OSA News - December, 1998
The holiday season is upon
us and an entirely cheery letter would be welcome, but for this particular
December, we have both good news and bad news.
The Good News -- just
a little bit. The
first bit of good news is that we have all survived for another year and
can now celebrate our holiday party together. The OSA holiday party is
held at our office, which consists of two main areas. First, there is
the big room (Suite 709) where all the food is, and as a result, it is
often hard to move. Past the doors to Suite 707 are the other 4,000 square
feet where both the music and also the quiet areas are located. It is
a wise member who secures their food and drink and exits to the quiet
areas.
The food is good, various and
plentiful, the drinks are mixed for you by our former college interns,
and the ambience is utterly friendly.
A second bit of good news,
but for the next holiday party, is that our attorney Joan Kiok and the
Fire Alarm Dispatchers' Benevolent Association are jointly taking space
across from OSA on the same floor. By next year they expect to be able
to open their 2100 square feet of offices and desks to accomodate our
overflow crowd. Both Joan Kiok and David Rosensweig, FADBA president,
have expressed their regrets that they will not be able to host at all
this year as the move is still in the negotiating stage.
The next tiny bit of good news
only applies to some of our members, those who are earning the
ten year longevity, but not the ten and fifteen year longevity. The information
and the chart come to you from Jay Warshofsky, a member of our Executive
Board and, obviously, an Analyst with a proclivity for numbers. Jay's
chart appears below.
Our last bit of good news is
that OSA is fiercely engaged, once again, in an organizing election. This
time we are engaged at the Transit Authority and MaBSTOA. To be sure,
the current news regarding corruption and vote fraud at DC37 is no help
to an organizing election but it is our hope and belief that the Analysts
at TA and MaBSTOA can distinguish between OSA and DC37.
As a part of that campaign,
and in response to offers made at last month's membership meeting, OSA
would be pleased to receive any personal testimony from members on behalf
of our union. We will send out some of the letters received to the voters
at TA\OA and thus will make use of our current members positive experiences
with OSA for the current campaign.
Please keep the letters short.
They will not be edited without your approval and must be typed. There
is no guarantee a particular letter will be used although some, at least,
will be used. A letter which simply says you think the union is wonderful
is not of much value. A letter which tells a true story of how union membership
actually helped you is of more value.
Please include your home telephone
number since, as a matter of course, we would like the TA\OA voters to
be able to call you if they have any questions. Send your letter to OSA,
220 East 23rd Street Suite 707, New York, NY 10010 or fax the letter to
OSA at (212) 686-1231 attention Rose. The deadline is "real quick" since
the mail balloting starts the last week in December.
The Very Bad News
-- and far too much of it.
As this letter is being written, DC37 has just been put into the control
of trustees appointed by DC37's parent international, AFSCME.
The tragedy of municipal labor's
largest union has been unfolding for months but, as long as the matter
was internal to DC37, comment by our union was inappropriate. The recent
revelations of vote fraud within DC37 change the matter from an internal
affair to one that affects all municipal workers. The connecting link
is an agreement titled the "1995 Municipal Coalition Memorandum of Economic
Agreement."
Background.
Before 1967, New York City experienced frequent labor strife with tugboat
captains, cops, teachers, caseworkers, sanitation workers, and a host
of other City workers striking in absolute defiance of the old labor law.
In 1968, the New York State Taylor Law replaced the old law. But even
before that, New York City had concluded the "Tripartite Agreement" that
created the Office of Collective Bargaining as a neutral party between
management and labor. "Tripartite" also gave the largest civilian union
the right to negotiate all issues that needed to be uniform throughout
city government.
In addition, the City began
to take the position that it would settle economic issues with one large
union and thereafter, refuse to give more to any other union. The City's
practice of refusing to give more to any union which came to the table
after the first major union had settled was called pattern bargaining.
Many unions have sought to
overturn pattern bargaining, over the years, but none have had any success.
The City can be persuaded, on occasion, to choose to deviate from a set
pattern but it has become very hard for any NYC public sector union, by
itself, to escape the pattern.
In defense, the NYC municipal
labor unions formed the Municipal Labor Coalition (MLC). One of the MLC's
main tasks is to negotiate, jointly, on behalf of over two-hundred-thousand
Municipal workers. DC37, as the largest union, led the MLC. Stanley Hill,
Executive Director of DC37 was also the Chairperson of the MLC. A fine
mess...
The MLC negotiated
the 1995 to 2000 agreement
(The Municipal Coalition Memorandum of Economic Agreement - the McMEA)
but it was felt to be a bad agreement by many unions. There was a two
year pay freeze given in return for a three year no-layoff pledge, and
the contract itself was for a very long period (five years).
DC37 allowed each
of its 56 local unions to vote separately, but totaled the vote for a
final decision. It is now known that thousands of "yes" votes were added
to the Local 1549 returns, swinging the decision from rejection to acceptance.
Once DC37 had voted, all 56 locals were bound by the decision. The Municipal
Labor Coalition locals outside DC37 were free to accept or reject.
Many locals rejected
the agreement, were unable to do better in negotiations on their own and
went into "impasse bargaining" or sought legislative relief. Unions which
went into "impasse" were forced to adhere to the pattern by the arbitrators,
and those seeking help from Albany were also turned down.
The bottom line is
that all municipal unions were forced to conform to a settlement obtained
by an act of fraud. The Mayor, of course, takes the position that he was
unaware of the fraud although he did claim considerable credit for the
settlement.
Where do we go from
here? We don't
know. Meetings are being called both within and outside of the MLC and
many unions are talking of lawsuits and reopened contracts.
Perhaps. Our union will attend
all the meetings and will take any action that seems reasonable, but there
is no precedent for the current dilemma. There was one case in the past
30 years -- a leader of a municipal union falsified a vote -- but in that
case, the leader cheated in order to reject the contract.
The penalties for falsification
of a vote are generally harsh, even if the individuals involved felt they
acted upon good intentions.
DC37 has often been of great
value to its own members and their families as well. Had it not been for
DC37, our city might, itself, have gone into bankruptcy in the mid-1970's.
It is a truly sad moment to see it all go so very far wrong
|