Over at my opponent’s blog, he accuses me of various leadership inadequacies. Unfortunately, once again, he has charged off in an offensive direction without anchoring his argument in the facts.
Negotiating Team:
· On January 31, 2007, I told the membership that we were recruiting for the coming negotiating team. I received only a few nibbles from Child Support attorneys, and none from the Fontana DA’s Office. I was anticipating a long and nasty negotiation, and I wanted to get started as quickly as possible. The response was disappointing.
· In April 2007, I discussed the composition of the Negotiating Team with the Board members, with an eye toward assembling a team behind DDA Mike Fermin, a prior negotiator on our behalf. In June 2007, Fermin was promoted out of our union.
· In August 2007, in response to my pushing, then-SBCPAA Treasurer Bill Drake put forward two DPD names. I begged those DPDs to join. One showed interest but was busy; the other ignored my pleas.
· In the ensuing months, I organized and discussed Negotiating Committee membership with both the out-going Board and the in-coming Board (which included Mr. Epstein and his campaign manager, Mr. Schaller). The possibility of obtaining an outside “professional negotiator” was discussed and rejected. We determined as a Board to utilize Marianne Reinhold, our long-term attorney, as the chief negotiator for SBCPAA.
· In early November 2007, I sent a list of some 20 proposed nominees for the Negotiating Committee to the Board. On November 13, we held a meeting and the composition of the negotiating committee was discussed.
During these discussions, both Mr. Schaller and Mr. Epstein made suggestions. A member of the Fontana DA’s Office was suggested to lead the negotiations. That person and I have a long-standing friendship. I went to talk to him. He said he neither had the time nor patience to deal with the County.
Epstein and Schaller also suggested taking one of their colleagues in Fontana off the Negotiating Team proper, and making her an alternate. We did that too.
A “boot camp” for negotiators was set up for December 1, a Saturday. Board members were invited. To his credit, Mr. Schaller was there. Mr. Epstein was not.
· On November 28, 2007, a Board meeting to discuss negotiations was open to all members.
· On December 1, 2007, we held the boot camp for negotiators, and the Negotiating Committee chose its chairman and other officers. At the boot camp, the Committee determined to open negotiations as quick as possible in light of the bad real estate market affecting the County budget as soon as July 1, 2008.
· On December 5, 2007, we held another Board meeting regarding negotiations. In December 2007, members of the Negotiating Committee survey the membership and paid for a salary survey comparing salaries and benefits with various counties to which we are adjacent or population-comparable.
· On January 16, 2008, I told the membership that that day was “Opening Day” for contract negotiations. I told everyone who would listen that periodic updates on negotiations would be available through my home e-mail address.
· Between January and June, negotiating committee members were constantly available to Board members for updates and information. Once a tentative contract offer was reached, those negotiating team members explained the contract proposal to anyone who wished to listen. They put together a PowerPoint explanation of the contract. Members attended and then voted.
At least one member of this union was swayed by what the Negotiating Team members presented, because on June 12, 2008, my opponent told them:
Subject: Thank You
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 01:44:11 -0400
From: mceps@aol.com
I wanted to say thank you to the negotiation committee members for their time and effort during the negotiation process. It appeared to be a long and sometimes frustrating process, but you stuck with it and achieved a good contract for the membership.
I will admit that at the beginning of tonight's meeting, I had a lot of concerns regarding portions of the contract. It was initially my intentions to vote no. However, after hearing your detailed explanation of the contact and doing my own analysis, I agreed that this was a good contract to send to the membership. Again, I wanted to thank you for all your time and effort.
My opponent’s current ill-informed complaints about the negotiating process do not comport with the history of how this team came to be. Selective invocation of by-laws does nothing because his comments are laced with factual inaccuracies.
Forensic Accounting
My opponent suggests that a “forensic accounting” of the County budget would have been handy. This is silly and would have been needlessly expensive. The County was not hiding money in Barbados!
The County’s position was that they had x-amount of money to spend on all our proposals.
An adroit combination of PAC funds, political support, and my talks with Board of Supervisors staff members forced the County to increase its initial offer to us to levels that ultimately were acceptable to all Negotiating Committee members, all Board members, and about 85% of the membership by vote.
Caseload Comparisons
Caseload comparisons were done. (The only caseloads that are severely out of whack are the deputy public defenders’.) They were discussed with the County, and my opponent knows that. DPD Suzy Israel was in charge of that issue for the negotiating committee. The County deemed “caseload limits” beyond the parameters of contract negotiations.
As I pointed out to the DPDs, I have had a meeting with Doreen Boxer. Your crushing caseloads are an issue where we agree with her proposals for additional DPDs to reduce your caseload burden. If I am re-elected, we will continue to keep the pressure on the Board of Supervisors to improve your working conditions.
Salary Surveys
Extensive salary surveys were done. First, I obtained and distributed a 2006 salary survey done for another bargaining unit. Then, attorney Reinhold’s colleague put together an updated and refreshed salary survey. Finally, Lance Cantos, a C.P.A., and Dan Silverman "crunched the numbers" on salaries and benefits for the negotiating committee, the Board, and the membership.
Once again, my opponent is either uninformed or does not wish to be. Is this what you want in a union president?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment