same time. It's how you create leverage. It's called strategy. And it's why UHW negotiated the country's best contracts in the health care industry—before the takeover. Now, SEIU's approach is to go into negotiations and immediately agree to whatever the employer puts on the table. That's why their contracts suck, and why UHW's members have taken a hit in wages and benefits ever since the trusteeship.

Response to your response:

First of all, these are not the best contracts in the industry -- the New York contracts in 1199 are much better, which always drove Rosselli crazy with envy.

It is clearly not part of any strategy when you cancel 30 contract extensions (after the expiration date of the actual contracts) all on the same day without a vote of the members or even informing them (another great example of Rosselli bottom up democracy -- don't even tell the members what you're doing), resulting in people losing their jobs and being unfiarly disciplined and having no arbitration rights to fight back. Nor is it a strategy to leave contracts open and then have to bargain them in the worst economic crisis in the last 70 years -- well -- let's just say that if that was the strategy then it was a really stupid one. And by the way, these so-called "back-room" deals are being ratified by members in high turnout ratifications by overwhelming numbers, but I guess it just means that all of those members are in on the conspiracy.

Q) "Where were they when Sal and the Executive Board over-turned the members democractic vote regarding a pro-rated, based on hours worked, dues structure?"

A) Quite a few years ago (long before the trusteeship) there was a vote on the dues structure for UHW. The proposal was to go from a flat rate structure to a percentage-based structure. Union-wide, workers voted to go to the percentage structure, which of course, means lower dues for members who work fewer hours. But, your co-workers in Kaiser voted against the percentage structure. They were also quite vociferous in their opposition. But, that's what democracy is all about. You get to vote your conscience and speak your mind. So, when the Executive Board of the union voted to allow Kaiser to stay on the flat rate structure, it was out of respect for, and in deference to, the vote of the members. What you are characterizing as a disregard for democracy is actually an example of how truly democratic UHW was before the trusteeship. Now, a vote of the members mean nothing. UHW trustee Dave Regan has absolute, dictatorial authority.

Response to your response: This may be the most idotic reasoning of all. The local voted 60-40 to change the dues structure, but because one part of the local was unhappy they don't have to abide by the democratic will of the majority? That would be like saying that Obama wins the vote for president in 49 states, but because one state -- let's say North Dakota -- voted for the other candidate then Obama is not their president. That's your vision of democracy? The fact is that tought guys Rosselli, Borsos and the others decided to politicize dues in the local because they were afraid to make hard decisions and face up to the members who had a different viewpoint. They were so chicken that they allowed the local to have dozens and dozens of different dues structures, so members doing the same work pay dramatically different levels of dues -- again undermining democracy. The local needed leadership but what it got from Rosselli was pandering.

Q) "Where were these people when Sal and the Executive Board reallocated the Education Funds, giving Sal control as it's Trustee?"

A) The issue of the Education Fund is a long settled issue. SEIU continues to flout these charges to try to smear NUHW's leaders, but here are the facts: 1) SEIU brought these charges to federal court... the judge threw them out. 2) SEIU asked for a trusteeship on these charges... the hearing officer said they didn't merit one.

I have a different question: Why did the Executive Board agree to pay trustee Dave Regan $270,000 a year? Oh, that's right, there is no Executive Board. They didn't agree. Andy Stern removed the elected officers. Dave Regan gave himself that raise.

Response to the response: So Rosselli & Co. secretly voted themselves lifetime appointments to the ed fund board and get to select future board members. Now THERE'S real democracy -- heck, you can change board members every time somebody croaks and you can then appoint your cousin Vinny.

So where's the outrage over exorbitant salaries, undemocratic decision-making, authoritarian rule, and concessionary contracts? You can find it in the votes of the thousands of workers who have already voted to leave SEIU and join NUHW. This isn't about Sal. It isn't even about Andy Stern or Dave Regan. It's about the workers. The workers are the union. It belongs to the them. That's why the workers are taking their union back.

Response to the response: Average contracts negotiated by UHW in 2009 had raises nearly twice the national average in the middle of the recession. All contracts negotiated by member-led teams and ratified by the membership. I would suggest that you look up the word democracy because perhaps you are confused. It's in the D section of the dictionary -- right after C and before E.

And by the way, the salary figure for Regan is total B.S.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 8:12 am

"First of all, these are not the best contracts in the industry -- the New York contracts in 1199 are much better, which always drove Rosselli crazy with envy."

So are you saying that UHW's contracts were the 2nd best in the country behind only those of 1199? I'm certainly willing to cede that point. But why in the world would you then criticize the leadership of UHW for looking up to the 1199's contracts? I know what I want in a union president: someone who is always striving for the very best. I don't know what you want, but if you want someone who will settle for less, well, you found it in Dave Regan. And Exhibit A is the reduction in the Kaiser pension benefit that he agreed to without any kind of a fight.

"This may be the most idotic reasoning of all. The local voted 60-40 to change the dues structure, but because one part of the local was unhappy they don't have to abide by the democratic will of the majority? That would be like saying that Obama wins the vote for president in 49 states, but because one state -- let's say North Dakota -- voted for the other candidate then Obama is not their president. That's your vision of democracy?

Let me say this plainly and clearly: The Kaiser members voted to stay on the flat-rate dues structure and so the Kaiser members got to stay on the flat-rate dues structure. Yes. That's my vision of democracy. And no, it doesn't mean I think that North Dakota should have its own President. Comparing a union vote over dues structure to a vote for the President of the United States of America is not really what I would call an apples to apples comparison.

"They were so chicken that they allowed the local to have dozens and dozens of different dues structures, so members doing the same work pay dramatically different levels of dues -- again undermining democracy. The local needed leadership but what it got from Rosselli was pandering."

There were not dozens and dozens of different dues structures. First there was the flat rate structure, that everyone was on. Then there was the vote mentioned above and much of the union moved to a percentage structure. Then the chapters from the former-Local 535 joined UHW. They were on their own percentage based structure—1.8%, I think, but with a higher cap—and they remained on that structure. Why? Because the leadership of the chapters was adamant that their dues not change as a result of the merger. It was a fair request and the Executive Board of UHW honored it. So, all toll, there were 3 different dues structure. Each was the result of either a vote of the members or the request of the members' elected leaders. Sounds pretty democratic to me. Your claim that there were dozens and dozens of different dues structures is just plain wrong.

"Response to the response: So Rosselli & Co. secretly voted themselves lifetime appointments to the ed fund board and get to select future board members. Now THERE'S real democracy -- heck, you can change board members every time somebody croaks and you can then appoint your cousin Vinny."

Umm, you lost me when you started talking about my cousin Vinny. Though I will admit, I thought that movie was hilarious.

"Average contracts negotiated by UHW in 2009 had raises nearly twice the national average in the middle of the recession. All contracts negotiated by member-led teams and ratified by the membership. I would suggest that you look up the word democracy because perhaps you are confused. It's in the D section of the dictionary -- right after C and before E."

Ha ha! I get it. "It's in the D section of the dictionary." That's funny. I always love ad hominem attacks.

Listen, just because SEIU puts a patina of member involvement on contract negotiations doesn't make them democratic. And, your mention of raises fails to take into account the fact that they were accompanied by massive reductions in benefits and contract standards. Case in point:

Last year Kaiser members had their pension benefit permanently reduced. Dave Regan agreed to the reduction without any kind of a fight. A real union would have demanded that Kaiser put more money into the pension fund— since they make a hefty profit last year—or negotiated for a temporary reduction rather than a permanent one. But the more important question is: did members get a chance to vote on that change to their benefit, which also constitutes a change to their contract? No.

And if that wasn't bad enough, UHW recently agreed to layoffs in Kaiser. The first time there have been layoffs since the beginning of the Labor-Management Partnership. If you enjoy these kinds of reductions in your contract, by all means, stay with SEIU.

"And by the way, the salary figure for Regan is total B.S."

The salary figure comes from the LM2 forms that the union is legally required to file with the federal government. Since you don't believe, I would recommend that you go into the UHW office and exercise your right to see a record of all expenditures—a right you use to have before the trusteeship—but Dave Regan won't let members see the books anymore. What kind of union doesn't let its own members see how their dues dollars are being spent? Apparently, the SEIU kind.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 11:12 pm

I know how you may feel about the trusteeship and lack of democracy we have all experenced, but you only need to ask the question: "why were we placed in a trusteeship in the first place?" I have seen the anguish and dissension experenced in our steward council over the past year as stewards were removed for their promoting of NUHW. Well we had 6 to 9 months of unincombered promotion of a rival union while being paid by the employer at every steward council by our council leaders. Now if I was telling every patitent I saw everyday how great Blue Cross is and how bad my employer is every day, to the hundred + patients I see, do you think my employer, Kaiser, would keep me in my position? Our Constitution and Bylaws prohibit this very behavior. Our union leaders violated this oath to their union, and by doing so, it lead us to be trusteed.

I understand there are some of us that lack tact and the ability to handle situations with cooler heads, and confrontations between both SEIU-UHW and NUHW supporters have lead to very bad situations that shed an unprofessional light on us as health care professionals; and yes, we are all professionals no matter if you are a EVS worker or a MRI tech, we all should talk to each other with respect and civility and hear what the other has to say. We are still all union brothers and sisters!

Now when I hear that our previous ousted union leader Sal alledgedly used our Union dues money to put a law firm on retainer that is known to be a union buster law firm, and Kaiser has the same law firm on retainer, which we shall all know more about the true facts when he is going to Federal Court in SF on march 22nd. My father had always told me to watch out for union busters and I don't know yet the reason for Sal Rosselli actions, be it personal or for profit, but his actions have harmed us all by attempting to weaken our union at such an important time when we need to be unified to bargain a great contract in our challanging economic times. The question begs to be answered: Why, was it for profit, power, or politics as usual, because we were all pawns in his plan?

What I would like to know is, just how do those NUHW supporters think they can negotiate a contract with Kaiser, with a small startup union comprised of the previous ousted leaders, many of whom have left and found gainful employment elsewhere? As you may know, NUHW's legal bills are mounting, and they are running out of financial support to effectively negotiate a strong contract.

I do hope that people will see that we all need to be united, show the Trustees we have our house back in order, get out of the trusteeship, bargain a historic contract that people will look up to kaiser SEIU-UHW members and say: "that is the place I want to work for, they have the best pay, beneifits, and job satisfaction!" We are almost there, so lets keep up the good work and bring those few people on board and mentor those who can learn a little tact in interpersonal skills to co-workers/union brothers and sisters!

And to the political figures I hope you listen to our rank and file members first before you sign anything for NUHW.

Thank You for taking the time to read this and getting involved in our union to make it better stronger and for the people by the people it repersents.

Tom Hinkle
SEIU-UHW
Steward Kaiser devision

Posted by Guest Tom Hinkle on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 8:48 am

I am a Kaiser employee, SEIU-UHW member, and shop steward. I really wish that these 116 San Francisco political leaders would have spent some time to check with me and my fellow union members, from across the region, before signing that letter.

While many of us initially signed petitions to decertify from SEIU at the beginning of the trusteeship a year ago, a lot has been revealed to us since then. We were completely unaware of the misconduct and misappropriation of funds committed by Roselli and his gang. The facts became apparent later after piecing together emails, communications, and common sense.

While our union members did not expect our former leaders to be perfect, we didn't expect them to steal from us either. It is clear that Roselli and his group actually set out to hurt union members in order to serve their own self-interest. Their actions were deceitful and deliberate. They ordered their staff members to persuade stewards to resign in an attempt to render our union ungovernable post-trusteeship. They encouraged SEIU stewards to organize against our own union. They destroyed important documents needed to represent our members. Roselli's group were spending so much energy on destroying our union that they allowed grievances to sit for years without moving them. Arbitration cases were left outstanding by our former leaders because they were too busy spending our union dues on fighting SEIU international, instead of representing our members. Our SEIU strike fund was spent so that they could use the money to form their own union, NUHW. They came to steward council meetings pre-trusteeship to tell us how to cripple the organization post-trusteeship. They knew exactly what they were doing. Many of the stewards at that time, myself included, trusted the relationships we had formed with the people organizing NUHW. We believed the lies that they told us, until the facts screamed so loudly that we could no longer trust our feelings, but instead had to consider the evidence which showed that our relationships with Sal's gang was built on lies and manipulation.

If I had it to do again, I would never sign that petition to leave SEIU and join NUHW. If you ask members of my steward council, they would tell you the same. Roselli's quest for power left the general best interest of our members compromised, lacking, and set aside. Now NUHW wants to come back and try to kick us while (they think) we're down. They want to divide our members in the midst of contract bargaining. This is a time for us to be united! Roselli and Cornejo, of all people, should know that unity is of utmost importance during bargaining. The fact is, they care more about their struggle for money & power than they do about the welfare our union members.

If this was really about growing their newly formed union, they would be out trying to unionize organizations that have no union, which make up approximately 90% of the U.S. workforce. Instead, they are trying to rob the coffers of another union, even if it hurts our working class members with families, who are trying to win a good contract in a down economy. Then again, they've exhibited that they have no problem stealing ... so I guess it makes no difference if they are stealing members or union dues or strike funds. Either way, it all equivocates to dollars & power for Roselli at the end.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 10:42 am

My name is theresa ward i am a home care worker from fresno, i was decived by the old leadership they told me that U.H.W. was gone and that N.U.H.W would be the new union none of which was true. Now i am very active in my union S.E.I.U-U.H.W.
finaly have a vioce at bargaining.
We had an election here in fresno and members choose S.E.I.U-U.H.W to represent Home care workers in the centeral valley. And to my knowledge none of my co-workers were ever threatend or harrassed into voting for S.E.I.U-U.H.W. Members are finaly leading the way to protect our consumers, people with dissablities, and our wages and benifits.

WE VOTED FOR S.E.I.U-U.H.W AND WE ARE STAYING WITH S.E.I.U.-U.H.W

Posted by theresa ward home caer worker, fresno,ca. on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 11:28 am

my name is Jose Gonzales, I live in Fresno ca. I have been a home care provider and union member for nine years in Fresno. I was a witness to the vote count that happened in Fresno. Before the election I was approached by NUHW.
this woman was forcing herself into my home after I repeatedly asked her to leave, until a friend of mine who was visiting said call the police.
I was active before but I am more active now because I truly believe we were deceived by the old leadership. I observed the election and we legally won and were certified. I am very happy with SEIU-UHW and the victories we have accomplished thru hard work and member involvement. In solidarity Jose Gonzales, Fresno home care provider

Posted by jose gonzales on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 11:45 am

I am a Homecare Provider. I have been providing care for 5 years and was involved in the Fresno election in June, 2009.

As a member, I was visited by SEIU-UHW and explained that I have the option to vote for the union I choose. SEIU-UHW DID NOT FORCE ME TO VOTE FOR THEM NOR TAKE AWAY MY BALLOT!! SEIU was professional with their work and remained as ordered to "NOT TOUCH" anything other than explained the two unions and their options. SEIU gave factual information and benefits already existed in the union to broaden my understanding so I could make the right decsion.

I learned that SEIU is my truthful union and have represented us, by fighting the governor to keep our $10.25 in July and keeping our domestic services hours in October 2009. Currently we are working hard to keep our wages and benefits in Fresno County.

SEIU is our union and we will continue to have SEIU as our union.

Posted by Guest Yeng Chang on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 11:55 am

I am Beatrice Olivares, a homecare worker IN Fresno for 25 years. In 2009, I was approached by people that told me that my union SEIU-UHW has been disbanded, the office closed down and a new union, NUHW will henceforth be representing homecare workers. These turned out to be blatant lies. An election followed and to the best of my knowledge, UHW conducted itself very well unlike the harassment and misinformation I received from NUHW. I witnessed the counting of the ballots and was impressed by the proper way it was conducted. SEIU-UHW remains a member driven union. I am a steward and a member of the bargaining committee and along with other member leaders of UHW, we are engaged in steering our union to improve our wages, benefits, working conditions as well as improve the lives of our disabled clients.

Posted by Guest Beatrice Olivares, Fresno, CA on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 12:03 pm

i really wish that these politicians would have done the research and spoken to the members of seiu-uhw before signing that letter because inuhw is telling all lies. nuhw is trying to tear our union apart. they don't care about the well being of our members or our patient and clients. alot of the members were left without protections because nuhw offical,while in seiu-uhw,left our contracts open in hopes that we, the members of seiu-uhw, would believe their lies and follow them. we dont want nuhw and they need to leave us and our clients alone.nuhw is about nothing but a power trip,they dont care about the people who's lives they are destroying. i'm so angry that nuhw is willing to mess up people's lives just to have a little power. our union seiu-uhw has fought long and hard over the last 70 plus years to ensure that the members will be treated fairly and with dignity and respect. now nuhw is trying to tell us false truths to get us to throw away all the hard work that alot of people died to win for future workers and WE SEIU-UHW WORKERS DON'T WANT NUHW(NUHU) and they need to leave us alone once and for all. to all the politicians who have nuhw's back when the truth comes out you'll be sorry you let them put your reputation on the line

Posted by Guest kiana scott on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 12:09 pm

This is up there with putting Kissinger on the 9/11 commission. Stern and the SEIU makes the prison guards look like pussies when it comes to self serving legislation.

"Interestingly, in addition to his critics on the left within the labor movement, Stern is also being criticized by conservatives right now after President Barack Obama appointed him to his National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform."

Posted by glen matlock on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 12:15 pm

What? Are you aware that at my facility the NUHW is taking full advantage of people with English as a second language. They go to Hispanic's, Vietnamese, Chinese etc and tell them they are the union and UHW no longer exists, then they shove a form in their face saying it is for their union and say sign, what they don't tell the member is they are signing decert petitions. Now I have seen on here NUHW supporters saying we are racist, I wonder to myself what is more racist. BTW we had a GREAT black history month celebration at the local recently, oh but wait we are racists so how did that happen? Roselli and Borsos need to retire and to the San Francisco politicians I say this, I live in San Francisco and we are coming after your elected seats ALL of them. So Mr. Newsom and the SF Board of Supervisors and all others since you can't look for nor read the truth you better read THIS! You are finished, no one messes with my job or my brother's and sister's jobs and thinks they will get away with it. YOU ARE ALL FINISHED!

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 4:41 pm

The SEIU-UHW and The NUHW are both croupt as all Hell .What's the difference

Posted by Guest Tony on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 12:26 pm

I am a home care worker in San Francisco, last year I was harassed at my own home by 4 organizers from NUHW, they pound the door and told me they're from the hotel union helping NUHW to collect signatures, and began screaming and yelling at me unless I signed on their blank sheet of paper. I never felt so intimidated in my whole life, I was so upset that I refused to sign. They left and came back in the next day when I went out to work, and they harassed my mother and asked her to forge my signature on their petition. This is what exactly happened! The only thing the UHW organizer has urged me to do last year is to take action to fight the Governor's proposal in cutting home care workers' wages and work hours, the UHW organizer was very kind and patiently explained to me that home care workers need to fight to keep the home care program, if the Governor has his way to cut the home care services, many seniors and disables will be suffer. But on the other hand, these people who call themselves union leaders of NUHW only care about signing up members and taking dues. This year, I heard that the Mayor is going to suggest to increase our home care workers' health care monthly payment by seven times, but instead of standing up and coming out to protest the budget, I am afraid these NUHW will once again harassing me at my home because your newspaper article misleading and encouraging them to do so, and the people signed on this open letter should ask workers like myself to find out the truth.

Posted by Guest Xing Xing Liu on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 1:43 pm

All these SEIU postings were the same lies SEIU told us in millions of expensive flyers in the run up to the Kaiser pro votes a few weeks ago - so what does it say about the uselessness of SEIU lies that 90 percent of us chose NUHW - oh wait - I know - we are ignorant and uninformed and should follow what SEIU staff and the Regan-Stern monolith tell us to obey - NOT! SEIU still doesn't get it and maybe never will: most workers pay their dues so union staff will work in support of the interests worker identify but Stern's SEIU is a dictatorship where staff know everything and the workforce should shut up and pay their dues or SEIU staff thugs will threaten you. So SEIU removing all our stewards and threatening us really worked well - get a clue SEIU - we don't want your corporate "union" dictatorship. Union staff work for us - not the other way around - that's why we pay dues. SEIU is too big for its britches and will keep getting taught a lesson tho I doubt SEIU will ever bother to learn it.

Posted by Guest oso on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 2:14 pm

Oh yes lets mention the Kaiser Pro's vote last January! Haha gotcha! Last Friday those Pro's with NUHW met with Kaiser to try and get Kaiser to use the UHW contract for them, and allow them a seat in Kaiser Union meetings. Kaiser told them NO to ALL their demands, all 5 demands. Kaiser said you get NOTHING! Now those same pro's are VERY pissed and are wanting back into UHW, the NLRB told them no they have to wait until next January, why because 1 election for decert a year is all they will allow. Now these poor people have NOTHING until next year. Oh and while your asking, ask Doctors Medical Center in San Pablo the same thing right after their decert and NUHW election last may NUHW took off, and is nowhere to be found. No bargaining no nothing not even a Rep is present at that poor campus.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 6:34 pm

NUHW Would Not Be Allowed in Kaiser Coalition

Unions will not accept groups who win elections due to "raiding"

Southern California Kaiser workers in the Health Care Professionals, Psych-Social and AFN (Sunset registered nurse) units could not be part of the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions or participate in national negotiations with Kaiser or in the Labor-Management Partnership (LMP) if they leave SEIU-UHW and join a new organization, the unions that make up the Coalition have determined.

The CKPU announcement reads, in part: "The Coalition will not support the application by any Union to join the Coalition or the (LMP) by virtue of gaining representation of Kaiser Permanente employees by raiding a constituent member union of the Coalition."

The CKPU announcement came less than one week after a decision by a regional director of the National Labor Relations Board to order elections among the three Kaiser units covering about 2,400 members in Southern California. This decision is based on a ruling that there is no contract bar in place, despite the fact that each of the groups has a contract that runs at least until 2011. SEIU-UHW has appealed the ruling.

If the members in the three units vote to join the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW), they would lose their current contract and put two years of negotiated wages, profit-sharing payments, healthcare coverage, and pensions at risk - as much as $15,000 for each of them. They also would have to go it alone in bargaining, not as part of the national Kaiser negotiations next year with nearly 100,000 members of the Coalition.

"NUHW is asking us to jump off a cliff. We would be risking two years of guaranteed raises, our profit sharing plan, healthcare coverage, and pensions. We would lose our place in the Coalition, our right to participate in national bargaining, and the benefits of the Labor-Management Partnership," said Tarry Bartley, MSW, Kaiser Riverside. "We would be throwing away our security and bargaining power smack in the middle of the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes."

Posted by Guest on Mar. 04, 2010 @ 6:45 pm

It's funny that SEIU's response completely ignores the call for fair election agreements and concerns about SEIU's conduct in SF, and is instead just a narrow denial of charges in Fresno.

I'm an ultrasound tech at Garden Grove Hospital. If anyone doubts that SEIU is threatening and even assaulting people, here is a video of SEIU staff assaulting an NUHW supporter in the cafeteria of our hospital.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hznSuacEN_I

This is the kind of thing we have had to deal with from SEIU for months. They treat us like this IN OUR OWN WORKPLACE.

If they're not campaigning unfairly, why won't they sign fair election agreements?

Posted by Andrena Kirby on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 2:23 pm

Well I am sorry that this happened, but it is on both sides that this is occurring. One bad apple does not spoil the bunch.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 05, 2010 @ 10:32 am

I have been working as an IHSS worker in San Francisco for 6 years, I have participated in the two hearings in 2008 conducted by former Labor Secretary Ray Marshall, and I have read the hearing report in 2009, I understand clearly why we have to remove the UHW President and E Board, I also know that many of my co-worker understand it too, and they all agree on that decision. Our union is not been hostile takeover, in fact, we were cleaning up our house. I have attend a rank and file membership meeting just last week, we have hundreds of members openly and freely debated and discussed union policy and future of our union, this kind of democracy has never done before during Sal Rosselli's presidency. All I can see right now is our fight against the cuts from the Governor and the Mayor has been disrupted by the disgraced ousted president. We are not interest in following the leaders of NUHW who we have agreed to removed from our union, we are already stand united in UHW.

Posted by Guest Qi Hua Zhao on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 2:26 pm

Unfortunately this looks more like a press release for NUHW, rather than a truthful unbiased opinion from a respected publisher.

Since the trusteeship, we the members have never felt more control of our union and more control at the bargaining table. Prior to the trusteeship, bargaining never felt driven by our needs at Sutter Delta Medical Center. In 2008, I witnessed bargaining at the slowest pace in 16 years, and I’ve been an elected member of our bargaining team for five contracts. We wanted to get bargaining moving, and we really felt like our member voice was being ignored on that count. After the trusteeship, we felt bargaining was much smoother, was more efficient, and was more productive in a positive way. Compared to bargaining sessions in the past with the old leadership of our union, we felt like management was actually willing to work with us.

We voted to approve our contract by 96%. Members have never felt more positive about a contract—especially in these economic times.

For some reason, NUHW continues to try to fill our hospitals with rhetoric and falsehoods without merit, even though we’ve told them we’re not interested. They’re now delaying our vote to affirm and keep SEIU-UHW as our union. SEIU-UHW has done nothing to coerce, restrain or manipulate the members as alleged in NUHW’s attempt to block our election at Sutter Delta Medical Center.

In as much is this article is a puff piece for NUHW, the truth lies within the membership who wants to move on from listening to NUHW’s promises to SEIU-UHW’s results. Earlier this year I was asked by NUHW leadership “Are you better off today than you were a year ago?” The conversation ended shortly after I said, “Yes.”

There’s always two sides to every story. If you really want to know how we feel about our union, please talk to the members of SEIU-UHW.

Posted by Guest Denny Henriques on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 2:50 pm

It's clear these posts were written by SEIU scab staffers. All they have are lies, lies, and more lies. And when that doesn't work they turn to violence. Check out this incident that happened last week against NUHW supporters:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hznSuacEN_I&feature=player_embedded

Posted by Brian on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 8:56 pm

Brian McNamara you are the scab, you are a NUHW employee we ARE members!!! Go back to Massachusetts. If only I had a camera for every time you people ATTACKED me I'd be once rich sucker!

Posted by Guest on Mar. 05, 2010 @ 4:17 pm

That's because for years Roselli has made connections with the media people and the local elected officials not with just support but with money so that is why it is biased. They along with our local leaders could care less whether or not he is telling the truth or he and his actions have been harming us. To the local media all I can say is GREAT job on doing your research, I can see now that if I want real news I will have to get the facts myself, because you clearly cannot. To Mayor Newsom I say, do you so easily forget all the nasty things this man said and did to you in your first run for mayor?
This has all leaded to this statement below:

I Henry Flowers a citizen of the city and county of San Francisco hereby announce my intention to run for city supervisor from district 2. It is time to now put our cities house back in order. A balanced budget, a more accessible city government and one that answers to it's constituents. Muni is out of control and it's time to take that back, the entire city run's on air as though they are high as kites on some drug. Companies do not want to do business here, hospital's who can fully pay to re-build to meet state earthquake guidelines are being put off because it is politics as usual at city hall. The hospitals are asking for NO city or state monies they have their own monies, these construction projects alone will pump billions of dollars into our economically depressed city and give thousands jobs. So you have to ask yourself, why the put off? Well, because there is a lot of money to be made in under the table bribes. It's time to retake our city.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 05, 2010 @ 4:02 pm

This year, more than 2/3 of homecare providers in San Francisco are facing the threat of the Mayor's proposal to increase our health insurance premium by 700%, and, all of the tens of thousands of IHSS workers and patients are facing the threat of the Governor's proposal to totally eliminate the In Home Supportive Services program. We are fighting for a matter of life and death here, and all these people from the elected offices and the community are trying to divide and weaken the solidarity of our union. Often it is the employers who would do every tactics to separate workers so we cannot speak in one demand, now here is the NUHW who are using the same tactics to stop our UHW members from fighting for our job and our wages and benefits. I have participated in many rallies, hearings, and injunction trials last year to stop the Governor's cut to our wages and hours, NUHW is no where to be found in these solidarity actions, they were busy harassing members to break apart our unity. Many workers and I will not fell for these tricks, we will tell others too.

Posted by Guest Sally Tang on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 3:13 pm

we,seiu-uhw members, find it truely disturbing that the politicians signed the petition for nuhw without doing some research on what really happened. you can't truely know what happened without talking to the members nuhw will say and do anything to get support from the community and politicans. the best interest of our members and clients is put at risk do to the tactics that nuhw are using to gain support and decertify our current union. nuhw is full of lies and don't give a crap about our members and clients.NUHW(NUHU) needs to get out of our facilities and leave well enough alone.nobody wants nuhw and thats why they don't want the elections to take place because they know they'll lose. sal roselli and his staff ought to be ashamed of what they are doing to hundreds of thousands of members and their lives. when nuhw stops the lies then maybe, small maybe, people will be willing to hear what they have to say but until then NUHW NEEDS TO GO AWAY AND STOP TRYING TO DESTROY THE LIVES OF SEIU-UHW MEMBERS AND THEIR FAMILY!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by dolores silva on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 3:42 pm

TO ALL U SEI-UHW SUPPORTERS...WHAT SEIU HAS DONE TO PAST CONTRACTS IN CALIFORNIA IS JUST FLAT OUT FACT...JUST SIMPLY DO THE RESEARCH...THEY MASK WHAT THEY TAKE AWAY...JUST DO THE RESEARCH..EVERYBODY WANTS TO ARGUE ABOUT WHO DID WHAT!! WELL I CAN TELL IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY SINCE THEY (SEIU) TOOK OVER THEY HAVE MADE ALL KINDS OF SIDE LETTER AGREEMENTS W/KAISER...AGAINA U DO THE RESEARCH... ASK ANY CENTRAL VALLEY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS BEEN DIRECTLY AFFECTED CUZ OF SIEU AND THEIR BACK DOOR DEALINGS!!!! WE IN KAISER HAD THE BEST CONTRACT'S THAT WERE NEGOTIATED BY SAL ROSELLI AND RALPH CORNEJO!!!! AGIAN DO THE REASEARCH...AND LAST TIME I CHECKED SAL ROSELLI IS NOT BEING INVISTIGATED FOR ANYTHING...ON OTHER HAND SEIU HAS BEEN AND PRESENTLY ARE BEING INVSTIGATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERMENT!!! SO UNLESS SOME OF U ARE AFFECTED BY SEIU'S BACK DOOR DEALINGS CUZ THEY ALLOWED MANAGEMENT TO CHANGE YOUR SCHEDULE, ROTATE U, CHANGE YOUR JOB, WHENEVER MANAGEMENT WANTS!!! SHUT THE HELL UP!!!! WHAT KIND OF UNION ALLOWS AND SIGNS THESE AGREEMENTS WITHOUT UNION WORKER VOTE TO CHANGE ANYTHING...THESE AGREEMENTS AGAIN R FACTS NOT RUMORS...THEY R AVAILABLE FOR ANYONE TO SEE!!! THESE BACK DOOR DEALINGS R SIMPLY FACT!! DO THE RESEARCH!!!!!!

Posted by Guest HEALTHCARE WORKER on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 3:48 pm

NUHW (NUHU) SUCKS THEY NEED TO GO TO H***. LEAVE SEIU-UHW MEMBERS ALONE WE DON'T WANT YOU. WE KNOW WHAT U DID TO THE KAISER PROFESSIONALS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND THAT WAS SOOO F***** UP!! YOU TELL NOTHING BUT LIES AND DON'T CARE HOW MANY OF US AND OUR FAMILIES YOU SCREW OVER IN THE PROCESS. LEAVE US ALONE AND STAY OUT OF OUR LIVES AND FACILITIES

Posted by ANGRY SEIU-UHW MEMBER on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 4:25 pm

It's funny how you say STAY out of our lives and facilities??? but no more than a year and a half ago UHW West was telling Andy sterns that!! the only difference is NUHW is moving towards 1voice a member driven union THE way uhw use to be AND anyone standing up for SEIU uhw is only in it for themself... DO U REMEMBER puerto rico???? We were trying to stand up for our members?? what happpend? UHW was treated like S**T!! Do you remember THAT???? I've been a UNION steward for 16yrs and Andy stern GOTS 2 GO!!!! you can be angry BUT when NUHW takes over?? NOW thats what I'M talking about...

Posted by Guest 1voice on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 8:07 pm

SEIU-UHW IS THE BEST NUHW IS THE ONE STOPPING THE FAIR ELECTIONS BECAUSE THEY KNOW WE WILL PUT THEM OUT

Posted by ANGRY SEIU-UHW MEMBER on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 4:30 pm

its very simple UHW was the best! We used to have a strong Union that protected our workers. That was before, this is now. SEIU-UHW supporters get over it, open your eyes, stop and think, it is so simple. Kaiser used to have LMP---gone, Kaiser workers used to have a pension----gone, Kaiser employees used to have a say---gone. We used to have shop stewards, shop steward that cared---gone-gone--long gone. We will get it all back with NUHW! its that simple.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 15, 2010 @ 5:21 pm

Over the past year we have worked hard to secure good contract – that include wage increases and protects healthcare and other benefits.  In these fights we have had to not only fight management, but we have had to fight a group trying to divide workers and interfere in our facilities.

At Delta we don't want to rebargain our contract and we want to stay where we are at.
Enough with the division!!

Posted by tina seymourGuest on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 4:31 pm

you have to remember who fought for you to have the contract youhave now and the wages you have now, those people who fought for you are now NUHW. remember that

Posted by Guest on Mar. 16, 2010 @ 5:22 pm

Andy Stern is to the American Labor Movement what Walmart is to Main Street America. He has become our generation's labor bastard. Return the Union to the Rank and File! Healthcare Workers Fight Back-Vote NUHW!

Posted by Guest Edward A. Sadlowski on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 4:36 pm

• Over the past year we have worked hard to secure good contract – that include wage increases and protects healthcare and other benefits.  In these fights we have had to not only fight management, but we have had to fight a group trying to divide workers and interfere in our facilities.

Posted by ttinattina seymourGuest on Mar. 03, 2010 @ 5:59 pm