Can wage restraint save jobs?

Lisbeth Latham

In the last month, Australian mine workers and mining communities have been rocked by layoffs and mine closures as mining companies have moved to reduce production in response to collapsing commodities prices.

In this context it is understandable and important for workers and their unions to explore solutions that will protect their communities from the devastation of closure. Two weeks ago, workers at Alcoa, who are members of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, decided to defer a four percent pay rise they had won in 2008 until 2010 in exchange for Alcoa not sacking workers.


This decision was made following Alcoa’s January 6 announcement that it would be shedding 15,200 jobs, or 13% of its global workforce, although no announcement had been made of job losses in Australia.

While the willingness of the workers to collectively share pay cuts is a significant display of collective solidarity, it is highly questionable that it will be effective in avoiding job losses and could result not only Alcoa workers but other workers losing more.

The Alcoa workers’ decision follows an ongoing push from the federal government, business and the media that workers should sacrifice wages now in order protect jobs.

No guarantees

While the workers are specifically offering pay cuts in exchange for no job losses, there is nothing to guarantee this is what will happen in the present circumstances: the offer to defer wage is not tied to Alcoa not proceeding with job cuts in Australia. Even if such an agreement was made, it would not guarantee that Alcoa would not conduct sackings in the future, as Alcoa would be able to blame any subsequent deterioration in the company’s financial situation for the job losses.

Previous experience shows that when companies are successful in gaining concessions (whether from workers or governments) they are quick to demand even greater concessions, with jobs ultimately being shed anyway. This should come as no surprise. Capitalism operates on a relentless drive to increase profits: if companies are able to secure an agreement that provides wage cuts under the banner of “saving jobs”, there is an incentive.

A central component of contract negotiations between the US United Auto Workers and US car manufacturers since 1978 has been the union making concessions in the wages and conditions of workers in order maintain the competitiveness of the automakers and preserve autoworker jobs. Despite ongoing promises that concessions would result in jobs being saved, employment at General Motors alone had fallen from 450,000 in 1978 to 73,000 in 2007.

In addition to the logic of concessions within a single company, workers giving up conditions at one company will encourage other companies to seek the same concessions — irrespective of whether they are in need of those concessions — in order to remain competitive.

Following the conclusion of the 1998 waterfront dispute between the Maritime Union of Australia and Patrick’s Stevedores, where the MUA agreed to a range of concessions in exchange for its members being allowed to return to work — including increased casualisation and reduction in staffing cranes — the other major Australian stevedore, P&O, moved to include the same conditions in its next enterprise agreement with the MUA.

It is also important to recognise that job losses have no direct link to either the wages that workers earn or the profits that companies make. Over the past two decades, thousands of bank workers have been made redundant across Australia during periods of high profits. In 2005, the National Australia Bank announced 2000 redundancies immediately following a quarter in which it made a record profit.

A more important factor influencing employment levels is the question of the amount of work to be performed; if this is reduced then capital will look to sack the workers that it deems to be unnecessary. Given the collapse in Alcoa’s revenue is a consequence of both declining commodity prices and declining demand, which has resulted in Alcoa moving to reduce production, Alcoa can be expected to reduce its workforce with the new levels of production that it is looking to achieve.

The only mechanism to avoid this would be to insist that working hours of workers be reduced in proportion with any reduction in production. However wages should be maintained by increasing the hourly rate by the same proportion.

Alcoa’s exact financial situation

A significant factor contributing to further threats of job losses is that company financial figures are not readily available to workers and their unions. This makes it possible for companies to manufacture a financial crisis in order to justify calls for concessions or job losses.

An important factor in Alcoa’s decision to shed workers globally was its poor performance during the December 2008 quarter, when it lost US$929 million. While this did reflect the impact of halving alumina prices between July and December, $708 million of the loss was a consequence of restructuring carried out by Alcoa.

This makes it important that unions have access to a companies’ books to have a clearer indication of their financial situation.

Who should pay?

Calls for workers to defer wage rises in order to limit job losses reflect an outlook that workers should bare the burden of the financial crisis. No such sacrifice has been made by Alcoa’s management or shareholders.

On January 23, Alcoa announced that it would pay a dividend of 17 cents per share, the same payment as had been made for the previous nine quarters. Over the same period of time, Alcoa had made profits totalling $4486 million. These massive profits should now be being used to offset the current losses being made by the company, rather than forcing workers and their communities to suffer.

Workers who sacrifice today to offset the declining incomes Alcoa and other companies are experiencing during the current downturn will not be reimbursed for their sacrifices in the future. Instead, everything given up today will have to be fought for again, as companies attempt to maintain any concessions that they are able to extract.

Unlike Alcoa, workers’ living costs are not going to be reduced during the economic downturn — indeed crucial costs of living such as rent are likely to continue to increase over the coming year. The only way workers can avoid seeing their incomes decline, and the flow-on effects to the rest of the community resulting from declining purchasing power, is for workers to continue to receive the pay rises that they have already won and that they are able to win in the coming years.

Originally published in Green Left Weekly #781

Read more...

Workers Occupy Waterford Crystal Factory

Lisbeth Latham
Angry workers at the Waterford Wedgewood's crystal factory in Kilbarry, Ireland have begun an occupation of the factory, following the announcement by the receiver on January 30 that the factory would be closed. The closure means that 480 of the 800 workers employed at the factory would immediately loose their jobs. More than 200 workers are involved in the occupation with more than 100 workers at given time occupying the factory’s visitor’s centre at any given time.


The company went into receivership on January 5, following five consecutive years of losses. The factory had remained open as administrators looked for potential buyers. On Friday, the receiver David Carson announced that the money borrowed to keep the factory operating had run out and production would cease. According to Sinn Fein workers rights spokesperson Arthur Morgan TD, the previous day during a meeting with potential investors, Carson had made a commitment that the factory would not be closed while there were people interested in investing the company.

Emergency talks occurred between officials from Unite, which organises 90% of the workers, and David Begg, Irish Congress of Trade Unions General Secretary, met with Carson and Dermot McCarthy, Secretary of the Department of The Taoiseach. Prior to the meeting UNITE regional organiser Walter Cullen said the only way the stand-off would end would be if the receiver reversed the decision to shut down manufacturing.

More than 2000 people attended a rally on January 31 to support the occupying workers. Union officials addressing the rally called on the government to intervene in the dispute and allow the company to continue trading for at least a week while potential buyers are spoken with again. Sinn Fein has call on the government to stop the receiver from closing the factory.

Read more...

French workers demand that capital pay the price of the crisis

Lisbeth Latham

French cities and towns were filled with protesting workers on January 29 as unions called a general strike to demand that the government of President Nicholas Sarkozy protect workers rights. The protests were in response to a new €26 billion financial bailout package aimed at increasing infrastructure investment, but doing nothing for workers faced with job losses and falling buying power. It was the first joint action by France's eight union confederations since Sarkozy was elected in 2007.




Both police and media have attempted to down play the strikes, the CGT and Force Ouvriere claim that 2.5 million people participated in the mobilisations. The Strike involved a quarter of the public sector; more than half France's education sector participated in the strike. Striking transport workers forced cancellation of services across France including the cancellation of 40 percent of high speed train services; 60 percent of regional train services, 25 percent of Paris metro trains and 10 percent of flights from Charles-de-Gaul airport. Strikes also occurred at Renault and Peugeot Citroen factories.



The general strike reflects widespread anger at the failure of the government to act to protect people from the impact of the economic crisis as France moves towards recession and unemployment is expected to exceed 10 percent. Despite insisting at the beginning of its term that the coffers were empty and social spending had to be cut back, the French government has delivered three large bailout packages, in October the banks were bailed out with €320 billion ($424 billion) in loan guarantees. Two months later, in December, the government announced it would provide €22 billion in aid to small- and medium-sized businesses hit by the downturn and approved a €26 billion economic stimulus package focused mostly on infrastructural investments. Unions are calling for an end to public sector job losses, increased wages and greater efforts to both protect and create jobs. Sarkozy's total failure to respond to the social impact of the crisis meant that the strike received widespread support, with a poll conducted on January 25 indicating 69 percent support for the strike including 54 percent of voters for Sarkozy's Right Wing government.



Following Thursday's strikes the government indicated that while it had heard the message, there would be, as Raymond Soubie, Sarkozy's social affairs adviser, told RTL radio, "No change of direction, Sarkozy will maintain his economic and social policies". However Labour Minister Brice Hortefeux did attempt to provide a sop, indicating that there would be a further response, "but not in an immediate, inarticulate way".



The leaderships of France's unions are expected to meet on February 2 to discuss the direction of the campaign. They have called for a concrete response from the government within 10 days. The French left is pushing to unite the growing struggles in France. Olivier Besancenot, a spokesperson for the Revolutionary Communist League which is moving to disolve itself to form New Anti-Capitalist Party on February 4-6, said on January 29, "there is a torrent of industrial disputes and social protests, but they all remain separate from each other. What we need to do is bring all this together in one massive movement of dissent." In the lead up to the general strike, at the initiative of the NPA, 10 French left parties including the French Communist Party issued a joint statement which declared "the various plans for here and around the world, have only one objective: to maintain the profits of major capitalists. The crisis is a crisis in Europe and worldwide. In this context, we need to mobilize for a social Europe, which is ecological, democratic and feminist".

Grève du 29 janvier en Aveyron
by guevaramax

Read more...

United Healthcare Workers forms new union as SEIU moves against local

Lisbeth Latham
Months of simmering tension within the Service Employees International Union finally broke this week as the SIEU's leadership moved, on January 27, to place its third largest local the 150000 member United Healthcare Workers - West under trusteeship. The UHW-W board responded on January 28 with an announcement that they were resigning from the SEIU and would be moving to establish the National Union of Healthcare Workers.


The SEIU had given UHW-W two ultimatums on January 23, demanding that the Local accept transfer of 65,000 nursing home and homecare workers out of UHW against their will, or face an immediate takeover and the expulsion of more than 70 healthcare workers who were elected to lead the local union.

The UHW-W executive board replied to the SEIU stating "given the enormity of this decision and its vast implications for UHW members," the executive board wrote, "such a decision should be enacted by a fair membership vote on a local-by-local basis, not by executive fiat." Their letter called for a democratic voting process that is "consistent with the SEIU Constitution and follows the model of the merger between Local 250 and Local 399 that led to the creation of UHW in 2005, and the various mergers, including most recently of 1199NJ, and other local unions into 1199UHE." The SEIU had held a non-binding advisory vote in November and December, however only 8% of affected members voted and the UHW-W had run a boycott campaign against aspects of the ballot it argued were undemocratic.


Following the UHW-W refusal to meet the SEIU's demands, SEIU International President Andy Stern moved to place UHW-W in trusteeship. Under the trusteeship the Local's assets were frozen, dissolved the UHW-W executive board and removed from the payroll all full-time staff. The SEIU sent employers a memo saying that the SEIU was now in charge, that UHW staff no longer had any authority and that employers should report any contact by UHW staff.

UHW-W president Sal Rosselli told the January 29 LA Times that following the trusteeship employers had broken off negotiations and informed some of the union's stewards that they would no longer recognise their authority. SEIU executive vice-president Dave Regan, one of the co-trustees appointed by SEIU, said shop stewards and other rank-and-file representatives have not been stripped of their positions and are trying to ensure that all bargaining goes forward without delay.

The SEIU's move to place UHW-W under trusteeship follows the recommendations of trusteeship hearings held over November and December. These hearings were initiated to instigate financial irregularities with-in the UHW-W. Ray Marshal, Labor Secretary during the Carter administration, who was hired by the SEIU to conduct the hearings, found that the UHW-W had established a not for profit entity with the intention of funding confrontation with the SEIU's leadership. Marshal found that this was insufficient to warrant trusteeship, but recommended that the union be place in trusteeship if it continued to oppose the SEIU's previous decision to shift 65000 members from the UHW-W to a single local representing workers in long-term-care.

UHW-W leaders said it is unprecedented to have a trusteeship request denied, and argued that Marshall linked two unrelated disputes by tying his recommendations to the fate of UHW-W's long-term care members.

Rosselli told Labor Notes "We suspect that the hearing report from Secretary Marshall got amended by SEIU lawyers to get their desired outcome," UHW-W's former head Sal Rosselli said. "Frankly we don't have a lot of respect for it being some independent report or process."

Prior to the publication of Marshal's recommendations, the SEIU had already moved to establish a offices in Oakland and Los Angels from which to impose the trusteeship with staff from across the country being flown into California to help take over the UHW-W.

According to Labor Notes, although many staffers were initially told that UHW-related assignments would be voluntary, the International informed organisers that failure to travel to California will be "considered a resignation."

New Union Launched - National Union of Health Workers
Following the announcement of the trusteeship, thousands of UHW-W members rallied at UHW-W offices across California to express their anger at the trusteeship. Hundreds of members occupied UHW-W offices on January 27 and 28.

On January 28, the UHW-W executive board announced that they had formed the National Union of Healthcare Workers and would begin to collect union cards as a first step towards winning recognition in their workplaces.

Announcing the creating of the union, Rosselli said "As a healthcare workers union, NUHW is committed to continuing the tradition of a member-led, democratically controlled union. There are lot of things that we still have to figure out, but we know NUHW will be all about accountability to the members, democratic-decision-making, organizing the unorganized and winning improvements for healthcare workers and the patients and residents we serve."

The UHW-W had little choice but to establish a new union, the original push to conduct a disaffiliation ballot had little chance of success even prior to the trusteeship. The SEIU constitution makes it almost impossible to win such a ballot, not only are union staff not allowed to support such a campaign, if just seven members support a local remaining affiliated to the SEIU then disaffiliation is not possible.

Constructing a new union will also be exceeding difficult. It is not sufficient for members of the UHW-W to decide they wish to be members of the NUHW for the new union to get bargaining rights. The workers would first need to be in a workplace which is in an "open period" prior to contract expiration and then file for an election and then attempt to defeat the might of the SEIU. However the UHW-W renegotiated 100 contracts in 2008 so the process will take many years.

Despite these difficulties UHW-W members who want a democratic union have little choice but to form a new union. "For decades, healthcare workers in California have wanted to be part of a democratic, progressive movement that would raise standards for caregivers and the patients and residents we serve. Events over the last several days have proven that's not possible in SEIU," said Angela Glasper, a 20-year optical services clerk from Kaiser Permanente. "Healthcare workers deserve to be part of a union that healthcare workers control democratically, not one that is led by a handful of outsiders from Washington D.C.".

Read more...

FIOM Statement on Gaza

The following statement was originally posted at MRZine's website.

Italy's Most Powerful Union:

Prosecute Israeli War Crimes, Suspend EU-Israel Agreement

Federazione Impiegati Operai Metallurgici nazionale (FIOM), the largest metalworkers union in Italy, whose membership numbers 360,000, called for prosecution of Israeli officials for war crimes and suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement as well as of the military cooperation agreement between Italy and Israel. The following is FIOM's 13 January 2009 statement on Gaza published on its Web site. -- Ed

Federazione Impiegati Operai Metallurgici nazionale
Corso Trieste, 36 - 00198 Roma - tel. +39 06 85262341-2 fax +39 06 85303079
www.fiom.cgil.it - e-mail: protocollo@fiom.cgil.it

Comitato Centrale

COMITATO CENTRALE F.I.O.M.
13 gennaio 2009

GAZA

For nearly two years the Gaza Strip has been subjected to what can only be described as a state of siege by Israel, with interruption of electricity, lack of heating, scarcity of drinking water, a healthcare emergency and no freedom of movement for persons or goods. UN Observers have repeatedly denounced the condition of the inhabitants of Gaza as inhumane, in violation of all International Conventions on Human Rights.

Thus, it appears a kind of “collective punishment” has been imposed on all Palestinians because of the vote expressed in the democratic elections two years ago, with a Hamas victory. For FIOM, the negative political evaluation of this organization is not up for discussion and we reiterate our choice to support the formation of an independent, secular and democratic Palestinian state living in peace and mutual security with that of Israel. What we denounce is the international community’s tolerance and, in fact, support of the mistaken choice of the siege, which contributed to the strengthening of the fundamentalist forces and armed groups of all types, rather than their isolation. The launch of Kassam rockets on Israel is also the result of this situation. This rocket fire is wrong and illegal, because it hurts Israeli civilians. It is harmful to the Palestinian cause itself. And it is used to create consensus in the Israeli population on the offensive against the people of Gaza. The Israeli army began its attack on Gaza on December 27, 2008, with a substantial deployment of forces, followed by a land invasion and use of white phosphorus on the civilian population, which is banned by international conventions, causing a true massacre, and committing intolerable war crimes for any democratic conscience.

Israel has gone so far as to attempt to hide what is happening, preventing International Observers and journalists from entering Gaza. Those responsible for these crimes must be prosecuted and judged by the relevant international institutions. The Israeli government should be held accountable for its repeated violations of international law, including humanitarian law, by national governments, the European Union, the international community, just as violations committed by any other government would be.

In particular, the EU-Israel Association Agreement, whose application is bound to respect of human rights, should be immediately suspended; the Italian government, which, unlike other European governments, has characterized itself in a negative light by the complete subordination and support of political choices of the Israeli government, must suspend the Military Cooperation Agreement of Italy with Israel, a belligerent country that violates international law and human rights.

In denouncing this situation, the FIOM Central Committee believes it necessary to immediately ensure that all political forces, the government, European and international institutions work for:

An immediate, general and permanent ceasefire;
Humanitarian protection of the civilian population of Gaza;
An end to the invasion of Gaza and withdrawal of Israeli troops;
Cessation of missile fire on Israel;
An end to the siege and embargo of Gaza;
Concrete steps to achieve a rapid end to the occupation of Palestinian territories.
These conditions can promote the opening of a negotiated peace -- based on the resolutions of the United Nations -- which includes all stakeholders, beginning with the legitimate institution of the PNA, and finding ways to include Hamas as a democratically elected representative.

The FIOM Central Committee condemns all initiatives of an anti-Semitic nature and those that deny the right of the State of Israel to exist.

We judge negatively all anti-Arab or anti-Muslim expressions.

We express our solidarity to Palestinian people and our support to that brave minority inside Israeli civil society that is fighting against the occupation, against the Gaza siege and the current massacre.

We commit ourselves to supporting the above-mentioned objectives and in participating in all the activities that focus on them.

On the 17th of January, different groups and coalitions called for two separate demonstrations for the ceasefire in Gaza. Although we think these simultaneous demonstration inopportune, we believe that it is essential that the two initiatives not to be in contrast, because in both cases the demonstrations are in solidarity with Palestinian people and to stop the massacre.

Therefore, FIOM, in addition to participating in the demonstration in Assisi, called by Tavola della Pace, that engages the whole of Cgil, will also be present with a delegation at the demonstration in Rome, called by the Palestinian Community.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The statement in English is available in PDF at <www.fiom.cgil.it/cc/cc_09_01_13-odg_gaza-eng.pdf>. The statement in Italian, also in PDF, is at <www.fiom.cgil.it/cc/cc_09_01_13-odg_gaza.pdf>.

Read more...

US employers lay off thousands of workers as crisis deepens

Lisbeth Latham

According to figures released by the Bureau of Labor on January 9, US employment in non-farm private sector employment plummeted by 524,000 during December as companies moved to cut costs in response to the slow-down in the global economy. The decline has occurred across almost all sectors of the US economy, reflecting the depth and breadth of the current economic crisis.


The job losses take the total reduction in employment to 2.6 million for 2008, the worst decline since 1945. The last four months of 2008 saw employment decline 1.9 million. The worst-affected sectors were manufacturing and construction, which shed 149,000 and 101,000 jobs respectively. During 2008 employment in manufacturing declined by 791,000 while in construction it dropped by 666,000. Employment in retail declined 67,000 in December and 522,000 for the year, while total employment in wholesale fell by 30,000 for the month for a total decline of 164,000 in 2008.

The only sectors to experience an expansion in employment were education and healthcare. Employment in healthcare and education grew by a total of 377,000 for the year and increased by 45,000 in December.

The decline in employment has resulted in the growth in the number of unemployed growing to 11,108,000, or 7.2 per cent of the work force, the highest figure since January 1993, up from 4.9 percent at the beginning of 2008. Unemployment is highest amongst African Americans (11.9 per cent) and Hispanic Americans (11.9 per cent) compared with 6.6 per cent for “whites”. The unemployment rate among teenagers is 20.8 per cent.

In December, there were 8 million workers classified as working in part-time employment for economic reasons, i.e. workers who are working part-time due to an enforced reduction in work hours or as they are unable to find full-time work, an increase of 3.2 million for the year.

Adding to the picture of reduced demand resulting in falling output is the decline in the hours worked. The average work week for production and non-supervisory workers fell by 0.2 hours to 33.3 hours the lowest figure since 1964. The average work week in manufacturing declined by 0.4 hours to 39.9 hours in December, while the average amount of overtime worked declined by 0.3 hours to 3.0 hours per week.

The continued expansion in job losses reflects the global economic crisis is continuing to deepen and has the potential to accelerate and build momentum.

Read more...

United Healthcare Workers-West to consider disaffiliation as the SEIU moves to carve Local up

Lisbeth Latham

On January 9, the International Executive Board of the Service Employees International Union voted to begin a process of breaking up its third-largest local, the 150,000-member United Healthcare Workers-West. The move follows months of hostility between the leaderships of the SEIU and UHW over the direction of the union, particularly how to build the union and achieve the best outcomes for workers. Part of the hostility has surrounded ongoing threats that the UHW-W would be put into trusteeship by the SEIU. The UHW-W has responded to the International Executive Board’s decision by requesting that the IEB initiate a ballot on disaffiliating from the SEIU.


The IEB decision means that 65,000 UHW-W members in long-term care will be moved into a new union local which will also include members from two other Californian SEIU Locals 6365 and 521.

The UHW-W has opposed the removal of 42 per cent of its membership on three levels. The SEIU has pushed to form state-wide mega-locals with memberships clearly defined along industrial lines, giving the union increased clout with both employers and politicians. The UHW-W, which organises across the healthcare workers, has argued that its structure is consistent with this logic.

SEIU’s President Andy Stern has argued that unions need to build “a ‘working relationship’ that can add value to the business and help improve performance [that] will result in workers sharing fairly in their employers’ success”. The UHW-W has argued that this results in the conditions of existing members being undermined. It also believes its more militant mobilisation of members against employers has not only delivered better outcomes for members in long-term care but has facilitated the organising of new workplaces. Finally the UHW-W’s leadership argues that any decision regarding how members are moved between locals should be made by the members affected rather than by the International’s leadership.

Ballot on the future of the Californian long-term care workers
The IEB’s decision to restructure long-term care has been justified on the outcome of a ballot of Californian SEIU members in November and December 2008. In the poll 21,008 members voted in favour of forming a new California-wide long-term care local. At the time of the ballot the UHW-W raised concerns over the democracy of the ballot, including:
• The ballot was only advisory, so its outcome could be ignored by the SEIU if it wished;
• The ballot was a pooled vote rather than a ballot by local, so all votes were included together, reducing the ability of the wishes of the members of individual locals to be taken into account;
• The vote did not give members a true choice as they were only offered a choice of forming a new long-term care local or a new combined healthcare local; there was no option to maintain the existing local structure;
• The leaderships of the affected locals were not informed at the same time, with the leaderships of both Locals 6365 and 521 being informed of the ballot in advance of the papers being sent to members, while the leadership of UHW-W was only informed of the ballot after the papers were sent to members.

In response the UHW-W called on members to boycott the poll and initiated a petition campaign where SEIU members in long-term care were encouraged to fill out cards protesting the ballot. This campaign was successful: just 24,366 votes were received out of 309,000 eligible voters (an 8 per cent return) and the UHW-W collected cards from 40,000 members including 1,000 members of Local 6365. In addition the UHW-W collected the signatures of 85,000 members on a petition against the ballot.

Disaffiliation
On January 11, the leadership of UHW-W sent the IEB a request that it initiate a ballot of UHW-W members to formally disaffiliate from the SEIU. The request follows the UHW-W’s executive board receiving letters and petitions from members across California requesting that UHW-W disaffiliate from SEIU. According to the UHW-W the requests for disaffiliation have cited three concerns as motivating the requests:
• The forced removal of 65,000 long-term care members from UHW;
• The stifling of union members’ free speech rights;
• Widespread corruption by Stern-appointed union leaders (the president of Local 6365 is one a number of SEIU senior officials to have been stood down in 2008 for the misuse of hundreds of thousands of dollars of members’ money).

Despite requesting that a ballot on disaffiliation be held, the executive board of the UHW-W has indicated that it will not be taking a position in support of disaffiliation. This is due to the changes in the SEIU’s constitution that were made at the SEIU convention in July 2008, which state that “no officer or local union or affiliated body shall support or assist any efforts to dissolve, secede or disaffiliate from the SEIU”.

It is unclear how the SEIU will respond to the UHW-W’s request for a ballot or what the UHW-W will do in the event the SEIU refuses to allow a ballot. The IEB’s decision to re-organise the Californian locals will not be implemented until at least February 9, while a disaffiliation vote takes at least 60 days to be scheduled, making it likely that the conflict between the SEIU’s IEB and the UHW-W will intensify.

Read more...