Labor news: SEIU vs NUHW

[choppedliver]

http://www.counterpunch.org/winslow04132010.html

As Andy Stern Prepares to Quit
No Knock-Out Blow in SEIU's Courtroom Showdown

By CAL WINSLOW

Amid news bulletins that Andy Stern is about to step down from his job as president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) , the union has fallen on its face again.

Its multi-million dollar law suit against the new National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) in Federal Court in San Francisco has failed in its intent -- to destroy the NUHW.

In trial SEIU called itself the United Healthcare Workers (UHW), its California healthcare workers local. This was deceptive; UHW, placed in trusteeship in January 2009, is run from SEIU headquarters in Washington, DC. We’ll use “SEIU” here for the sake of clarity. SEIU went to court with a civil lawsuit demanding $25 million in damages in a vain attempt to bankrupt NUHW and 28 of its leaders. The core of its case was that the defendants had conspired (for “personal power and profit”) – for years and all on “company” time – to leave SEIU and found a new union.

The trial was part and parcel of SEIU trustee Dave Regan’s promise “to drive a stake through the heart of NUHW”, doing so, he told Randy Shaw, to make certain that NUHW leaders “never again work in the labor movement.”

SEIU is the large organization of service workers, including hospital and healthcare workers. NUHW is a new union of healthcare workers, founded by the former leaders of UHW. They were relieved of their duties (fired) a year ago in January when SEIU trusteed and then wrecked UHW.

In fact the results of this trial, to be fair, were mixed. SEIU lost but NUHW did not win. The jury found no conspiracy, no theft, no violence, no sabotage and no “contracts left open” - and no evidence at all against twelve of the original defendants. There was no evidence of a penny stolen. The twelve “acquitted” won defense verdicts against SEIU. The jury did find the remaining defendants plus NUHW liable for $737,850. The largest part of this resulted from the jury’s calculations of the defendants’ alleged betrayal of fiduciary duties - the jury ordered that defendants pay back part of salaries and costs for January 2009, as well as small amounts for security and dues that SEIU allegedly failed to collect. In this they apparently agreed that the former UHW officers and staff obstructed the transfer from UHW of 65,000 long-term care members to the scandal ridden southern California local 6434 – without consent. And they seemed to agree that these defendants spend some time in January – before trusteeship – preparing to launch the new union, NUHW. This, to say the least, was not the crime of the century. Neither was it a big reward in a case where SEIU spent more than $10 million.

So, there is room for celebration, but not too much. And there are other significant points here, points that need making in part because coverage thus far emphasizes SEIU’s “paltry” recoveries. Also because they are perhaps more important, representing as they do labor’s civil war in California and the fundamental issues remain far from settled.
First, of course, comes the money. In a case that began with demands for $25 million, inevitably there will be the sense of relief; in contrast the $737,850 doesn’t in fact sound like much.

Indeed, $737,850 is not much in twenty-first century corporate America; it is the equivalent of a minor bonus for a junior executive in a bailed-out bank. It is next to nothing in the TV lives of our rich and famous. To the defendants against whom judgments were made, however, this victory must be bittersweet victory at best. When are they to worry? Now? How, god forbid, would they pay? In the future? When?

more at link:

http://www.counterpunch.org/winslow04132010.html

[curt_b]

CL,
I've wanted to comment on this since you posted it, but a lot of it is the kind of inside baseball stuff that I don't think many people are interested in. I follow this much like the hockey fans here follow their favorite sport, and probably for the same reasons.

To keep it short, whether or not Sal Rosselli is a true reformer means little. What I do know is that the culture of UHW under Rosselli was marked by two things that Stern's SEIU could not tolerate:

1) UHW had a strong Stewards' Council at every job site. Every department had a Steward that handled grievances and they met regularly to handle day to day shop floor problems. Moreover they were always involved in contract negotiations.

2) UHW's Staff was largely comprised of former healthcare workers. Their culture was to develop staff from their membership. SEIU, under Stern, has instead recruited staff from people that have never worked in the industries.

The problems came to a boil about the time of the SEIU national convention in 2008. The convention was held in San Juan and the Governor of Puerto Rico joined SEIU in breaking and raiding the Puerto Rico Federation of Teachers, the strongest and most militant union on the Island. The new union is a subsidiary of the Puerto Rico Teachers Association, a group that has long represented principals and supervisors at island public schools.

At that convention, SEIU did two other things that were questionable. They invoked the equivalent of democratic centralism, forbidding any criticism of SEIU's line, and they formally eliminated the role of Shop Stewards by setting up an 800 number for members to call for grievances and eliminating the Stewards' Council (staff would now handle grievances instead of Stewards).

So, my instinct is that any NUHW victory is a good thing, but throw in all the intrigue of the California Nurse with both and it's a tough call.

[choppedliver]

CL,
I've wanted to comment on this since you posted it, but a lot of it is the kind of inside baseball stuff that I don't think many people are interested in. I follow this much like the hockey fans here follow their favorite sport, and probably for the same reasons.

To keep it short, whether or not Sal Rosselli is a true reformer means little. What I do know is that the culture of UHW under Rosselli was marked by two things that Stern's SEIU could not tolerate:

1) UHW had a strong Stewards' Council at every job site. Every department had a Steward that handled grievances and they met regularly to handle day to day shop floor problems. Moreover they were always involved in contract negotiations.

2) UHW's Staff was largely comprised of former healthcare workers. Their culture was to develop staff from their membership. SEIU, under Stern, has instead recruited staff from people that have never worked in the industries.

The problems came to a boil about the time of the SEIU national convention in 2008. The convention was held in San Juan and the Governor of Puerto Rico joined SEIU in breaking and raiding the Puerto Rico Federation of Teachers, the strongest and most militant union on the Island. The new union is a subsidiary of the Puerto Rico Teachers Association, a group that has long represented principals and supervisors at island public schools.

At that convention, SEIU did two other things that were questionable. They invoked the equivalent of democratic centralism, forbidding any criticism of SEIU's line, and they formally eliminated the role of Shop Stewards by setting up an 800 number for members to call for grievances and eliminating the Stewards' Council (staff would now handle grievances instead of Stewards).

So, my instinct is that any NUHW victory is a good thing, but throw in all the intrigue of the California Nurse with both and it's a tough call.


Thanks CB, and one reason I never got too involved in sports (I do root for Ohio State and Buffalo Bills/sabres) is because I can never remember pertinent info/data/stats. Same goes with the labor movement for me. One thing I have seen is that Andy Stern/seiu became a typical top down leader/union, as you well know and demonstrate above. Its the same with the teacher's unions also. Andy Stern belongs in an Asshole thread. I am glad UNHW won some thing, (on edit, the phone rang, I sent it without finishing).

[choppedliver]

Continuing some thoughts:

How SEIU can be a union without stewards is beyond me. I recall last year when tabling for single payer a local nurse came up and was talking about her Professional group. My comrade and I were perplexed and asked her what she meant. She said the group that negotiates their contract. We both said in unison, you mean your union! She said, no, its not a union...Its a professional group, snide as hell. Argh, its sad when a worker doesn't recognize the fact and looks down on labor.

Again I have to say how much I hate my union's motto " A union of professionals" yuck. Actually, all unions could use it because to get paid for a job is to be a professional, right?