If you have difficulty reading the newsletter, please go to www.patriotreturns.com to see the latest release.
THE PATRIOT RETURNS |
Vol. 33, No.1 April 12, 2006
MORE ON THE MEDCO MESS The story of the New Caucus-engineered collapse of the Welfare Fund has become almost too depressing to recount. After coming into office in 2000, our Dear Leader, PSC president Barbara Bowen, and her trusty Welfare Fund guru, Steve London, implemented bold changes to the WF. We hear that they upped adjuncts' coverage by $550/person---but didn't reduce full time faculty benefits by an equivalent amount (don't want to lose full-timers' votes!). Then, they covered up how their policies had placed the Adjunct Fund out of balance---thereby denying the membership a democratic opportunity to weigh in on how best to resolve the WF crisis. The result: the deficit-to-reserve ratio skyrocketed from 3.99% to more than 64%; the WF now teeters on the brink of bankruptcy; and "Solidarity Steve" is e-mailing members to expect a massive "giveback" to the WF as part of the contract settlement. As the WF reserves plunged, Steve and his handpicked crony, Larry Morgan, declined to change policies. Instead, they searched around for bargain-basement alternatives to what minimal coverage we received. Hence, the dental plan that no dentists accept. And hence the switch to MEDCO, the labor-busting firm that bilked Ohio teachers out of millions. The more we read about MEDCO, the worse it gets. According to the New York Times, MEDCO was fined $29 million as part of a settlement with the Justice Department and 20 state Attorneys General. The wrongdoing: MEDCO got billions of dollars in rebates from drug companies, but failed to pass these rebates onto the company's consumers. And as of April 6th, 2006, according to that day's Wall Street Journal, MEDCO has made good on its threats against workers at its Las Vegas plant. Some 580 pharmacy technicians, represented by the United Steel Workers, had objected to MEDCO's plans to change or terminate health plan benefits "in its employees' best interests." Rather than renegotiate their contract, MEDCO locked them out! It is little wonder, then, that Steve and Larry are so enamored of MEDCO. As MEDCO hopes to do, Steve and Larry run a union-free operation. That's right: the workers at the Welfare Fund are not unionized!! Like MEDCO, "Foggy" and "Luau" have changed our benefits, and plan to cut them even more, in our "best interests." But what do you expect when you're dealing with bottom-of-the-barrel, cut-rate firms? About what you can expect when the union is run by bottom-of-the-barrel leaders. LONDON LOSES THOUSANDS The Patriot Returns readers might recall a few months back, when we caught the Dear Leader and cronies in a slight . . . exaggeration of the truth . . . regarding PSC membership totals. Though the PSC leadership claimed in the Chronicle of Higher Education and the Village Voice that "the Professional Staff Congress represents 20,000 faculty and professional staff at the City University of New York," the PSC had filed a report with the U.S. Department of Labor listing a bargaining unit of 17,897. Our exposé triggered a huffy University-wide e-mail from "Solidarity Steve" London, claiming that the real membership total was not 17,897, as the PSC had told the federal government, or even 20,000, as the leadership had claimed publicly, but closer to . . . 22,000. This spring's election campaign has left Steve with about as much credibility as White House press secretary Scott McClellan, and recent membership news isn't going to do anything to help him out. According to those government-mandated forms that Steve claimed understated the PSC's membership total, there are 2,965 agency fee payers---who aren't eligible to vote in the April election. Yet we hear the PSC only mailed out 13,823 ballots. That's 6,177 less than what Steve's inflated membership total would have demanded---and 1,109 fewer people if we use the figures that the PSC reported to the Department of Labor. Has Steve lost between 1,100 and 6,100 more PSC members, give or take a few? Or, is our current leadership as incompetent at keeping updated membership lists as it is at everything else? At this rate, the PSC won't have any members left! That would be one way to solve the Welfare Fund crisis. THE RUMOR COLUMN: The merry militants of the New Caucus certainly have been busy of late. From supporting the ongoing GSOC strike at NYU, to planning for the upcoming USLAW/NYCLAW Rally, to negotiating 'round the clock with Chancellor Goldstein, it is amazing they've been able to mount an election campaign against the CUNY Alliance. We know that Barbara, Steve, Nancy and company are dedicated and efficient, if not always effective. But where do they get the energy and the time? Among the solutions to this PSC puzzle: like the multinational corporations that they vilify, the New Caucus pays others to do their mundane labor. We've heard rumors that the NC has hired a group called Corporate Campaign Inc. to handle some of the (rather fancy) printing and publicity for their re-election efforts. Sources tell us that Corporate Campaign Inc. has worked for the New Caucus before, from designing and doing up their first "Teach CUNY" fliers, t-shirts etc., to researching, preparing and publishing a "Legislative Handbook" for use in the PSC's periodic assaults on Albany. But we also hear that CCI was disappointed that it did not win a larger share of the PSC's business. Nothing untoward here, of course, since such tasks need to be done by someone. But we've heard troubling rumors that a prominent officer of the PSC may have a close personal relationship with someone employed by CCI, which, if true, would raise conflict of interest issues. And while the New Caucus may have the right to hire whomever they want to help in campaigning, they don't have the right to use any PSC funds in such a matter. To do so would be to violate the PSC's own strict guidelines, as well as state and federal laws governing union elections. Fortunately, the PSC's director of legal affairs, Nathaniel K. Charny, has extensive expertise on violating election laws, and would, of course, steer the New Caucus clear from such dangerous shoals. Nor should Patriot Returns readers worry that the Dear Leader has somehow succumbed to the embraces of corporate America. Its name notwithstanding, CCI advertises itself as specializing in transforming "local labor struggles into highly visible statewide and national campaigns while generating widespread organizational and financial support for its union clients." CCI also "develops strategies and tactics and structures campaigns in ways that strengthen internal union solidarity, maximize membership and family involvement and generate favorable media coverage." All of which Barbara and Steve could use a hand with. Just why CCI would be involved in an internal union matter like an election is another matter, of course. But we're sure that the NC will have suitable answer. The connections between the New Caucus and Corporate Campaign Inc. are not limited to the current campaign. Barbara has worked closely with Ray Rogers, CCI's CEO, in the "Campaign to Stop Killer Coke." That's the soft drink, not cocaine. The PSC has banned Coca-Cola from all union events, and in cooperation with the CSKC, has staged rallies outside of the Colombian Consulate. Rogers has also been quite active in urging TIAA-CREF to remove Coca-Cola from CREF's Social Choice Account. "If you view TIAA-CREF primarily as in investor with the overriding goal of maximizing return, you'll probably do more to harm society than to benefit it," says Mr. Rogers. Some things, it seems, don't go better with Coke. As politically correct as Mr. Rogers' neighborhood might seem to be, the CEO of CCI and CSKC has been a controversial figure on the labor left and elsewhere. As Socialist Action described it:
In August 1999, despite the opposition of a majority of the Executive Board of Local 100 of the TWU, then-president Willie James hired Rogers and CCI to run a publicity drive for the New York transit workers' contract. Willie was soon ousted by Barbara's comrade-in-arms, "Jolly Roger" Toussaint. The Dear Leader should be careful about presidential precedents. In June 2004, Rogers' CSKC was embroiled in a controversy with the United Jewish Appeal. CSKC picketed a UJA-Federation of New York dinner for Steven Heyer, president of Coca Cola. While Heyer was being honored for "global leadership," CSKC distributed fliers declaring that, "In Honoring Killer Coke's Heyer, UJA-Fed Can't Sink Much Lower." "Much lower" than what, we wonder? We presume that the UJA was not pleased with Rogers' demagogic street theater. Barbara's cozy relations with Ray Rogers---ideological, financial, and political---seem similar to her close cooperation with Michael Letwin, as do the divestment means and ends of Rogers' anti-Coke and Letwin's anti-Israel campaigns. But this may just be a coincidence. In order to dispel the rumors that we've been hearing about the NC and CCI, and in the name of democratic unionism, we'd like to ask Barbara the following questions:
Before responding to us, perhaps the Dear Leader might take a short break from her many duties, relax, and have a Coke. Don't worry, Barbara, we'll still be here.
Sharad Karkhanis, Ph.D. Forthcoming issues of The Patriot may be accessed at http://www.patriotreturns.com/. |