I am thinking about starting a real thread about MSEA, Politics, State Government, News Worthy events rather then the same old foolishness. Maybe we can grab past people and new people.
Somebody else should start a thread pointing out changes needed.
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH
TLR said: "Sonny, you are targeting MSEA not other unions"
Thanks for pointing that out. LOL!
IT TAKES ALL KINDS.
TLR said: "I was told yesterday and today things are far more exciting since my arrival."
You should be billing msea for your services rendered.
Big Labor Folds, Endorses Obama
What is it about so called Labor Union Pwogwessives and Obama?
Why is it only the real right and left get it?
Now watch as all SEIu affiliates like msea get on board the Obama train whether you like it or not.
Looney Ranger was asked to respond with Ideas of substance and he can't, I think he is a laughable hit man for SEIu, who demonstrates SEIu frustration in NOT being able to silence this thread. Bottom Line Looney, IS, what has been posted here IS the accurate depiction of life with SEIu, what you bring make no sense other than to demonstrate ignorance. You write ignorantly, your points are ignorant and you bring uo things that you know nothing about. I know people who know you and have called you an ignorant bully just trying to keep your SEIu position at all costs to the membership. But, please keep your nonsense up because to the intellegent person, they make a strong arguement for immediate change. The Looney Ranger and his oblivious sidekick "El BruceO". If either of you would just explain your position on any SEIu act effecting members, we can have a meaningful debate here. For example, Hiring an Executive Director with no Union experience, at a critical time for MSEA, provided WHAT advantage?
SEIU/MSEA should get a dem. they have supported to take leg. action and pass the right to work Fairshare bill for state employees (eliminate that) to set stage to renew action and settle pending grievances.
Buy doing that the contract would she settled very quickly IMHO. They would get nothing but it would be a start. They are not going to get anything anyway. Which is the intent of the administration.
Look no more w/ the names and accusations. As I have said many times if you really want to know who I am and my experience just ask anyone. Look me up on MaineOpenGov. etc, etc. .
I have always been upfront and honest w/ any post here in this thread . Obviously that is not the case w/ you two whatever you are.
Bruce, I agree that in order to get a contract signed it will take compromise from MSEA. If the elephant in the room during negotiations is "Fair Share", I suggest that MSEA compromise. The other subject matter that many are discussing is elections are in November and will the republicans survive. Not just state employees are upset. If a majority of democrats are back it may be a different ball game.
I thought that I heard that the contract problems are going to arbitration. MSEA may stand a chance at arbitration and I am guessing that this is what they are holding out for and they may be hoping that a majority of democrats are back next year.
Another new topic is DHHS is being reorganized. Apparently many state workers that have been employed for many years have received letters that due to the merge of divisions their positions will be dissolved therefore they will be terminated from DHHS which is terrible news to receive and leaving them dangling is uncalled for. Even though word at DHHS is that new jobs will be available, workers that received these letters have not been promised a job working in other positons. Let's not forget our long time state workers at DHHS that have worked very hard and are doing a great job.
Even though there are many problems at DHHS downsizing at this point is not the best idea. It is my understanding the Mental Health, Substance Abuse and Children Services are three divisions where staff members are being targeted. I ask, who in Maine believes that Children's Services is not essential. I am uncertain to where Children's Services will be placed. There focus should be straightening out the mess for MaineCare. Of course some of these positions being eliminated may be confidential but not all. Is MSEA helping to make sure workers find positions? I hope so and I hope legislature is paying attention. I have heard that the democrats are opposed to such cuts and believes this needs to be further evaluated. Where will the republicans fall with these recommendations. I hope they all remember that this will be an election year and this is another disadvantage to state workers and to people receiving these services in Maine. Let's hope legislature does the right thing this time and assists with making sure state workers and citizens receiving services don't continue to suffer.
BL said: "I have always been upfront and honest w/ any post here in this thread . Obviously that is not the case w/ you two whatever you are."
Well so much for you having always been upfront and honest.
CHRIS "HOMER" QUINT IS NO MEADOWLARK LEMON!
BtB said: "For example, Hiring an Executive Director with no Union experience, at a critical time for MSEA, provided WHAT advantage?"
None what so ever for msea members....which is why he was hired.
The State doesn't want their managment union to have any advantage.
It's like watching the Washington Generals play the Harlem Globetrotters.
The Generals never win by design because they never have any players better than the Globetrotters.
Well keep in mind, again your comment regarding compromise is not correct. Under Maine Laws pertaining to collective bargaining the process ends with the employer implementing it's proposed changes unilaterally. At which point bargaining is resumed however with the status quo being the employer's position. So compromise may be a tool in bargaining but if a position is rigid compromise has little value. I want to say it is sad to hear of the heavy reductions to the work force at Dorthea Dix. But at least the employees effected can bump, right? There are 100's of contractors working in Unemployment positions, Motor Vehicle positions and many other areas. SEIu, request a list of contractors and allow displaced fulltime workers to fill those jobs! Oh they don't have the contract language to provide that job protection? Oh, of course! But then the workers have their sacred income protection plan, right? Oh that is just for medical! Oh well, SEIu at work for you where nothing is what you'll get!
The issue of bumping is a major area where unions could be very effective for their members. Although MSEA positions have been better protected than AFSCME positions was in past lay offs.
Where AFSCME employees were position to position title in bumping,that is what did me in in 91 I was the only holder of a position in state service, I have seen past MSEA bumps go to similar positions and past held positions titles.
I think it is very obvious this administration has one goal that is budget control etc. and a major element of that will be seeing as many senior employees gone as possible thru any means.
The problem , contrary to popular opinion. is performing the required work and the effect of loosing knowledgeable and experienced staff. There is a price to that.
It was interesting to see the legislator from York publicly raise ethe issue of staffing levels and problems w/ in DHHS latest mess. AS has been state many times all these enew technological advances have all been predicated first on doing more w/ less vs. making sure it cane done correctly ! That was one of A.Kings' major contribution to star service, the age of the technocrat !
Strangelu enough the most successful reorganization in state service have been creating separate entities vs. combining functions.
Ala MH & Corrections to DOC and Dept. of Mental health vs MH going into DHHS.
TLR ypouare correct caution here is warranted.
Bruce Libby, I remember the bumping in 91 that is why I was glad that the majority of employees did not receive cuts even though it is tough receiving a 17% cut. In 91 there were state workers that were targeted and there were state workers that took a huge demotion, many steps down to stay in the state system and avoid lay-off. People that work for the state understand the games when it comes to job cuts.
I feel what happened to retirees was in very poor taste.
Sonny, I hope that MSEA gets going on the latest now.
The other issue I have is why did the governor hire a lawyer to negotiate contracts. That is why taxpayers pay BOHR. If the Governor did not trust is BOHR staff then why does he not replace them or he can send the Commissioner for Admin & Finance in to do the negotiations. These are the Governors appointees.
Retirement I agree in most respects. Unfortunately he attention, irrational attention paid to and how it was paid too my million dollar retirement has accomplished what believed the admin. wanted .
One it motivated senior staff to leave creating immediate payroll savings. Two on the down ironic side it placed more people on the retirement system thus impacting the vaulted "unfunded liability"!!!
There is fault on all sides. The fact is the system was never designed for 14000 employees,nor was it ever in the original dreams that a large number of the work force would be 18 to 22 yrs. old.
If you hire a twenty year old he will work for 25 and then some ,it is that then some that impacts the system. Neither union ever paid enough attention to this. The leg. just didn't care.
Hiring att. for contracts was I think just because he didn't expect the BOHR staff to be behind his ideas and their history is not one to brag about. Remember when fairshare was finally implemented for all unions
the statue was law. It required pay or termination. There were 600 MSEA members under that threat. Baldacci got the word from BOHR ,he said he didn't read contract he signed!!! Wonder why BOHR didn't have much umph!!!
JB couldn't take union money and fire all those members
Here again if the parties had been smart and the gov. office kept the eye on the ball and dealt with real non monetary issues,remember when the lawyer said the classification system is out of touch? Heck I could have told them that.
Maybe the impasse would have been over. SEIU is never going to give up fairshare The admin. will not stop until it is a dead thing that I do not disagree with.
My prediction as I have said right along we haven't seen the bloodbath that will happen .
A chilling reminder is 1991 was 17 million dollars, 1995 was 45 million !
Unfortunately I have seen nothing that indicates future changes will be done with anymore respect for the employees!
I wish thee had been a means to assess the toll the 91 layoffs had on employment as well as the 95 cuts.
BL, excellent points and I agree w/most of your post. I do have a slight disagreement with BOHR not negotiating the contract. The director for BOHR is appointed by the Commissioner of DAFS's and the Commissioner for DAFS's is appointed by Governor LePage. There is also a new associate commissioner for DAFS. These are the Governor's new appointees and they should all be qualified to negotiate the contract. In the past it has been done by the Director of BOHR. At the building I work in it was discussed and we had been told that the Director of BOHR is a left-over from the past administration and has been in an acting capacity for at least 2 years. Why would this important job not be filled? Taxpayers sure could save alot of money with the staff members doing what they are hired to do.
I agree with your point on the administration receiving monies from MSEA which in my mind makes it a conflict of interest for all parties concerned. As we have heard on this site and I have been told for a number of years from other state workers, some have been carefully watching to make sure that MSEA is not targeting staff members along with the administration. I have been told that state workers feel that MSEA does not fairly represent them if they have disagreements or are nonmembers. Is this a fact? People have seen no evidence but everybody should be careful. Sometimes where there is smoke, there is fire. It has been a long time story. I actually know a couple of past state workers that said that is what happened in their particular cases.
You know all there this thread there has been nothing to refresh people on what I see as a simple view.
I heard this at a mid management traing seminar years ago dealing w/ labor relationship issues.
A union is a service industry. They provide the following services.
The first is a event usually provided every two to three years.( Ok not a plus this time in Maine) And the tendency is to deal w/ money and very little else.
The second is situational and in reality usually pertains to disciplinary cases the majority of time.
This is rarely used since for the most part the majority of employees do not get disciplined and need the representation.
Note: In disciplinary cases it is not a case of innocence or guilt , it is ,did they state follow its' own policies and procedures as agreed to in contract and is the discipline appropriate.
I saw the check one former MSEA member received 5 figures not because he was innocent of charges but because entire process was violated by state from investigation to disposition of the case
This perspective supports my belief that if open understands what they (unions ) are supposed to and do their jobs they are not going to be in need of the union or actively involved.
Yes, in this day and age unfortunately it pays to do your job do it correctly and use caution. If there is a problem and one is a member go to them and file a grievance.
I will say 99% of the people bitching about the union fro whatever reason never filed a complaint(grievance) and complaint the union never did anything for them!
A former co worker was ashop steward in NY. if a member came to him w/ a complaint the first thing that was done was handing a from to the member and telling them to document their issue . That starts process
that starts the unions responsibility.
These current negotiations would have been an excellent time to gain language protecting bumping rights and reducing contracting throughout the system There are many contractors in unskilled positions currently. How is it justified to keep those types of contractors working while qualified regular employees lose their livelihood? Many will just fall short of pension credits etc. What of Health benefits lost? An interesting proposal would have been something to the effect, "There shall be no bargaining unit work assigned to an outside contracting agency for temporary Labor while regular bargaining unit employees have been place on layoff status through the downsizing or reductions in work force for any reason unless it be established that all so effected employees have refused such employment."
The reason you are not seeing BOHR negotiating this agreement for the State is two fold when reading between the lines. It appears as though LePage is 'onto' the unique relationship known as the SEIu culture and adament about his desired changes to the State contracts, and, bringing in an outsider introduces concepts from outside of Maine including decisions from other areas. It appears as though governor LePage is of the same mindset as the SEIu supporters by including leverage from outside of Maine the same as is done by MSEA through its affiliation.
Joyce Oreskovich was appointed by Baldacci and is a carryover from that era. Although a capable Labor authority, I would doubt if she has any influence on LePage and in fact is likely minimized in authority. Her role is as a shield for R's as she is positioned to do the grievance dirty work!
Back to Blue, I agree with most of your post but the Governor has made appointments and one is a commissoner for DAFS. If he is unhappy with Baldacci's carryover's then he needs to appoint somebody new. The point I am trying to make is that the taxpayers are paying staff members to do contract negotiations and I agree that MSEA-SEIU is costing taxpayers money but so is this administration.
As far as the newest terminations there are no contractors doing their jobs. They are still employed but word out is that the administration will be creating new positions because they are reorganizing the structure/merging of DHHS. State workers have received a letter that their positions will be eliminated and word it that these jobs will be advertised/posted and are up for grabs even though workers that received termination letters are very qualified to fill vacant positions and some have dedicated many years to state services. Not all of these workers are MSEA members.
Contractors working for the state has been an ongoing issues forever. This is nothing new. It has been going on at DOT, MRS and DHHS for years. I am trying to figure out what good they are doing, are the necessary and is the state saving money? Doubtful.
TLR nobody said contracting was 'new' but just because it has been going on is no excuse to not try to change it. The way to change it is to introduce language into the agreement and now is a good opportunity, As far as who the governor appoints or not, or BOHR or not that is again his discretion. His arguement is made by looking at the Taxpayers costs toward the operation of MSEA such as but not limited to meeting expenses paid by taxpayers. From that stand point dollars paid to an attorney are a pittence by comparison to eliminating the expense. I think worrying about the State's bargaining team is less effective than structuring SEIu's team. But, from what is out there for info it appears as though Interest Arbitration favors the State's position. System wide ability to bump is in many Public agreements at such time as an employee is otherwise out the door, That type of protection would be of great value to some now as the job market remains soft. But as you said it is business as usual! It would be interesting to know the total numbers of contractors working within bargaining units from temporary agencies and other companies. It would also be interesting to challenge the State as to the prudent use of funds associated with contracting, I am aware of some temps making $15.00 per hour when a regular would make $10.00 but then you must look at the addons!
119,000 VIEWS +
Hmmm...since viewership of this thread continues to rise....
Then that must mean there is continued interest in what's being posted here.
Statements to the contrary are just purple juice fueled.
Ahhhhh, Purple Juice. Well Sonny I hope that juice has Libby, Libby, Libby on the label, label, label as it appears as though SEIu has done it again! Using Members dues and Fair Share hostage money as its personal slush fund, SEIu has filled the trough for another Fat Cat bureacrat to slop at with a BIG $$$$$$ salary and benefits! Rumor from the Director of Fields, Grand PooBahh of nothingness office is that the number one staff person of Libby Mitchell has been given a FULL TIME retirement position at 65 State Street! Ohhhhhh Yeahhhh, another know nothing about Labor relations political appointee for the members to carry one their back. The only benefit to this person coming on board is that fair share should go down as an even greater portion of doodues now goes for political purposes! Apparently Belch-a-long personally endorsed the new fully paid retiree as when he reviewed her application she wrote 'hates UPS!' Her role will be walking SEEYOU the SEIu mascot when the lag draggers, barking Seals, Bleating Sheep and posting moaners get together for a rally! Other than that her job is to figure out what Wah Wah is doing! SEIu.......Your Dues at Work for WHO?
THE UNIQUE RELATIONSHIP
BtB said: "Ahhhhh, Purple Juice. Well Sonny I hope that juice has Libby, Libby, Libby on the label, label, label as it appears as though SEIu has done it again! Using Members dues and Fair Share hostage money as its personal slush fund, SEIu has filled the trough for another Fat Cat bureacrat to slop at with a BIG $$$$$$ salary and benefits! Rumor from the Director of Fields, Grand PooBahh of nothingness office is that the number one staff person of Libby Mitchell has been given a FULL TIME retirement position at 65 State Street! Ohhhhhh Yeahhhh, another know nothing about Labor relations political appointee for the members to carry one their back. The only benefit to this person coming on board is that fair share should go down as an even greater portion of doodues now goes for political purposes! Apparently Belch-a-long personally endorsed the new fully paid retiree as when he reviewed her application she wrote 'hates UPS!'"
But isn't that just what Tim "Moe" Belcher meant when he bragged about msea's "...unique relationship with the State"?
Translation: msea-seiu is a subsidiary of the Democratic Party and as such you can expect more of same of this kind of political revolving door.
Question for the masses
Does the cba supercede federal law. If the cba says u have to choose one or the other. Grievance procedure or courts, labor board, mhrc... can one do both anyways?
The cab doesn't but excepted process is that process set out in contract 9which ids the cba) be followed and all steps exhausted wheeling w/a grievance.
AS to violations the LRB is the step where complaints are heard and after resolution I believe one could pursue other action.
TRANSLATER PLEASE???????? Bid Steve raises a good question. No collective bargaining agreement can waive or limit your Federal Rights, They can only limit those rights having access to the grievance procedure and arbitration. So what are the specifics of your question? I am assuming discrimination. Well your Federal rights are guarenteed as is access to Human Rights. additionally there may be contracual benefits protected such as vacation, discipline etc. A contract requiring you to choose one or the other is illegal from what I have seen. Employers like that either or language trying to defer to a lessor degree and control their costs and liabilities. File both charges and let a Court tell you you can't. The arbitrator may defer his opinion or hold it in abeyance pending a decision elsewhere but you could get two decisions with the arbitrator adding contractual benefits not covered by Federal Law. I would be interested to hear BL's response and TLR's the other expert on all that matters!
Example if you file a discrimination complaint it will usually go to Maine Human Rights who is designated to investigate and resolve such complaints, if they cannot or the person filing is not satisfied you may then peruse court action.
It really isn't a case of choosing one to or the other it is steps taken in a progression.
But instead since some may have dealt with these matters in past do not listen BtoB is the resource for you to get further information from.
If you wait long enough you will see a list of the actions BtoB and Sonny have initiated against the MSEA and the results of their labors
I always disagreed with Msea when they refuse to represent you with mhrc or court. If they feel its worth going to arbitration why not go all out and try to recoup some of the costs if discrimination truly happened from the discriminator
PEOPLE IN GLASS HOUSES SHOULDN'T THROW STONES!
BL said: "If you wait long enough you will see a list of the actions BtoB and Sonny have initiated against the MSEA and the results of their labors"
This is you trying hard to be snide I suppose.
But what are you waiting for us for?
Take that hill Sarge, we gotcha covered!
REFER TO CBA SECTION ON DISCRIMINATION
BS said: "I always disagreed with Msea when they refuse to represent you with mhrc or court."
Actually I don't have a problem with that since the grievance arbitration process is supposed to be a more cost effective way to resolve contract disputes.
And if a labor union wants to limit their service delivery to just providing that narrow scope of labor relations services then so be it....but buyer beware and all that.
Of course that doesn't limit a grievant from also pursing a number of legal remedies that may be available to him/her for discrimination/civil rights issues.
And msea's State contracts expressly say that....just refer to their State contracts on discrimination.
But what I do have a problem with is msea firing their Labor Reps for advising people of their CBA rights to also go that legal route in addition to the grievance procedure.
Now why would msea (Belcher & Hiltz) do that? Because of "...msea's unique relationship with the state." (translation: msea is a managment union).
And so if the State of Maine government doesn't want msea Labor Reps advising msea members of their additional rights to also file law suits against the State...then msea will obey the State.
BS said: "If they feel its worth going to arbitration why not go all out and try to recoup some of the costs if discrimination truly happened from the discriminator"
Because you wouldn't want to share your cash settlement verdict, judgement or settlement with msea....it would just end up paying for worthless Democrats.
BiddefordSteve, did make an excellent point. This is a sore point with state workers that MSEA is not carrying through with helping their members and non-members with other methods with LRB and MHRC or law suits.
Back to Blue your point of view was well executed/written. It seems that a union should be doing more than the grievance procedures and correct me if I am wrong because I am not an expert on labor but I do believe that other unions do more than file grievances. I would like to know how long it takes to get through the grievance process with other unions.
No names but do others know how many people of brought in a private lawyer and if members/non-members have filed complaints, law suits? I have heard the rumors in my building.