Tuesday, January 9th, 2007...1:43 pm
Victory, and I Don’t Mean a Movie Staring Sylvester Stallone, Michael Caine and Pelé
Hot from SEIU and that big building downtown:
On Tuesday, January 9th, the Pima County Board of Supervisors became the first county in Arizona to allow its workers the freedom to vote to form an authorized union.
“Now we want a vigorous debate among county workers about what kind of employee organization they want,” said Dave Mitchell, President of the Pima County Chapter of SEIU Arizona. “SEIU believes that better workplaces and better services go together. If employees choose SEIU, they choose not only better working conditions, but an opportunity to sit down with management and brainstorm ways to make Pima County an even better place to work and live.”
The ordinance allows employees to vote in an election to choose whether or not they want an authorized union and, if they vote for a union, allows them to meet with the county and confer on wages, health care, improving services, and other issues.
“All of the employees want to congratulate Board Chairman Richard Elias and County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry for working with us to make this historic step a reality,” said Mitchell. “Now we look forward to working together with the county on ways to improve the services that we provide to county residents.”
The item was passed 5-0.
12 Comments
January 9th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
Do you know if the county employees have civil service rules?
January 9th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
Victory? ,
SEIU is poaching from CWA and AFSCME. How do you call that a victory? As a former UFCW member I find Unions like SEIU objectionable. When a Union poaches (attempts to de-certify or grab members from another Union or two) the Labor Movement is hurt and divided. Why in the world would you not even mention that the County and City have two Unions, CWA and AFSCME, with members already?
I would love to see what their (CWA & AFSCME) leadership & rank and file thinks of SEIU. Is SEIU even a part of the AFL-CIO or did they “bolt the AFL-CIO”?
Why can SEIU leave and you make no comments but you write “Those of you that followed the Senate election in Connecticut may remember that Joe Lieberman, when bolting the Democratic Party…”
Joe leaves the Dems and he hurts the Dem cause, SEIU leaves the AFL-CIO and it is a victory.
Am I missing something or is there a disconnect?
January 9th, 2007 at 11:26 pm
It is not poaching when the unions don’t have bargaining rights, even under the AFL-CIO rules. AFSCME has been there forever and never managed to expand the membership or get recognition. We need a strong union presence in Pima. I hope SEIU, AFSCME and CWA compete like hell and sign up every worker available. I hope that the best union wins… Anyway you look at it, progressives win.
January 10th, 2007 at 7:00 am
Lamedem,
You are wrong, CWA and AFSCME bargains (wages) for the employees in Pima and the City.
as for competition, If I understood the post only one Union will emerge from this. So SEIU, instead of looking for a new (workers)organizing campaign attacks the base of CWA and AFSCME.
How do the progressives win ?
January 10th, 2007 at 7:09 am
I haven’t heard of the complaints from CWA, but AFSCME had only managed to sign up two hundred members out of the 6000 member work force. SEIU had in less than a year signed up many times that. At what point is it no longer “poaching”?
AFSCME had no bargaining rights, CWA has some recognition by the city and TUSD, but not by Pima County.
SEIU bolted the national union, but has a “solidarity agreement” with the local AFL-CIO.
January 10th, 2007 at 9:17 am
I think it is really simple; poaching is when one Union runs a campaign where another Union has members. SEIU knew CWA and AFSCME had members, thus they are poaching. If SEIU had an understanding with the AFL-CIO (Local or National) they would not have moved in on another Unions turf.
Have you spoken to Ms. Walker (AFSCME) or Mr. Dean (CWA)? I am sure they would love to get the equal time you gave Mr. Mitchell.
January 10th, 2007 at 10:57 am
The ordinance allows employees to vote to choose which union they want, as it says in Ted’s post. Why is AFSCME opposed to employees voting to choose an authorized union? And ordinance doesn’t apply to the city, so CWA isn’t affected.
January 10th, 2007 at 11:37 am
I think the question is why is SEIU running campaign in a place that has a Union (no matter what shape)
unions are work place democracy in action if the workers need a union join AFSCME. Why spend the $ ?
As for what AFCSME wants I don’t know I am not, or ever have been a member.
SEIU has this type of rep all over
January 10th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
I think the big question here isn’t, “Why is AFSCME opposed to employees voting to choose an authorized union?” or “why is SEIU running campaign in a place that has a Union …”.
The real question is what is the PURPOSE of organizing these workers.
The purpose of the county having union workers is NOT to build up the rolls of SEIU or to protect the monopoly on members that AFSCME had.
The PURPOSE of union organizing is to improve the work conditions and quality of life of those being unionized.
PERIOD.
The politics of this is so damn insider (even on this blog) that it is pretty sad.
The REAL QUESTION is — what is better for the WORKERS.
I’m not arguing that AFSCME is or SEIU is … but why isn’t THAT the debate that you are start AZ Blue Dog? Why isn’t that the response you give to him Tedski?
Lamedem has it right … if this whole insider bare-knuckled union throw down has the net-effect of improving the bargaining strength, the quality of life, and the safe and fair treatment of employees — why do we as regular progessive activists care who wins?
If you have an axe to grind on this issue, it is a political one … and while that is fun and increases the comment count - I don’t see the value in it.
January 10th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Mr. T,
Sorry I thought that this is exactly the place to debate “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” This is a place where weirdo’s (like me) can get as wonky as I want. It is not like I can go the George and Dragon and debate the finer points of Trade Unionism.
I am from a Union family and we used to fight like hell until a republican came around. The Democrats used to have some really good conventions (blood on the floor) until the TV fluff we have now.
Like the Spanish Civil War we Democrats. (I am not a progressive or Liberal. I am a old fashion anti communist, pro Union Democrat) fight until a republican comes around. It is the debate that sharpens my rhetorical skills.
January 12th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
Doesn’t address the main part of my argument.
Maybe instead of PRACTICING your rhetorical skills - you could practice your READING COMPREHENSION.
That way you can actually RESPOND to what I wrote, instead of some bullshit side story about blood at conventions.
January 13th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
Mr. T,
Have you ever been in a union? If you are, (god help the local you are with) have you ever done anything except shoot off your mouth? I do not give a tinkers damn what you think the point is and I really don’t care what you see as valuable. I will respond to what you wrote
1 Stop with the caps, who in the hell do you think you are? That shit bird you style your self as?
2 Since you like caps, how is this PROGRESSIVES is spelled with a r after the g you insufferable jerk (try the F7 button)
3 “The real question is what is the PURPOSE of organizing these workers.”
You were as wrong on this as everything else.
The purpose of a union is to gain POWER, tool
So now post away, I am done with you
Leave a Reply