Home arrow Forums arrow Your Union arrow Local 1036 Merger/Bakersfield Membership meeting of 8/7/08

Local 1036 Merger/Bakersfield Membership meeting of 8/7/08

page: prev  1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26 ... 60, 61, 62  next
Display posts from previous:
Author Message
ross53
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:20 am

Joined: 24 May 2006
Posts: 1435
Location: california
Quote:
I'll try again...when is fucking enough enough?
The day that Wal Mart workers have better medical benefits without paying inept union leaders, to”alledgely” protect them, at that time the UFCW membership will rise and a revolution will begin. IMHO.

Think of this, union member pay $52.00 dollars per month to UFCW inept leaders and the member need to have a second job to make ends meet in addition in order to receive proper medical benefits the member need to apply for government assistance.

Congratulation to, UFCW President Joseph T. Hansen, the 2007 labor leader of the year!!

What a fricking travesty 1.5 million members, 85% earn poverty level wages and work with inadequate medical and pension benefits.

_________________
" I always wondered why somebody doesn't do something about that. Then I realized I was somebody" Lilly Tomlin.
Back to top profile :: pm :: www
saveufcw
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:47 am

Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Posts: 85
Quote:
The posting by saveufcw is from a personnel document of Rick Cranes. The election has not yet been called. Any legal protection (personally, I think the argument is bogus)is not yet an issue. That information is confidential and the person responsible for posting it should be prosecuted.


Hey guys, step down off that high horse OK? Rick is FILED CANDIDATE that has been throwing charge after charge against George Hartwell, most of it FALSE. The moment someone calls him out on his bs you scream foul. I will explain this to you very slowly OK???

There is legal precedent, a published case directly on point, that allows this. It was a Federal case and involved a suit against none other than George Hartwell. The person who sued ended up having to pay his legal expenses and the case never made it to a jury. The judge ruled, and the appellate court agreed, that the PUBLICS' INTEREST IN WHO RAN THE UNION OUTWEIGHS THE PRIVACY INTERESTS OF A CANDIDATE.

We've been doing this for a little while folks. We know how to defend someone from false attacks. Usually, it doesn't take much more than exposing the slanderous piece of trash for who they really are.

Rick created these rules when he attacked people personally in his merger fight. When he attacked their honesty, integrity, and loyalty to members. He wrote the rule book and will now get a lesson in those very rules for we have been playing this game since before Rick crane knew what a union ever was.

Maybe lines might even be inadvertantly crossed in the course of the campaign. Rick would be free to pursue legal recourse should he choose should that instance occur but I promise you this my friend, Rick Crane will never be elected president of 1036. Mark those words. We have way to much on him, and the financing to ensure every single voter knows it.

I emphasize this point. We did not seek nor did we want this battle, but we shall not back down from it either. Let the TRUTH be known though the heavens may fall.
Back to top profile :: pm
Pearson
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:31 pm

Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 1421
Location: Sun City AZ
I'll keep trying till you answer these questions sufcw.
[/b]This isn't about Crane or Hartwell to me. It is about what the ufcw has become; about how guys that are overpaid to begin with make a mockery of what should be a proud labor movement; about how they turn it into their own personal piggy bank as they trot off into retirement.

Where do you want to begin? Wynn's shady house deal? Talirico's $900,000 payday as he was carted off to prison? The 75 million dollars we lost in our pension fund in hedge fund investments that went to a firm the Dority's daughter ended up marrying one of the principal officers? Dority's half a million dollar payday after the failed Southern CA strike? Loveall's half a million dollar payment for a year and a half after he had retired? Hunsucker's $800,000 salary to sell his local to Loveall? Oh yeah, and don't forget all these retirements came with $170,000 a year retirement checks. The abuses have been so egregious that now new (and old) staffers are getting screwed.

Your guy was trying to do the same thing. See, it isn't personal, it's just wrong. It's endemic in the ufcw. And during all this time, ufcw members have been going backwards. I really hope you haven't been buying the spin machine hype on grocery workers united that has been spewing how great these settlements are.

What you are seeing is manufactured unionism. It's little wonder no one cares, no ones votes, no one gives a rats ass if it's Hartwell or Crane. No one cares if it's the ufcw or seiu. We're losing the battle of representing workers and now we've walked to the edge of the cliff.

The boys have wrapped their arms around employers and said let's all just get along. Did you see Lind's comments regarding an old local 839 grievance they settled? Did you see Loveall's comments on "NO CONCESSIONS" and then read the internal 7 page memo that highlighted the pluses and minuses? Have you seen how making partners in the past has worked for the auto workers and airlines unions?

Where does it end? When do members count?

_________________
If we don't do it, who will?

Last edited by Pearson on Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top profile :: pm :: e-mail
skywalker
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:31 pm

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 592
Location: California
saveufcw wrote:
There is legal precedent, a published case directly on point, that allows this. It was a Federal case and involved a suit against none other than George Hartwell. The person who sued ended up having to pay his legal expenses and the case never made it to a jury. The judge ruled, and the appellate court agreed, that the PUBLICS' INTEREST IN WHO RAN THE UNION OUTWEIGHS THE PRIVACY INTERESTS OF A CANDIDATE.

We've been doing this for a little while folks.


Is the case that you are referring to?

Macias v. Hartwell

What about some of the other court cases?

As to your second point.

True, you have been sticking it to people for a long time now and its actually high time that we shove it back up your collective rectoms not out of any malice but just to be fair and in the spirit of Solidarity.

After all,

We are more than a union, we are a family

_________________
Seek the Truth
Back to top profile :: pm
Laboryes
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 3:18 pm

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 2054
Quote:
Mark those words. We have way to much on him, and the financing to ensure every single voter knows it.


Ya! Sufcw we know you have the "financing" that would be the inflow of dues revenue collected from the rank n file members having to work two & three jobs just to make ends meet right?

Don't you think that money would be better spent on educating and taking care of the members rather than spending it on a bunch of lawyers and expensive glossy flyers to spew your one sided opinion on the members so you can protect your golden free ride?

Here's the way I see it! While Crane may not be the answer to all he did accomplish one thing that I haven't seen Hartwell do and that was get members away from their fantasy football and off their couches to get involved with the goings on with their(not Hartwells) union!

Then of coarse maybe that's how Hartwell likes the members...dumbed down,uninvolved and not paying attention! That way, like Loveall he can feast at the trough all at the members expense while no one is the wiser! Am I close?

One other issue at least Crane had the balls to login here at uncharted and ask a few questions! Haven't seen Hartwell login and give his opinion! What's up with that?

_________________
"When people refuse to obey, then democracy comes alive."
Howard Zinn
Back to top profile :: pm
ross53
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 3:43 pm

Joined: 24 May 2006
Posts: 1435
Location: california
skywalker wrote:

We are more than a union, we are a family


No way brother… we are family up until you pay your dues and you let our fearless/inept leaders do anything they want without questioning them.

The moment that you start asking questions you become an outcast, you are not family anymore actually our fearless leaders label you anti-union.

Hey George, show us that you really care about your family ( "We are more than a union, we are a family") that is your slogan on your solidarity newspaper correct? do the right things then, let the merger vote stand, and schedule the officer’s election for 1036 A.S.A.P.

I love some of the current dictators who are in control of our union. Hey George maybe you should call Kasparian and ask him for his wisdom he is doing a great job of oppressing the rank and file in San Diego. “ The Kasparian way or the highway”.

Kasparian, "Don’t Worry" in time I will post the detail of the conversation of Nov 2007 between UFCW Local 135 officials and Albertsons officials.

I am sure that the UFCW International will be very proud of your leadership. Rolling Eyes

_________________
" I always wondered why somebody doesn't do something about that. Then I realized I was somebody" Lilly Tomlin.
Back to top profile :: pm :: www
Laboryes
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 4:16 pm

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 2054
Quote:
" long live Pedro"


Vote for Pedro- http://www.natlauzon.com/images/vote4pedro.jpg

Sorry Ross I couldn't help myself Mr. Green

_________________
"When people refuse to obey, then democracy comes alive."
Howard Zinn
Back to top profile :: pm
unionnow
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 5:25 pm

Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 846
Location: Gettin the Hell out of retail
The case you are tlking about is found here Macias v. Hartwell

That was struck down under Californias Anti Slapp law.

That being said. It is very difficult to slander a union president. It is almost impossible. The same thing goes in a union election. Its been that way for many years.

It is illegal to post items from someones personal file. This suit does not address that but go ahead and do it anyway, its not your money that you are throwing away. It is just your ass you are trying to save. You have been doing it for years.

If you read between the lines in this suit you can see that the person was fired for attempting to run against Hartwell. Its just like the the blog found here:

http://saveourunion.blogspot.com/

It totally validates Crane's timeline and the reason why he was fired.

It looks like cooler heads have prevailed and there is going to be an election instead of a merger vote.

The first hit piece is in the pipe and anything goes.

They can accuse Crane of anything. It the Crane side follows slander for slander then its going to get ugly and confusing for the membership.

Let the hartwell side do the slamming. Take the high road and just focus on doing something for the membership.

If Crane is really married into the Loveall family then god forbid.

If that is false get the marrige certificate out and ready for priniting.

If its not true they are going to allege it.

_________________
“The burden against Damascus. ‘Behold, Damascus will cease from being a city, and it will be a ruinous heap. (Isaiah 17:1-2)
Back to top profile :: pm :: e-mail
ross53
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:50 pm

Joined: 24 May 2006
Posts: 1435
Location: california
Good morning Unionnow,

I just received an e-mail from my friend “PEDRO” Pedro is respectfully asking you
To look up a case Savage v Hartwell.

Pedro alleges that Roslyn Savage was let go by GH simply because she was Diabetics and Martel Fraser was instrumental in making Savage life a living misery.

Savage eventually retired with permanent disability and George Hartwell and Martell Fraser went in town to gloat with the members’ money.

Thank you, from my friend Pedro.


Not this one... http://www.natlauzon.com/images/vote4pedro.jpg
but the real Pedro.

_________________
" I always wondered why somebody doesn't do something about that. Then I realized I was somebody" Lilly Tomlin.
Back to top profile :: pm :: www
unionnow
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:08 pm

Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 846
Location: Gettin the Hell out of retail
Its harder to find this stuff if it did not go to the court of appeals.

Which county was it filed? If you know where it was filed you can get a copy of the whole suit. A legal service will go in and copy it for you for a fee.

It also depends on jhow the case was settled.

Was if filed by the DOL or the Labor Board?

_________________
“The burden against Damascus. ‘Behold, Damascus will cease from being a city, and it will be a ruinous heap. (Isaiah 17:1-2)
Back to top profile :: pm :: e-mail
Laboryes
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:52 pm

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 2054
Quote:
To look up a case Savage v Hartwell.


Hey while we're looking up old court cases unionnow can you look up a case Jack Loveall v Frank Diprospen?

Would have been either Placer county or Sacramento county.

_________________
"When people refuse to obey, then democracy comes alive."
Howard Zinn
Back to top profile :: pm
unionnow
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 9:19 pm

Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 846
Location: Gettin the Hell out of retail
That one was filed in Federal Court in Sacramento.

If you want to view it its open to the public. If you want a copy you will have to go to a legal service and pay them to go in, make copies and then mail them to you.

_________________
“The burden against Damascus. ‘Behold, Damascus will cease from being a city, and it will be a ruinous heap. (Isaiah 17:1-2)
Back to top profile :: pm :: e-mail
skywalker
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 10:42 pm

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 592
Location: California
unionnow wrote:
Which county was it filed? If you know where it was filed you can get a copy of the whole suit.


It was filed in Ventura County and what is really nice is that everyone that was a party to this legal action has a complete file including Hartwell's and Savage's Depositions that were given under oath and under the penalty of Perjury.

Actually, there is a whole lot more to the Savage story Here is a taste.

The settlement agreement was agreed to by the UFCW International Union, Hartwell and Hayes.

The 1996 settlement included her UFCW Disability Retirement and rightfully so. Rosalyn suffered from many troubling medical conditions that prevented her from ever continuing to work in the UFCW work environmemnt.

She had been a seventeen year insurance office clerk for Local 1036 and Local 770 prior to that.

Fortunately for Savage, she was able to become employed at the L.A. unified School Disrict and has worked as a full time office clerk for the past 11 years.

What was done to her was simply barbaric.
Her deposition is simply earthshaking but can be substantiated by witnesses that worked with her at the time.

Still, it wouldn't be prudent at this time, for us to post the entire legal complaint or Court Depositions.

However, we reserve the right to post them at a later time.

_________________
Seek the Truth
Back to top profile :: pm
saveufcw
Post Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 11:40 pm

Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Posts: 85
You guys are spinning so fast it is making me dizzy. But in the interest of fairness I'll try to keep up...
Quote:
we know you have the "financing" that would be the inflow of dues revenue collected from the rank n file members
WRONG as usual. It is private money. By the way, how convenient you forget to mention that Crane didn't have a problem cashing those very same checks, and is seeking to cash some more. He was collecting over 100 grand a year for nearly 15 years. AMAZING how that point gets missed.
Quote:
While Crane may not be the answer to all he did accomplish one thing that I haven't seen Hartwell do and that was get members away from their fantasy football and off their couches to get involved with the goings on with their(not Hartwells) union!
I don't know I would give crane the credit, but he did instigate the controversy and that generally causes higher turnout. Of course, mailing the ballots to peoples homes helps as well, and that wasn't Rick's doing.

Your point however is a fair one. For all we talk about our leaders and what they do, at the end of the day it is OUR union. All our members need to do is vote. Don't like the merger? VOTE NO. Don't like the contract? VOTE NO. Do like the dues increase VOTE YES. The point is VOTE. If the membership voted, got involved, their wouldn't be "questionable" elections because the will would be clear and votes wouldn't be close.

I know I know, it's all Hartwell's fault no one votes.
Quote:
When do members count?
The members ALWAYS count. Here is the problem. No matter how much a leader does in the best interests of the membership, making the best decisions he or she can with AL the facts known to him or her at the time, there are ALWAYS those who, usually with little or no knowledge who will attack, mock and ridicule hose decisions. Which brings us full circle to Rick Crane.

Rick Crane is not an average stock clerk at the market running "from the ranks of the people." He is an executive who was fired and grabbed a job so tat he could run to be an executive again. He made his fortune at the UFCW yet decries others. He claims all these differences with George Hartwell but so far we have seen two although he has indicated 3. They are as follows...

1) Rick Crane opposed the dues increase to restore the strike fund. OK. That is a fair position. George Hartwell took the tough position (as leaders have to do sometimes) that after the tough strike, the strike fund was depleted and should be shored up. There was the additional argument that entering yet another tough negotiating cycle the threat of another strike was very real. It would have been utterly irresponsible of George Hartwell NOT to seek to increase the strike fund both from a negotiating standpoint, and a practical standpoint.

1a) Rick indicates he wasn't happy with the current contract. (I believe he voted to approve it but I could be wrong) Many people weren't "happy" but is Rick claiming that he would have pushed the walk-out instead? Would he still have done that if there was no rebuilt strike fund? THESE are the tough questions that we should be discussing.

Unfortunately Rick Crane has chosen to embark on a long term negative campaign and is now crying because he finally got hit back.

As for the merger yes, Rick opposed the merger once he figured out he couldn't run for president, but didn't resign out of protest. He was fired. Now that he has serious financial motives in the outcome he has run a negative campaign of scare tactics. (ie: The executive board could just give Hartwell a raise post merger) Of course there is NEVER anything to back these allegations up and it avoids Rick having to deal with substantive specific policy differences he may have... why you may ask?

..because it is difficult to claim you oppose someones policies when you have been voting for, and promoting them for years.
Back to top profile :: pm
unionnow
Post Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 12:24 am

Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 846
Location: Gettin the Hell out of retail
Quote:
As for the merger yes, Rick opposed the merger once he figured out he couldn't run for president, but didn't resign out of protest. He was fired. Now that he has serious financial motives in the outcome he has run a negative campaign of scare tactics. (ie: The executive board could just give Hartwell a raise post merger) Of course there is NEVER anything to back these allegations up and it avoids Rick having to deal with substantive specific policy differences he may have... why you may ask?


Crane has been around long enough to know that a merger means no election of officers. I find it interesting he was fired soon after he became known he was running.

Maybe he changed his mind? Dont we have that right in complex issues such as these?

The leadership of that local has a long history of that stuff and its SOP in all UFCW Locals.

god forbid the person who runs for office.

There are some good serious questions that need to be asked. Its good we have a forum to do that. It's up to the members at UFCW 1036 to ask those questions.

Thats what an election is all about. Choose your leadership wisely, its what our fathers died for.

_________________
“The burden against Damascus. ‘Behold, Damascus will cease from being a city, and it will be a ruinous heap. (Isaiah 17:1-2)
Back to top profile :: pm :: e-mail
Home arrow Forums arrow Your Union arrow Local 1036 Merger/Bakersfield Membership meeting of 8/7/08
Page 25 of 62
page: prev  1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26 ... 60, 61, 62  next
Display posts from previous:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group