News From OSA - October, 2020

Our ordeal is not over and it will not be over until a vaccine is tested, proven and distributed. That process takes time, so we can anticipate that at least part of 2021 will be less than ideal.

Let us look forward to the day when the plague has been tamed and we can resume our lives in a somewhat changed world.

NEGOTIATIONS AND CONTRACTS. The economic cost of Covid -19 on the State and City has been extreme and would be best "paid off" over a multi-year period by way of City bonds.

The Rich Citizens Budget Commission will favor, instead, meeting those costs out of the salaries, benefits and pensions of you and me, so they may oppose the State allowing such borrowing. That, in turn, makes the next round of contract negotiations look difficult from labor's point of view.

If Broadway does not rebound, if the real estate market is damaged by corporations cutting down on rental space, if the Federal and State governments turn their back on us, we could have a real problem in New York City.

And yet... we have been here before.

Most recently, the mid-1970's saw New York City at a very low point in population, employment and economics, yet we rebounded. Before that, the Depression of the 1930's hit New York City very hard as well.

In fact, if you read the history books, it turns out that our City has often been booming and busting and booming again. Our strengths are not to be dismissed.

We have a super harbor and very stable land. Our climate is moderate and we avoid regular forest fires, tornadoes and most hurricanes. Our geography is gorgeous and our infrastructure is so good that it was able to survive 40 years of delayed maintenance and neglect from the 1950's through to the nineties.

New York is a nice place to live.

And, if there is a New York, they will need us to keep it safe and running. The Civil Service of New York City survived both the problems of the 30's and the 70's. We will survive Covid-19.

MEANWHILE, WHAT ABOUT OUR PRIOR CONTRACT? That was in the last round of negotiations and the pattern set is known to us all.

We are due a retroactive raise totaling 7.25% for the period that started in August 2017.

We would have already gotten that raise had the City not dragged its feet until the virus changed everything.

We do expect that money and that settlement because the City needs to maintain the integrity of the system of pattern bargaining they instituted over forty years ago.

We obviously did not get the increase on time and we probably cannot hope for interest on the delayed raises. We can and do expect to resume negotiations early next year.

900 MILLION DOLLARS. Members were quick to call in early October as the teachers first lost and then regained a huge amount of retroactive pay.

The story was dramatic, but refers back to that third term that Mike Bloomberg purchased for himself. OSA had gotten a 4% and 4% contract before he won that election, but immediately thereafter he discovered the cupboard was bare. Thus, he offered the teachers nothing at all.

His actions violated pattern bargaining and were corrected as soon as he left office. However, he had spent the money due the teachers, so the United Federation of Teachers agreed to defer those raises until this year. De Blasio sought to renege on the deal he had made, but the UFT refused to go along.

The final agreement got the teachers half the money now, and half next year. They also got a no-layoff clause which, at this time, is worth a lot.

WELFARE FUND. The onset of the coronavirus cut down on the ability of our members to seek dental treatment. We asked our provider, Self-Insured Dental Services, for details, and there was a drop-off in claims.

To compensate for that period we are asking S.I.D.S. to consider a revision for this Fund year.

We would like to see if it is reasonable for those members who did not use their full benefits due to Covid-19 to carry over some, if not all, of the unused benefits.

We will have an answer by the November membership meeting. Note, the "Dental" year is from July to June.

UNION ELECTION. The Governor's ban on meetings has been in place since mid-March. It will probably not be lifted until we have an effective vaccine. If all goes well, we can hope to begin holding meetings by March of 2021. At that point, Covid-19 may have been defeated at last.

Meanwhile, it has been distressing to be unable to gather together regularly. Our organization was founded over fifty years ago and, for all those years, we would gather every couple of months to hear reports from the officers and to express our approval or disapproval of actions taken or plans proposed.

Now, during a severe health crisis, we have had to fall back on phone, mail and the internet. We are not alone. All of the other unions, and even the Municipal Labor Committee, have faced the same problems. Attempts have been made to use virtual meetings to replace actual in-person meetings.

The MLC made a series of attempts, with mixed results. The relatively small Steering Committee of the MLC was able to meet, although nowhere near as easily nor as satisfactorily as normal. The larger full-membership meetings were worse. DC37 held a virtual meeting that drew thousands of viewers, but there could be none of the give and take that normally goes with such events.

OSA has not, until now, made the attempt, although we were watching and participating in others’ efforts.

In terms of staying in touch with each other, phones, mail and the internet have been sufficient to ensure that our Welfare Fund and Grievance/Disciplinary work was covered almost as well as normal. Formal negotiations were ended by the City in March, but informal, and vital negotiations over the impact of Covid-19 were able to occur and were effective.

Our organizers could and did try to stay in touch with people, but of all of the aspects of a union, organizing suffers the most from lack of in-person human contact. There was simply no help for this and we were not about to risk the health of our volunteer organizers nor the members they would meet.

Now, however, it is time for our regularly scheduled biennial election.

Our technical folks are trying to set up some sort of virtual meeting, but it is not done yet. Our hard target is the month of November and notice will be given on the phone Hotline and the Weekly Newsline page of this website.

Since it is so unusual a year, nominations will be accepted before the meeting occurs. Any dues- paying member is eligible to run and need only send in a signed letter indicating your interest in running and for which office(s) you are nominating yourself. Please address the envelope to Officer/Board Nominations, OSA, 220 East 23rd Street, Suite 707, New York NY 10010.

The requirement that a nomination be seconded is waived for this election, since many of our members are working from home.

You can see which offices are up for election or re-election at a glance on the "Who We Are" page of this website. All OSA and OSART officers are elected at the same time.

The jobs, for the past half century, have generally been unpaid positions. It has been our practice that workers from regular work locations should oversee the union and guide it, as best they can, to work on behalf of the members.

Nominations received before the meeting will be announced at the meeting and nominations will remain open for ten days after the meeting. The election itself will be by mail ballot.

NATIONAL ELECTION. Finally, some thoughts on the upcoming national election.

Our country has been divided into groups that hold different opinions since our founding. In my own lifetime, I have seen many controversies, but seldom ones that made us hate each other.

There were two differences of opinion in our history that did lead to the most intense passions. Our fight to accept African Americans as equal citizens split our nation in 1860, and it did so again in the 1960's. I believe the good guys won in 1860 and during the Civil Rights era, but there can be no question that the issue divided our nation both times. To this day, there are those not yet reconciled to equality, regardless of race, creed or color.

The second dispute grew out of our well-intended efforts to help South Vietnam's democratic government resist a takeover by Communist forces. One early sign that we could be making a mistake was an article in Army magazine in 1960. Army was published by the Association of the United States Army. One of its monthly editions had a report from a Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) member.

I believe the article was written by a non-commissioned officer whose task was to help train the Army of South Vietnam. The author praised the young recruits that he was training. He did, however, note a problem he did not expect. The young soldiers would follow him into danger without reservation or hesitation. They did not perform the same way for their own officers.

When he asked them why they could never locate or subdue Vietcong guerillas on patrols led by their own officers, the answer was disturbing. It seems they felt that their officers looked down on them and they, in turn, believed their officers to be corrupt and untrustworthy.

This was, of course only one article written at a time when the U.S. presence was limited to only 500 MAAG advisors.

During the next decade, we sent more and more and still more of our young men and women to shore up the Army of South Vietnam. As we became ever more involved, the democratic government fell to a coup by Army officers and one of our reasons for being there became moot.

As the years passed and the war went on, our country became divided over the wisdom of our actions. Some felt strongly that we had to continue and to win at whatever cost, especially since so many American lives had already been lost. Others came to believe we were making a mistake and should cease to send our youth off to fight and die.

This division among us led to hatreds on both sides, pro- and anti-war, and it was a troubled time for our country.

That war ended and, shortly thereafter, a united North and South Vietnam was briefly at war with China. Today, and for many years, Americans are welcomed as tourists in Vietnam. That nation is our ally against the growing power of China and we never, in the 1960's, could have imagined this outcome.

Today, we are again divided, and seriously so. Americans are angry at each other, but the point of dispute is no great issue such as war or civil rights. We are divided over one man.

A large percentage of us are entirely committed to him and a bit larger percentage dislike him with equal or greater intensity.

Four years ago, I wrote that I thought ill of Donald Trump. Since then, he has confirmed my opinion, over and over again. Yet, still, he has a core of support that astonishes me.

Very well. Now, we will vote.

I will vote for Joe Biden, who does not speak as well as John F. Kennedy nor Ronald Reagan. I will vote for him for many reasons, but most of all because I believe he would want to unite us. He may not succeed, but I believe he would want to do so.

You will vote as you will but, as always, I will close by urging you to vote. It is important.

top
top
top
top