|
Post by Tom G on Jun 14, 2012 20:12:31 GMT -5
I'm really glad you like That Girl. I still like to watch old episodes on retro TV. I guess I'm showing my age.
|
|
|
Post by Darth Stateworker on Jun 14, 2012 20:16:20 GMT -5
Tom - I think that question has been answered again and again, but I'll answer it again.
I was in jeopardy. I voted no - twice. Why? Because I understand the history of unionism, and I see unions losing power everywhere across the nation. The ONLY way to end the slide is to stand up.
As I noted on CapCon during the contract debate, the vast majority would have been back to work within a few months. Ask around. Ask older workers who were around when Mario was in office and got pink slips. That's how layoffs work. The state has turnover that is greater than 10k people a year, and the mandatory rehire lists that the state would have had to have used would have gotten most back to work in short order. That's what happened to the vast majority of the 1000 Paterson laid off at the end of his term.
So a better question is: How can a union display any solidarity or power when it backs down from a fight due to threats?
|
|
|
Post by Tom G on Jun 14, 2012 20:17:34 GMT -5
Not to go off topic but why does the counter advance when you refresh? This gives the false illusion that more people are reading this blog. You should fix that to keep it honest.
|
|
|
Post by Darth Stateworker on Jun 14, 2012 20:31:47 GMT -5
The counter for the thread shows the number of reads Tom.
|
|
|
Post by Tom G on Jun 14, 2012 20:31:52 GMT -5
Ok Darth, fair enough but you have to understand that not everyone sees things as black and white. You make an argument but it's based on a crystal ball. Example, "everyone would be back to work anyway" There are 2 sides of your solidarity coin. One could argue that we stood up to show our strength by defending our members from Andrew. You may not like it but 70% of the membership did just that. I agree 100% with Pete when he says were not forced as NYUP argues. No one was forced to vote yes or no.
Below is just sampling of what can happen with out a contract and i'm not saying there are not times we should hold out.
"The lack of a contract created a crisis for many PEF members. Nearly 153,000 PEF workers and their family members lost their prescription drug, dental care, and vision care benefits in September 1992.[80] The governor urged both sides to bargain as the benefits crisis worsened,[81] although a state judge later ordered the benefits restored through the end of calendar year 1992.[82]"
We both have our reasons for standing our ground and i don't think it's fair to say that you know what the outcome would have been had we called Andrews Bluff a second time. If you want to go down that road one could argue that he might have laid off more then 3500.
|
|
|
Post by Tom G on Jun 14, 2012 20:37:55 GMT -5
Yes, I know it shows reads but not unique reads. I suppose you might have access to that and we don't.
|
|
|
Post by Darth Stateworker on Jun 14, 2012 20:47:22 GMT -5
Tom, I fail to see where capitulating shows strength. It shows weakness.
As far as your example - it wouldn't happen again. If a judge already found it to be illegal, that means there is now case law that would mean the union could get an immediate injunction to stop such an action in the future.
And as far as the programming of the forum software - that's out of my hands. It's a free Proboards forum. While I have administrative rights, I have no ability to change their programming. And TQBH, your entire comment thread on this matter seems to be just another one of your marginalization attempts.
|
|
|
Post by Tom G on Jun 14, 2012 20:53:35 GMT -5
So you claim the legislature is not crafty enough to mess with us in a different way? I see your argument but at least 50% of the membership sees passing the contract as a sign of strength.
|
|
|
Post by Tom G on Jun 14, 2012 20:54:57 GMT -5
Also, A lot of people are not aware that Andrew never took repealing triburrough off the table.
|
|
|
Post by Darth Stateworker on Jun 14, 2012 21:03:28 GMT -5
Tom:
No, I don't think "50% of the membership saw a yes vote as a sign of strength." They didn't vote yes to project strength. They voted yes so people didn't get laid off, and to claim otherwise without any scientifically conducted polling that concluded otherwise is completely disingenuous.
As far as what the legislature can and can't do, do you even understand the Triborough amendment in the slightest? They could repeal the Triborough amendment tomorrow, and little would change about the way the state workforce is governed, because the Triborough decision by PERB would then be the precident - and the Triborough decision does not allow for them to diminish compensation like health care either.
As far as Cuomo going after Triborough - how feasible do you think that really is? Because it doesn't just affect us, it effects 1.5 million public sector employees all over the state. Don't you think that there MIGHT just be a little bit of a backlash if he attempted to do so? Don't you think the Democrats in the Assembly might just be a little worried about what would happen if they pissed off every civil servant in the state?
|
|
|
Post by peterea01 on Jun 14, 2012 21:10:52 GMT -5
First of all 3,500 of us had a date on our layoff notice and we were already having meetings with management on separation issues. My Regional Director had tears in her eyes and was saying good bye. We were 3 days from the deadline and Cuomo had no intention of backing down. Anyone who says otherwise didn't get a slip and has no idea what they are talking about, When you wear that persons shoes then you can comment.
Now all this talk about being tough. Sue Kent went on record as saying she would have called for a strike. I say what stopped her or anyone else from going on strike? 2 days loss of pay for every day on the picket line, small potatos for the cause. I didn't see any of these big mouth activists willing to use the only tool unions have ever had to deal with the bullying mangement. Why, becasue it would have cost them something.
Had the Sue Kent tough guys taken it upon themselves to organize a strike not only would they have brought Cuomo to his knees, they would have sent a message across the nation to every billionaire that wants to attack public service and the strikers would have been heroes and Sue Kent would be President by a landslide.
Instead they chose the selfish cowardly action of placing others in jeapardy while remaining safe behind that pile of bodies. A hero saves others at their own personal risk they don't act tough by using others as a shield. We call that cowardice in this country.
The real heros are the people that stood up for themselves and fought for their jobs and their families. And no matter which way you try to spin around this issue , make up lies and swift boat it the result will alway come out the same. The public and the membership at large will never buy in to the cowardice. Thats's why the contract went through and was a huge success, even after the phone calls, even after threats, evens after the dire predictionsby the press. Cowards never win in America.
In my opinion this is and will remain Sue Kent's achilles heel. She can't get around it and we will remind people for many years to come. I will never forget what almost happned to these innocent 3,496 people.
I will remind all the brave out there that the next time we get threatened by the Governor I will expect the self proclaimed brave to go on strike. Nothing else will work and you can forget trying to educate them because private industry and their own layoffs gave them all the education they need or want. Now they want your head on a platter.
If the crazies keep up the rhetoric and dividing the unions we are certainly lost.
I know saying this here is a waste of time for most but there may be an innocent soul out there that needs to hear he truth. pete
|
|
|
Post by Tom G on Jun 14, 2012 21:15:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Darth Stateworker on Jun 14, 2012 21:22:43 GMT -5
Actually Pete - I discussed a strike on CapCon more than once. We also discussed it here. I even went so far as to discuss how it helped TWU in NYC illustrate their point the last couple of times they did wildcat strikes contrary to the Taylor law. So, the evidence is there that I was all for one, and the penalty was not something I was concerned with. So are you saying that you would have supported one? Than I would be in complete agreement with you there. However, Brynien isn't. Why? Because he stated as such, and I suspect he wouldn't have wanted to have to park his ass in jail for a few days like the Taylor law directs (union heads get thrown in jail during a strike as per the Taylor law) and Toussaint of the TWU did for his members.
Please Pete, stop with the emotional appeal. As I've reminded you again and again, I was there, in jeopardy like many others. And yet I still felt that the wiser course was to show some strength and vote no. We all saw it coming for months, and those of us that saw it coming prepared for it by scrimping and saving to make sure we would be able to get by until we got called back.
There is no heroism in cowardice Pete, and as a union, that's exactly what we displayed by backing down.
And I don't know about Sue Kent, but I know about me. I put MY OWN neck on the line. Maybe Sue Kent can't say that. But I can.
Honestly Pete, this isn't about Sue Kent. Personally, I'm not thrilled with either choice. However, we've seen what M1st can (or can't) do. They failed. The only one that seemed to have any spit and vinegar was Arlea, and apparently, she's retiring. Maybe if she stayed on and replaced Ken at the head of the ticket, I would have considered M1st. But she didn't. So by default, that leaves me with NYUP. And as far as they are concerned - they've got 3 years to turn things around. If they don't, I'll vote to fire them as well. Unions need strong leadership in this environment. Brynien is not strong.
|
|
|
Post by Darth Stateworker on Jun 14, 2012 21:26:32 GMT -5
Tom - I've properly added your YouTube link. However, I don't think it's very good or original. It's more like a mindless attack ad.
However, as you can see, I didn't delete it because I'm a firm believer that we all should be able to say our peace.
|
|
|
Post by Darth Stateworker on Jun 14, 2012 21:37:49 GMT -5
I'm heading off for the night - the kid is in bed and my DVR has a ton of things queued calling my name. I'd like to thank you both for actually getting down to discussing the issues tonight. Hopefully, such a dialog can continue, because when the election is done, we need a solid direct for us to take no matter who wins.
|
|