Home arrow Forums arrow Your Union arrow To members of CUPE 561 who work at SD43

To members of CUPE 561 who work at SD43

page: prev  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  next
Display posts from previous:
Author Message
prototype
Post Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 9:56 pm

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
Opinions requested -

Can anyone here give me some opinions about this item that I put on the blog yesterday - How CUPE 561 helped change J. J.'s status at SD43.

I could use some feedback on this and other items I've been posting on the blog.

Feel free to comment.
Back to top profile :: pm
wm pasz
Post Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:26 pm

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 1219
Location: Toronto
I'm going to try to respond to your question about feedback in a somewhat comprehensive way which I hope is helpful to you. You've posted a lot of information on your blog and it's obvious that you feel very passionately about your experiences at the school district. I think that what's missing though is a sense of what it is that you're out to accomplish in terms of your use of the Internet. I've mentioned this before and I think you said you were thinking about it but it's not something that you should leave until later.

Something you may want to consider if you want to use the Internet effectively is that communicating in writing online is a lot different than communicating in writing with your employer or with the LRB, court or whatever. The Internet can be a very effective communication tool or it can do absolutely nothing for you. It all depends on how you use it. A few pointers that I've picked up from our own 8 years of online activism:

People visiting your blog are unlikely to read very much of what you've posted unless it's clear to them very quickly, why it's there in the first place. Don't expect visitors to wade through a lot of material to try to figure out what you're all about. They won't. If the site looks complicated or confusing, they'll move on.

Most blogs and activist sites have a short, concise statement about their purpose. It's front and centre on the main page. Visitors will look for this and if they don't see it on the main page, they'll click away to something else.

Only those who connect with (share an interest in) your "purpose" will stay and start to read what you've posted. For this reason, it's best to make your purpose as clear and succinct as possible.

When I look at your blog as it is now, I'm not sure what it is that you're trying to achieve. Are you hoping to...

- raise awareness of workplace bullying?
- think through an approach to your application for judicial review?
- tell people that you're unhappy with the outcome of your case at the tribunal?
- provide suggestions or insights that others with similar complaints might find useful?
- generate support among the members of your union local?
- get your job (and other remedies) back by trying to generate public pressure?

As it looks right now, the answer could be any or all of the above. If the answer is all - or most - of the above, you need to refine your message a bit. Ideally it should be one of the above and the rest can be subcategories or related objectives. The reason for this is that you're looking for people who will develop an immediate interest and might be willing to help you or whatever. If there are too many competing messages, that's not likely to happen.

_________________
Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. You don't need anything else. - Malcolm X
Back to top profile :: pm :: www
prototype
Post Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:32 pm

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
Why am I doing this on uncharted

Sorry I took so long to reply, Pasz.

- What do I want -

I want to continue my job at the school district. I didn't work hard there for 10 years just to get bullied out of the district by someone who was somehow threatened by me. A person in the maintenance shops, in 2005, told me I was a threat. At the time I didn't know what he was talking about. My list of remedies is on the blog. I have the right to 'be made whole'.

- Fight my 'win' at the BC Human Rights Tribunal, decided on September 30/08 -

Though I supposedly won, it wasn't a win. The Tribunal threw me a bone, hoping I would grab it and leave quietly. Sorry, many things in the decision weren't true, the Tribunal knows it, and I'm going to fight the decision at the Supreme Court. I should have been reinstated, into a permanent position, at the least. I should have gotten the full-time position that my casual co-worker was awarded. He was one of my co-workers who also turned his back on me, in the end. The same co-worker who had no complaints about me at the Tribunal hearings, and admitted at the hearings that I had treated him fairly when I was in charge of jobs. The same co-worker I had always gotten along with during all the years we'd worked on the same crews. At the end of this posting read 1. ('Bystanders & Bullying').

- Prepare for Judicial Review at the BC Supreme Court -

The blog is the place for me to post all the relevant information regarding my case. I take the testimony and the documented evidence, together with what the Tribunal Member said, and from that I'll get my argument for judicial review ready. I could have kept the blog a secret, but then I realized that others might benefit from what I'm writing there. The blog might look unorganized now, but the pages will be put into a proper order when I'm finished with it. Also, each page on the blog is readable, and with info pertinent to my case.

- Inform the members of CUPE 561 -

At the same time, the same information can be read by anyone at the school district. That way they'll know what really went on. Nobody there knows the whole story. And I know that the union executive members aren't going to tell them. People in the painting department will know exactly what I'm talking about when they read the blog.

- Bullying awareness -

What happens when someone's targeted, and the wheels start turning to get rid of someone. What happened to me is a classic example. I know that because of all the caselaw I've read about people in similar situations. You can find some of that caselaw on the blog, on lists I've posted there. If a person thinks they're being bullied out of their job, you can bet your ass they're being bullied out of their job. I told the Tribunal about other people who were bullied at the school district, in different departments. Those people told me their stories, while I worked at the district. I also told the Tribunal about the entire payroll department quitting their jobs enmasse at the school district. That was briefly mentioned in the CUPE 561 February 2005 Shoptalk newsletter. Some of those women had many years seniority. Did the President of CUPE 561 care enough about the women to approach them to find out why they all quit? I know the President of CUPE 561 didn't care enough about me to find out why I quit in August 2005.

- Accountability -

How do members of a union find out if their leaders haven't been totally honest?
How do the members of the public find out if the managers of public institutions haven't been totally honest?
How do members of the public find out if the members of the judiciary haven't been totally honest?
The best way to do that is to show cold, hard evidence - in the way of documents. Especially when they're posted right on the internet, for all to see. That way, no one can deny that they exist.

At the end of this posting read 2. ('Bullying in the public sector and the failure of trade unions to support members').

In order for Human Rights Tribunals to continue to be accorded the luxury and unaccountability of the kind of deference which is conferred on them, by legislation and the courts, the public should be ensured that the Tribunals are as honest as the day is long.

Either that, or legislation should be changed so that Tribunals are not accorded such reverent deference.

- Provide information about the BC Human Rights Tribunal -

To inform people what goes on at the BCHRT. How the process really works, what to expect, how to prepare, etc. I want to let people know how not to make the same mistakes that I, as a self-represented person, made while going through the whole process at the Tribunal. I've never found detailed information on the internet from a person who's actually gone through the experience of going through the Tribunal. I guess I'm the first one doing this.

- Why the internet -

So everyone knows what everyone else knows. That used to be the mainstream media's job. Now it's the internet's job.

- Advice & support -

Where can a woman go when they had no true support from their union, when fellow union members turn their back on you even though they know what's going on, when there are no publicly-funded women's groups left to help women going through something like this, when the woman can't find a lawyer willing to take the case on, when the woman can't even afford a lawyer, and when the woman is going through this by herself.

Inhabiting this forum is a huge spectrum of different kinds of people, with different ideas. But the people on this forum all seem to be in agreement about the same thing - there needs to be positive change in unions and institutions in order for those organizations and workplaces to be more effective in helping the average employee. Everyone here seems to be passionate about the need for better justice. This is where I fit in.
Maybe I can contribute by telling my story, and maybe that could help others.

Maybe some of the people here can help me do that, with good advice and support.

At the end of this posting read 3. ('The Dark Side of Justice').


Here's an email I received, on May 24, 2006, from a fellow CUPE bargaining unit member at SD43,
while I was still not working at the school district and still trying to get someone - anyone - in management
to have a face-to-face discussion with me -


"...... Here is a quote from www.uncharted.ca ,a website I'm sure you will find helpful now that you are dealing with a higher lever bureaucracy.

Quote:
"Institutions either control us or we control them. Either we make things happen or things will happen to us. Unions need democratizing but so do the other institutions that affect the quality of our lives - including the places where we work. Those institutions should enhance the quality of our experience here on earth. They should not exploit us, marginalize us or enable our enslavement by private interests. As awareness of the injustice of our marginalization grew, so did our interest in understanding the tools and techniques of oppression."

.......I believe the best way to promote change is from within. You could do the same by coming back to work."



My reply to the person, emailed May 25, 2006, was as follows -

"I agree with you that the best way to promote change is from within. But since I'm not in the system right now I have to try to change things from the outside. That's difficult but not impossible, though I'm still having a devil of a time trying to get someone in upper management at SD43 to have an actual face-to-face discussion with me.

Failing that I'll just get ready for court and that is also another way to affect change, even if it means I'll never work at SD43 again.

That's a good quote you sent from uncharted.ca. But I go one step further than the person who wrote that - I don't hold institutions accountable, I hold people accountable. Behind every string pulled there is a person pulling it.
.............."




Unfortunately, when the person quoted that particular passage about institutions the last line was left out from the original article. That line reads as follows -

Quote:
"And as our understanding of those increased so did the profound belief that it doesn't have to be this way."


I agree with that last line. No, it doesn't have to be this way.


That particular passage about institutions can be found in this article HERE


1. Bystanders & Bullying

2. Bullying in the public sector and the failure of trade unions to support members

3. The Dark Side of Justice


Last edited by prototype on Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:08 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top profile :: pm
prototype
Post Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:46 pm

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
Is my outrage apparent in this letter?

Today I started posting letters, in chronological order, on the blog.

Here's one of the letters I'll be posting in the future, when it's time to insert it into it's proper order.

This is the last letter I sent to (S. K.), the CUPE National rep.

For posting purposes on this forum I've changed some names into initials in brackets.

EXHIBIT 4 - Tab 44

Quote:
May 24, 2006

Dear (S.):

Thank you for your email of May 16.

Here is where I stand today:

I no longer have seniority after many years of having seniority.
I am not on the recall list. Two casual painters with far less seniority than me are on the recall list - both are men.
I no longer have the right to be rehired.
I can no longer be in charge of jobs despite years of successfully being in charge of jobs.
I was told I probably would no longer be allowed to have keys to the buildings after many years of having keys to the buildings.
I apparently now have a bad reputation at SD43, after years of having had a good reputation.
I can only work at SD43 again if I sign a letter giving away my future rights.

After 10 years I have lost a lot. That's what the people I'm complaining about were aiming to do. All their actions produced the desired results.

I can't believe I'm in this situation.

The people I'm complaining about are in the same positions as they were before. Some are in a better position.

I've found that the following line in the Collective Agreement has no significance:
7.8 A. 3. Role of Seniority - Both parties recognize that job security shall increase in proportion to length of service.

Cupe 561 hasn't protected me against SD43's demands that I sign a new, very restrictive contract signing away the rights I used to have and won't be allowed to have in the future. SD43 and Cupe 561 obviously want me to knuckle under. I've been marginalized in the worst way and I'm sad to say that I can't tell the difference between my former union and my former employer. I gave Cupe many chances and many months to help me and I'm no further ahead now than I was when I first went to Cupe about my complaints in October 2005. I really want to believe in Cupe.

About the investigation - I believe that (R. S.) did the best he could with what he was given. Unfortunately, I found that the investigation lacked thoroughness, though I don't blame (R. S.) for that.

You originally told me that you would conduct the internal investigation yourself. The list of incidences that I gave you was intended to complement the letters I had given you in December. When you turned the investigation over to (R. S.) he only had the list of incidences but not the letters. That meant (R. S.) was missing a lot of information.

Also, most of the witnesses that I had listed were not interviewed. Getting information from all the witnesses is crucial to an investigation like that.

Although there are many statements from the witnesses that I refute, the statements that Dave (Y.) made about me swearing at Arthur is slanderous. I have never, ever sworn at Arthur (H.) in any manner at any time.

On May 11, as I was handing some papers on bullying to (R. S.), I asked you if you had read the ones I had given you in December. You said no. I respectfully ask you to please educate yourself and Cupe about the issues of bullying and mobbing. I'm not the only person who's gone through that at SD43. I heard one other person's story about the bullying and mobbing he went through at SD43 a few years ago which drove him out of his last position and into the current one he's in now at SD43. He was lucky that he was a full-time employee with a lot of seniority. A casual like me, whose seniority mysteriously disappeared, isn't as lucky.

Ordinarily at this time of year I would be busy working at SD43 running jobs. It was a challenging job and I enjoyed it. Now, I no longer work at SD43 and I have no other challenges to keep me busy. That means I have a lot of time with a new challenge - preparing my case for the BC Human Rights Tribunal.

On May 17 I filed a complaint with the BC Human Rights Tribunal and have named the Coquitlam School District and Cupe 561 as respondents. I really didn't want to do that but felt I had no choice. I've worked hard all those years at SD43 and I didn't do that just to get bullied out of my job.

On May 8 I wrote Private and Confidential letters to (L. D.) - the Superintendent of Schools, and (M. D.), Director of Facilities. I never heard back from (M. D.), and (L. D.) forwarded my letter to (R. C.), Director of Human Resources.
(R. C.) wrote back to me saying I had until May 26 to accept the new conditions of my re-employment. His answers regarding the rest of the issues I brought up in the letter seemed to me to be callous and indifferent.

My situation seems to become more Kafkaesque as time goes on.

By the way, there's no such thing as a 'seasonal casual' in the Collective Agreement, nor any other type of 'seasonal' employee.

The last paragraph in your letter has this line - 'This is with the view to facilitating your return to work in a productive, workable environment by creating harmonious relations at the workplace for all concerned'.

You don't honestly think I'll be in a harmonious frame of mind going back to work at SD43 under the conditions previously mentioned, do you?

Thank you for the time you've spent to help me.

Sincerely,
( J J )

CC -
-Dave Ginter
-(R. S.)

The following articles describe what happened to me at SD43:

The following info on Bullying & Mobbing were found on -

http://members.iinet.net.au/~rabbit/stalky.htm
http://members.shaw.ca/mobbing/mobbingCA/mobsyndrome-1.htm
www.mobbing.ca


I added to the above email articles about bullying and mobbing, but won't include them in this posting. I will include them on the blog.

BLOG
Back to top profile :: pm
atuuschaaw
Post Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 4:41 pm

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 781
Location: an ahwangan
Quote:
Those institutions should enhance the quality of our experience here on earth. They should not exploit us, marginalize us or enable our enslavement by private interests.

The very things an organization (established to represent it's members) should be trying to accomplish , eh? Oh, but unions with the same structures as the corporations, just doesn't work with democracy very well.
Quote:
That's a good quote you sent from uncharted.ca. But I go one step further than the person who wrote that - I don't hold institutions accountable, I hold people accountable. Behind every string pulled there is a person pulling it.

I agree, while at the same time understanding that the structures of our current institutions have flaws within them...from corporate on down the line. And to quote a plumber friend of mine, (No, not Joe the Plumber), "Shit flows downhill!", which places us awfully close to the rectum of this structure. Our current institutions are hierarchical human resource tools, not horizontal egalitarian communities.

So I guess I have chosen to focus more of my attention towards the question of "How do we build these new egalitarian communities which are a combination of local and virtual villages?" What are the steps we need to take, and in which order of priority do we place these steps? Let me get back to you on that...I'm still working on it. Wink

I think just being here at uncharted and sharing your stories, trials, and injustice is the first big step. And becoming active on the web, blogging and participating in the human experiment runs a close second. Or at least that's how I remember it. But I found when you share your stories with other people, (no matter in which part of the globe they shit), you are taking on the responsibility of change,which is a good thing.

I've struck the flint and tried to light that fire of union democracy...but the tinder and the wood are just too wet. So I thought it might be a good idea to search for some dry tinder and build a new fire. As usual, I post this with a word of caution, it's only my humble opinion! Whenever I'm uncertain...I just listen to the other great thinkers here at uncharted. You would be surprised what you can learn! These collaborators here have a world of knowledge when it comes to fighting undemocratic practices. I would name them, but I don't want to embarrass them. Mr. Green

For the time being, I think I've chosen the word collaborator to represent what I like to be called. I've spent so much time on a wiki lately...it's beginning to sound appropriate. Laughing

_________________
"Speaking the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." George Orwell
Back to top profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www
prototype
Post Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 6:26 am

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
atuuschaaw, did you really say -

Quote:
For the time being, I think I've chosen the word collaborator to represent what I like to be called.


Gee, atuuschaaw, I don't really like that word 'collaborator'. It's always carried negative connotations
to people of my generation (the cold-war generation), and my parents' generation (the war generation).

And then there are the issues which I've been discussing on this forum.

Here's something I found on the web -

Quote:
Collaborators come in many forms. The common denominator is that they are aware of workplace bullying but keep their mouths shut, and thus implicitly or explicitly condone the actions of bullies.

It can be your trusted academic colleagues who for years drunk bears with you, played cricket with you and had BBQs with your family, played with your children but now are distancing themselves.

It can be senior academics afraid that if they speak out and break out from groupthink they will miss out on the next round of promotions, so they join the lynch mob.

It can be governors who know or suspect that senior academic staff are engaged in bullying of junior staff but do not confront those who appointed them, and do not insist on the fair and transparent application of regulations - this is while they are active members of the church.

It can be the union rep who does not question the entrenched culture of workplace bullying, and from his/her protected position often sleeps in the same bed with the managers.

It can be your neighbour who asks you to close the door and move on in life; is prepared to justify and explain what happened to you.

It can be the local media that is afraid to question a local public institution for fear that it will loose advertising and burn bridges.

A collaborator is anybody who - for whatever reason - fails to speak out and speak up while watching the victim of workplace bullying suffer mentally and professionally. We all know what happened to the Vichy collaborators... All collaborators are eventually exposed. Await for your future...


This quote was taken from Bullying of Academics in Higher Education

And if you google collaborator and click on images, well, unsavoury reminders of the past come up.

That's just my take on the word. Maybe others here have more positive connotations of the word collaborator.
Back to top profile :: pm
atuuschaaw
Post Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:23 am

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 781
Location: an ahwangan
collaborator Yep! That's what I really said! Sorry you don't care for it, but it just doesn't carry all that negativity on wikipedia and other wikis. I suppose if one cared to focus their search, the word friend could be considered a negative thing as well.

So I won't call you a collaborator, but you can call me one! Mr. Green

_________________
"Speaking the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." George Orwell
Back to top profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www
prototype
Post Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 11:15 am

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
Supreme Court news -

Last week my petition for Judicial Review was filed at the BC Supreme Court.

The respondents on the petition are the BC Human Rights Tribunal, the Coquitlam School District, and CUPE Local 561. The union was added as a respondent, again, despite the fact that the Tribunal dismissed my case against them a year ago.

For the past few weeks I've been absorbed in paperwork, getting my case ready, which is why I haven't done any posting here or on the blog.

I have more news on all this, including the fact that I've retained a human rights lawyer who worked his brains off preparing my petition for the Judicial Review, but I won't say more about that until I hear from the respondents. The respondents have a right to reply to my petition, but there's a strict, and very short, time limit in order for them to do so.
Back to top profile :: pm
prototype
Post Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:58 pm

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
Supreme Court update -

The responses have come in.

The Coquitlam School District, who have been found by the Tribunal to have discriminated against me, are going to fight me all the way.

CUPE 561, who I've been trying to prove went along with the school district's discrimination against me, as well as try to prove President of CUPE 561 D. Ginter's own discrimination against me, is also going to fight me all the way.

Neither party has offered to talk with me.

I'm still not working at the school district.

The school district has unlimited taxpayers' dollars to fight me, the union has unlimited members' dues to fight me, and I'm paying for myself. Looks like this is going to be very expensive for everyone.

The Tribunal's decision of Sept. 30/08 included the continuing of the anonymization of my name.

Both the school district and the union are against that and it looks like they plan to 'out' my name.

Thought this would be a good time to quote from one of my own letters to the Tribunal. In August 2008 the Tribunal wanted submissions about the continued anonymization of my name. I responded with my reasons for continued anonymization, the lawyer for the school district responded with the school district's objection to the continued anonymization, and I then gave my final reply.

Below is my letter. I left out certain info for this posting. For this posting most last names have been changed to initials in brackets.
Ms. Wills is the lawyer for the school district.

Quote:
August 14, 2008

BC Human Rights Tribunal
1170 - 605 Robson Street
Vancouver, BC V6B 5J3

Attention: ................
................

Dear .............

RE: J. J. v. School District No. 43 Coquitlam ...... (case 3962)

This is to acknowledge that last night I received Ms. Wills' Aug. 13 letter to the Tribunal. A reply was requested and here it is -

I submit that the public interest can still be met while granting me continued anonymity.

Ms. Wills said "In the event the Complainant's home address is disclosed, such disclosure is no different and carries no higher consequences than for any other individual."

Can Ms. Wills guarantee that?

Ms. Wills also said "In this regard, we note the number of witnesses who testified and whose names will undoubtedly be set out fully in the Tribunal's decision. Those individuals were required to testify; are not directly involved as parties; and, yet their anonymity is not protected."

I recall that, in April 2007, Ms. Wills protested my receiving the home addresses and phone numbers of a number of the people named in my complaint, including the Managers at the District. Eventually it was agreed by all that I could send Orders to Attend for certain people directly to the School District. I still don't know the home addresses and phone numbers of any of the Managers named in my complaint, nor the home addresses and phone numbers of Arthur (H.), Dave (Y.), and Dave Ginter. And I have no interest in knowing any of their home addresses and phone numbers. Yet, those people all know my home address and home phone number. Those people have a certain amount of privacy.

Would there be negative consequences for the people named in my complaint (presuming any of the following will be named in the upcoming decision) -

..............
..............
..............

..............

..............

They can all keep their personal privacy. If my name is published I won't have the same privacy as any of the above people, except my brother.

.............

Getting back to the anonymity issue -

I assume that all the people named in my complaint, including the witnesses at the hearings, read the Tribunal's original decision of October 5, 2006, which the Tribunal posted on the internet.

Any one of the people named in my complaint, or witnesses, could have had the right, I presume, to ask the Tribunal for the limiting of the publication of their names as well.

Perhaps counsel for the school district could have advised the people named in my complaint, or the witnesses, that they too could apply for the limiting of the publication of their names. Did counsel for the school district do that? If not, why not? Is there any proof that any of the witnesses asked for the limiting of the publication of their name? Did any of the witnesses express worry, at the hearings, that their name might wind up on the internet in relation to this case?

When I originally faxed my Form 1 Complaint to the office of the BC Human Rights Tribunal, at 10:15 on the evening of May 17, 2006, accompanying my complaint was my cover letter, part of which read as follows -

Quote:
Dear Sir/Madam:

RE: My complaint to the BC Human Rights Tribunal.

Would you please consider this letter as my request for me to withhold my last name on my complaint form to the BC Human Rights Tribunal.

I would like to ask that I be allowed to file my complaint using only the initials of my first two names.

I'm a very private person and I've spent a considerable amount of time trying to decide if I should go through the Human Rights Tribunal with my complaints about my employer and my union.

................

I'm only interested in getting justice and have no interest in publicity. I'm also not interested in destroying anyone's career, which is why I'd also like to leave off the last names of all my co-workers. None of us have a full-time job at the school district we've all worked at and we all depend on decent references to continue to get jobs outside the school district. I'd also like to leave off the last names of the lead hand painter/supervisor and shop steward.

The rest of the people involved in this complaint have full-time jobs at either the school district or the union and their names are already mentioned on their perspective websites.

Would you please consider my request.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

(J. J.)


I can show mercy. Can the school district say the same?

Thank you for reading this.

Sincerely,

(J. J.)

Back to top profile :: pm
prototype
Post Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:44 pm

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
Just adding this link - How CUPE deals with workers who complain

Will post again very soon.

I got a lot of new information recently and I want to let the school district and union know about it.
Back to top profile :: pm
prototype
Post Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:56 pm

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
THE NEWS -

Before I took any further action I wanted to know my job status at the school district.

Here are a couple of letters I wrote, and what replies I received (for the purposes of this posting I've left off the lawyers' names and have also left out my last name) -

On February 6, 2009 I wrote the following letter to both the Coquitlam School District and CUPE 561 (through their lawyers) -

Quote:
"Dear Sirs / Mesdames:

RE: J. J. v. School District No. 43 (Coquitlam) & CUPE 561

As you know I haven't worked at the Coquitlam School District, on the district's payroll, since October 2005.

I've always expressed my interest in continuing my job as a painter at the school district, including reminding the school district and the union of this fact, on numerous occasions, since at least November 2005.

Also, many new documents have recently come into my possession containing information which seems to contradict some of the school district's testimony at the BC Human Rights Tribunal hearings.

I would be willing to discuss my job status at the school district, and the new documents I've acquired, with both the school district and the union.

This letter is written without prejudice to the Judicial Review at the BC Supreme Court, and any other possible future filings in other legal jurisdictions.

I'd appreciate a reply to this letter before the end of February 13, 2009

Thank you.

Sincerely,

(J J)"

On February 6, 2009, I also wrote the following letter to just CUPE 561 (through their lawyer) -

Quote:
"Dear Mr. _____________:

RE: J. J. v. School District No. 43 (Coquitlam) & CUPE 561

Considering that the BC Human Rights Tribunal decided, in September 2008, that Coquitlam School District 43 discriminated against me I would like to know the following -

- what is the position of CUPE 561 regarding representing me in order for me to continue my job as a painter at the Coquitlam School District.

This letter is written without prejudice to the Judicial Review at the BC Supreme Court, and any other possible future filings in other legal jurisdictions.

I'd appreciate a reply to this letter before the end of February 13, 2009

Thank you.

Sincerely,

(J J)"


The union's reply -

The union's response was fast and short. They wrote back saying, in words similar to these, that any proposal regarding my employment would depend on the participation of the school district.

Attached at the hip?

The school district's reply -

The school district hasn't bothered to reply at all.

My new letter to the union -

This morning, Feb. 16, I've sent off a follow-up letter to the union (thru the lawyer for the union), part of which reads as follows -

Quote:
"Dear __________:

RE: Representation from CUPE 561

............

Considering that the school district has decided not to respond to my letter of February 6 and, keeping in mind what I wrote to you in my Feb. 6 letters, I need to know what your position now is -

- Will CUPE 561 represent me in order for me to continue my job as a painter at the Coquitlam School District?

............

This letter is written without prejudice to the Judicial Review at the BC Supreme Court, and any other possible future filings in other legal jurisdictions (in the matter of J. J. v. SD43 & CUPE 561).

............

Sincerely,

(J J)"


I told the union that I would appreciate a reply to that letter by the end of Feb. 18/09.

My next moves -

My patience has run out.

Therefore, I've come up with a list of at least 13 major moves I plan on making, all to take place before the end of February.

None will be illegal.

Some of my moves will be highly public. Worldwide, in fact.

If the school district and union don't want to deal with me privately, then they'll have to deal with me publicly.

I'll post here every action I take, after the fact.

If I get any positive responses from the school district and the union I'll post that here too.

If the school district and union do the right thing I'll let you all know.

My first move -

Just a small step of my first move is HERE (look for the comment from J. J. v. SD43 & CUPE 561)

That gives you a hint of what my next moves might be.

Stay tuned.





Back to top profile :: pm
wm pasz
Post Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:45 pm

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 1219
Location: Toronto
Quote:
It all trickles down.

Stop installing uncaring, coldhearted people into positions of power at school districts, and perhaps bullying might be conquered, at all levels.

And start bringing in neutral investigators, and neutral facilitators, with no connections to the school districts, unions, or the government, when charges of bullying come up.

Bullying has been cited by workplace experts to be the number one workplace problem today, all over the world. And schoolyard bullying, among children, is cited to be epidemic as well.

I've found numerous articles on the internet of workers bullied to death. And also numerous articles on children bullied to death.

Who in BC, and Canada, is going to start taking major action in stamping out bullying in workplaces and in schools?

Anybody?

Perhaps if more people talk about bullying, instead of ignoring it - or hiding it, something might be done about it.

If you google 'bullying' over ten million entries come up.


Well said prototype. The thing that we have to start getting our heads around if we want to conquer the bullying phenomenon is that it's inherent in a workplace order where you have a hierarchy of authority. As long as humans are allowed to dominate other humans, you're going to have this kind of behaviour. Most people are not uncaring or cold hearted (and I don't know how you would test for this during the hiring process without getting into a lot of questionable psychology) but they become this way in the hierarchical environment of the workplace. I've seen the nicest people (who - outside of the workplace - really are care about people, do good things, are good parents and so on) yet put them in an environment where they either dominate others and are themselves dominated by someone and they behave badly. This is the case no whether they are senior managers, shop floor supervisors or even non-supervisory workers. Everybody is busy wielding power, trying to get power or sheltering themselves from the power of others. Most aren't even aware that it's happening. This is a difficult subject for people to get their heads around because the idea of a workplace without bosses or hierarchies of control is so radically different from what we're used to but we're going to have to go there eventually. Bullying isn't the product of bad hiring decisions, psychological problems or lack of training. Power corrupts - on every level.

Looking forward to seeing what you've got planned.

_________________
Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. You don't need anything else. - Malcolm X
Back to top profile :: pm :: www
prototype
Post Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 5:01 pm

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
Hierarchies are sometimes necessary. The majority shouldn't always rule.

What happens when a person who doesn't look like, or act like, the majority tries to fit into the majority?

Here's what a man posted on another website -

Quote:
"My workplace has been going through hiring equity problems for many years. We are underepresented in almost all "target groups" (women and visible minorities). Its a job traditionally dominated by white males and it has its locker room mentality built up over many years which is very difficult to change.
................
About 15 years ago the OHRC began asking questions and eventually a deal was reached which allowed us to try to correct the problem ourselves through outreach programs and a preferential hiring system. ..................
................
Those target individuals who make it face an often whithering torent of resentment and hostility, though progress is being made in this area as well over time. Women in particular bare the burden of being blamed for ruining the boys club that existed in the past and forcing many unwanted changes upon the culture of the job. Those that have stood up for themselves and fought back have recieved little or no support from management and found too few sympathizers amoung their co-workers. Any who rightly launched complaints for harrassment or open discrimination were branded as trouble-making bitches. It's rather like the recent movie North Country with Charlese Theron.

................. I have personally watched a very close female freind hounded off the job in spite of the fact that she was very well qualified and eager to try to fit in. It nearly destroyed her.
I guess there is a lot we could discuss, but i really don't know where to begin. I trust & hope that your workplace is not so polarized or poisoned an atmosphere as mine."


That posting was here HERE - (scroll down to the 4th post)

I have tons more examples but will save those for later.
Back to top profile :: pm
wm pasz
Post Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:39 am

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 1219
Location: Toronto
Hmmm...getting rid of hierarchies doesn't necessarily mean replacing them with a majority rules model. That's one possibility but there are others as well.

Why do you think people engage in the kind of bullying that person whose story you posted describes? I think it has to do with the dominator hierarchies in the workplace. I think it's because people who have no formal authority try to get their power fix by informally dominating others.

_________________
Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. You don't need anything else. - Malcolm X
Back to top profile :: pm :: www
prototype
Post Posted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:00 am

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 128
Location: Canada
Hierarchies -

You're never going to get rid of hierarchies. It's part of the human psyche.

What bothers me is the lack of accountability to accompany the hierarchies.

Every level of hierarchy has to have accountability mechanisms in place, in order to counterbalance adverse behaviours.

This is what was lacking at my workplace, from at least 2002 onward.

Not one person, in any level of authority, took any responsibility for any problems that arose in the painting department.

By mid 2005 it was a horrendous free-for-all. Everybody was doing what they wanted, and certain types who shouldn't have had control had total control.

I didn't have a clue as to what was going on, and I was becoming so depressed and stressed out that I just didn't want to be there anymore.

What changed to produce such havoc?

More on that later.



Who's in Charge -

Perhaps now would be a good time to mention just a few things the Tribunal Member didn't mention in any of her decisions regarding my case -

(for the purposes of this posting some names have been changed to initials in brackets)


- 2005 -

- I read in the school district investigator's notes (which the Tribunal ordered the investigator to produce in 2007) that one of my co-workers told the investigator that Arthur had told him and another co-worker that 'you guys got a problem taking orders from a woman'.

At the Tribunal hearings I asked another one of my co-worker witnesses about this and he said he overheard the other two
co-workers talking about that. None of these people were George K.


- Here are part of the first 2 paragraphs of my 2nd Personal & Confidential letter to Dave Ginter, President of CUPE 561, dated November 28, 2005 - (EXHIBIT 4 - Tab 10) -

Quote:
Dear Dave:

Pursuant to our phone conversation on November 21, 2005 I'm writing this in response to the letter you sent to me dated Nov. 9, as well as touch further on the topic of who should be in charge of jobs that groups of casual painters are working on.

You've clarified a few things for me by mentioning that Dave (Y.) wanted (M. W.) to look after the casuals. Instead of wanting what's best for the job he wants to install an unsuitable person (because of lack of experience), a friend of his, to be in charge of the jobs. 'Patronage appointments', for lack of a better phrase, should be banned from the decision-making.
.....................


- 2006 -

- April 4, 2006 - I phoned the full-time painter (that I went for advice from in Aug/05) and asked if he knew who was looking after the casuals next year. He said he heard that (T. F. S.), a full-time painter, and John D., now a full-time painter, heard they might be doing that job, but only if they got more money.

- April 13, 2006 - Grievance meeting at school district offices. Before the grievance meeting Shaheen (K.), CUPE rep., said if they put in a charge hand and I don't listen to them then I could be charged with insubordination. That was news to me. Only me, Dave Ginter, and Shaheen (K.), CUPE rep, were in the room when Shaheen told me that. My response to her when she said that was, "where are we, in the army?" Dave Ginter didn't say a word.


The Tribunal Member knew all the above facts but none of it is mentioned in any of her decisions. Why not?


So, while certain people later on officially said nobody would be the on-site supervisor on casual jobs, the truth is that things were already in motion to install a couple of men as on-site Lead Hand Painter supervisors. And I didn't know about any of that until after I was laid off in October 2005.

And in the 10 years I worked at the school district I never even heard the word insubordination.

So, let's see if I get this right. If a woman's in charge, and the men don't want to listen to her, then they don't have to listen to her. But when men are in charge, and the woman doesn't want to listen to the men, then she's insubordinate. OK, I get it now. Thank you CUPE for clearing that up for me.


More later.
Back to top profile :: pm
Home arrow Forums arrow Your Union arrow To members of CUPE 561 who work at SD43
Page 3 of 5
page: prev  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  next
Display posts from previous:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group