CT News Junkie | Workers Decide To Stay With Incumbent Union

Social Networks We Use

Connecticut Network

Categories

Our Partners

Workers Decide To Stay With Incumbent Union

by | Jul 31, 2012 10:05pm
() Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Labor, Legal

Correction supervisors voted overwhelmingly to keep their current representation, and rejected an offer to join a Massachusetts-based union.

Of the approximately 500 member bargaining group, about 428 of supervisors were eligible to vote. Of that 182 voted to keep their current union, 37 voted to join the National Correctional Employees Union, and one voted for no union representation, Ben Phillips, spokesman for CSEA/SEIU Local 2001 said Tuesday.

The results were tallied and counted by the Board of Labor Relations, which allowed the vote to go forward when it decided the window for requesting a vote was filed at a time when the unit didn’t have a contract. The Correction supervisors were just one of two bargaining units to reject the state employees concession package last summer.

The vitriol over the concession package and the distrust of current union leadership by some of its members is what prompted NCEU to come into the state and offer an alternative. But CSEA/SEIU Local 2001 prevailed in keeping its union representation.

“We’re really excited about the results,” Phillips said Tuesday. “We wanted to show the state that we were not a divided union going into contract negotiations.”

The bargaining unit has been without a contract since 2011. Phillips said the petition from NCEU and the subsequent Board of Labor Relations complaint had been holding up negotiations on a new contract.

The result of the vote, which was conducted over the past two days at nine different locations, was not surprising, Phillips said.

The Board of Labor Relations ordered the vote to occur within 30 days of its decision, and happened to fall around the same time as many summer vacations.

There were several questions from members about absentee ballots, Phillips said. But absentee ballots are not allowed in these types of elections.

Christopher Murphy, executive director of NCEU, was not immediately available for comment Tuesday evening.

However, last week he remained optimistic union members were still yearning for change one year later.

“People want change. They’re looking for a union that will provide them with better representation,” he said.

NCEU wasn’t the only union looking to offer state employees a choice. Its sister-union, the United Public Service Employees Union, also wanted to hold an election for judicial marshals, probation officers, and the State Engineering, Scientific and Technical Unit, also known as P-4.

But the Board of Labor Relations sided with the state and the incumbent unions who maintained that state employees essentially closed the window to switch unions when they voted to approve the concession agreement in August 2011. The window doesn’t open for these bargaining groups again until 2016, according to the attachments to the concession deal.

UPSEU, the New York-based union, isn’t giving up the fight easily.

“While disappointed in the decision we were always cognizant of the possibility that the matter would ultimately need to be decided by the courts given the high stakes political ramifications of any decision granting UPSEU elections,“ UPSEU President Kevin Boyle said in early July. “Unfortunately we were right. This is far from over.”

Share this story with others.

Share | |

Comments

(29) Archived Comments

posted by: Upset.Citizen | August 1, 2012  4:55am

Upset.Citizen

These people will regret this when they are walking the corridors 25 years in and they realize they could have retired at year 20!  I can’t believe they would rather stay with bus drivers and cafe workers then go to a union made up of their own kind…

Luckily P4 is better organized and informed!  We will not forget what SEIU/CSEA and this governor/legislature have done to our incomes, pensions, medical, retirement age, and how they have done nothing about the money that they were supposed to start setting aside for us other then spend it!

When we win the court case that was filed for last week we will vote to go to UPSEU!

UC

posted by: Vote Yes!!!!! | August 1, 2012  6:42am

Vote Yes!!!!!

It is ashame for these members.  A year later and they finally get to vote?  The process is so sided. Look what has happened to P4.  Leaders have had charges placed against them, DOL some how sides against members and the day of the delayed decision, DOL Commish steps down….  This whole process is ridiculous.  Members have such short memories and that is what CSEA is counting on.  Don’t forget members were told nothing of the last package until the last minute.  They were told they would get plenty of time review it.  Which was cut short.  When it was defeated,  SECRAP , CSEA and the rest of them changed the rules so they got what they wanted, not what the members wished.  Not to mention targeted lay offs which were against union contracts.  P4 will vote CSEA down.  I wish Corrections the best, but you will unfortunately learn that you are only a revenue source for CSEA.  Their only goal is to get more and more members by spending your forever increasing dues…  You will learn, the hard way.  Enjoy your honeymoon….

posted by: Raoul Duke | August 1, 2012  8:29am

Actually, most of these corrections supervisors will be able to retire after 20 years.  25 and out only applies to hazardous duty workers hired after the last SEBAC agreement.  But the facts have never been a major concern to UPSEU and its supporters. 

Do these P4 people who want to join the mob-affiliated UPSEU understand that UPSEU is mainly composed of secretaries and municipal workers?  UPSEU has never represented a state worker in Connecticut.  The presidents of several locals in UPSEU’s parent union IUJAT were recently indicted on federal racketeering charges and a couple were made members of the Genovese crime family. 

Connecticut state employees have defined benefit pensions, virtually free retiree health care, and will start receiving a series of 3% raises next year.  No one likes a concession, but they got a better deal than any other group of public employees in the country.

It’s a shame that state workers in Connecticut have been targeted by a shady organization like UPSEU which depends on misinformation and ignorance to further its goal of lining the pockets of high ranking UPSEU officials.

posted by: Who is John Galt? | August 1, 2012  9:32am

Who is John Galt?

These greedy idiot state workers posting about “their freedom to switch unions” are in their own little world.  Your all pissed off that you had to give up a little bit of your tax payer funded benefits while the rest of us are lucky to even have a fricken job!  And now your taking your nonsense union BS to court?  This whole thing is a disgusting waste of my tax dollars. My bet is that the dopes posting on this site are about 6 guys who all work together and have convinced themselves that everyone in their little unit is as disgruntled as they are.  Your group would probably vote the same way as these corrections guys, but you’ve got your heads too far up your fat arses to notice. When is the state going to wise up and fire these fools?

posted by: illogicallyl logical | August 1, 2012  11:47am

Ok, I have to put some people in “check” here.  A lot of misinformation coming out.  Before I do that, let me address the vote.  First, for good or bad, regardless of the outcome, at least they had to right to vote for a union. Both sides had to realize that someone had to lose in this vote. What I find startling about the vote that no one has addressed is that 428 people were eligible to vote and approximately 220 people voted.  This was one of the most important votes of their lives, and a little over one-half showed up to vote.  Those that didn’t show up due to laziness or apathy (not a planned vacation)...you can’t complain one bit about the results.  Now to address the other bloggers.  The 25 and out retirement for hazardous duty is based on the “50 year old rule” (or whatever it is titled).  If you are 30 years old and over, you can still retire in 20 years, as the “50 year” requirement is met.  If you join at 26, you work 24…27, then you work 23…and so on.  @Vote Yes…the goal for ALL unions is to increase membership for dues.  It doesn’t matter who the union is.  They don’t work for free (although some don’t work at all!).  @Raoul Duke…the health retirement isn’t “virtually free”.  Tier 2A and above pay 3% out of each check for the “Retirement Health Fund”.  Plus, Hazardous Duty pay into their own pensions (versus non-hazardous duty).  Finally, my criticism is directed at Christine Stuart.  Once again, you allow someone to troll the site (the member “Who is John Galt”).  If you read the CONTENT of his/her rant, there is nothing but insults to other state workers.  There is nothing in the rant that discusses the article that you posted.  Yet you continue to let a “troll” like that post disrespectful vitriol about other people that they have never met, and careers that they are obviously unqualified to work. I know it’s your site, but a little discretion should be used when editing bloggers that are discussing THE ARTICLE IN QUESTION rather than using this forum as a means to insult people.

posted by: Raoul Duke | August 1, 2012  12:22pm

For all the complaining about Dan Malloy, and there’s lots to complain about, do these P4 people remember what Tom Foley had in store for them?  He was going to declare a “fiscal state of emergency” and start laying people off.  Remember all the talk about state employee pay and benefits being “unsustainable”?  So, instead of having a 4 year no layoff guarantee, a defined benefit pension, retiree health care, and 3% raises, they would be collecting unemployment.  If they are so oppressed by the state why don’t they just quit and go work in the private sector?  As a Connecticut resident and taxpayer, I’m getting tired of paying for well compensated state employees who want to force their nervous breakdown on the rest of us.

posted by: Vote Yes!!!!! | August 1, 2012  1:32pm

Vote Yes!!!!!

Galt:  6 guys?  Actually considering more than 1300 cards were signed in about two weeks which is over half the members in the union….  I would respectfully say that u have no clue what u r talking about.  U sound silly.  By the way non of this has anything to do with taxes….please stick to facts

posted by: Major Shmuck | August 1, 2012  1:39pm

Major Shmuck

Duke:  Dan Foley said he would look into doing it.  Mellon Head DID DO IT!  Huge difference!

Not to mention CSEA helping him by screwing their members.  Vote Yes: is wrong you don’t sound silly…. You sound stupid.    Major out!

posted by: THREEFIFTHS | August 1, 2012  1:57pm

@Raoul Duke You said.If they are so oppressed by the state why don’t they just quit and go work in the private sector?  As a Connecticut resident and taxpayer, I’m getting tired of paying for well compensated state employees who want to force their nervous breakdown on the rest of us.

I talk to people who work in the private sector and are oppressed by the working condtions in the private sector.Last I am sick and tired of here about people saying. As a Connecticut resident and taxpayer.Public Sector workers are taxpayers two.In fact most pay mire taxes then public sector workers.Last You and other taxpayers should have take the test to get into the public sector.

posted by: Who is John Galt? | August 1, 2012  2:11pm

Who is John Galt?

Hey, illogical,  Just because you don’t like the CONTENT of what I have to say does not make me a troll or my comments any less true. I don’t like seeing my tax dollars going towards helping a bunch of state workers live the high life on my dime, nor do the other right minded tax payers in this state. 

I stand by what I said:  It’s always the same people with the same icons and stupid comments about about their “freedom” showing up on these posts. What about my freedom from wasteful spending? How much money is this small group of disgruntled state workers costing tax payers every time they take some more nonsense that no one else cares about to court?  I think that’s a valid question dealing with this article.

posted by: rankandfile | August 1, 2012  6:27pm

Raoul Duke, what Foley would have done is no different than what Malloy actually did (i.e. fiscal emergency and layoff threats). We would still have defined benefit pensions and health care with Foley (read the 1997 Rowland agreement with the 20 year guarantee). What 3% raises are you referring to? We’re still waiting to get the 3% contract raise that we were supposed to get in 2009 that was postponed by the Rell concessions. What guarantee is there that we will actually get any of the Malloy raises, if we haven’t even yet gotten the Rell raises? Why do so many people have a problem with state employees simply wanting a free choice about who represents them? You must all be Democrats, since you want them to keep getting the contributions the current unions give them. Most taxpayers would probably prefer that they not get those contributions.

posted by: illogicallyl logical | August 1, 2012  8:35pm

@John Galt….REALLY?  Tell me what state workers are living the high life?  Is it the Connecticut State Police?  Try telling Trooper Bagshaw that…oh you can’t because he lost his life in the line of duty.  Is it the Correction Officers?  Funny that in a twenty year span of their job, their starting salary and their ending salary are different ONLY by 10k, forcing them to basically due a prison sentence just to make a decent wage.  You know what the life expectancy is after retirement for these two groups…7 years.  So before you start running your mouth behind your keyboard about they’ve got “their heads too far up your fat arses to notice”, take the tests to get into these “High Life” positions.  If you can’t, then it goes to show you aren’t worth the money that they are getting paid.

posted by: perturbed | August 1, 2012  9:49pm

perturbed

Just time for a couple of real quick comments:

@Vote Yes!!!!!—in retrospect, this is not all that surprising. The key probably lies in this line from the top of Page 8 of the Revised SEBAC 2011 Agreement: “Current employees who retire after July 1,2022 - The following changes do not apply to individuals who retire under the Hazardous duty provisions of the plan.” Unlike the rest of us, the hazardous duty people actually were able to influence the negotiations. Originally, they were supposed to have their pensions re-negotiated like the rest of us—with an increase in their retirement ages. That was changed so that only new hires under Tier III get the revised retirement ages. Hazardous duty people were taken care of.

@Who is John Galt?—you wrote: “How much money is this small group of disgruntled state workers costing tax payers every time they take some more nonsense that no one else cares about to court?  I think that’s a valid question dealing with this article.”

Your question is misplaced. We would have had our vote last fall if the state, SEBAC, and our trusty incumbent union bosses didn’t object to it. You should direct your anger about court costs to the people that set this path in motion. So far, our appeal to superior court is the very first time we’ve taken anything to court to win our right to vote. Up until now, we’ve just been responding to the state’s, SEBAC’s, and our union bosses’ objections before the Labor Board. And they’ve all made sure the process has dragged on as long as humanly possible.

Here’s a clue for you (nobody should go without at least one): between last fall and whenever this thing is finally settled, AFSCME and SEIU will have raked in far more of our union dues than the entire legal process will have cost anybody in court costs. And the vast majority of the legal fees are being paid by our trusty unions with our own union dues. I do agree, though, that the state paying lawyers to support our incumbent unions—payback, if you will, for selling us out—is just plain wrong.

Just out of curiosity, are you at least equally angry at the hundreds of millions of tax dollars Malloy has handed over to the private sector in the form of corporate welfare? Is the “first five” now up to seven?

—perturbed

posted by: Who is John Galt? | August 1, 2012  11:18pm

Who is John Galt?

This has nothing to do with taxes?!?!?  You obviously forgot that my taxes pay your bloated salary, so this very much has everything to do with taxes and government waste.  I for one can’t wait to get rid of that weakling Malloy because he caves to the unions every chance he gets!!!  I can’t wait until he’s gone and we get someone in there who will finally deal with these unions once and for all:  Good bye to the public sector unions that negotiate against the tax payers!!!!  That will save the state money and we won’t have to hear state workers whining about their contracts anymore!!!  We can just lay off all the useless state workers, get rid of the fat and be done with it.  The best government is one that’s small enough to drown in a bath tub after all!!!!

posted by: rankandfile | August 2, 2012  6:43am

Galt, there is at least one error in your thinking. You said “How much money is this small group of disgruntled state workers costing tax payers every time they take some more nonsense that no one else cares about to court?” The labor board originally certified the ballots. It was only after the objections of the State and the current unions that first a hearing had to be held, and then court action taken. It’s the fault of the current unions and the State that it has to go to court. It’s only costing the state money because they hired outside lawyers to fight the free elections. Call Malloy and ask him to have the state drop their objections if you’re worried about saving tax dollars.And state workers aren’t pissed because they gave up money and benefits (see Rell, Rowland, Weicker concessions). They are pissed because they are forced to contribute to the Democrats against their will, forced to pay union dues against their will, pissed because a lawful vote was taken, then the results of the vote were thrown out and the rules were changed, pissed because their unions seem to believe their socialist agenda is more important than the needs of their members.We’ve given up concessions every three or four years for the last two decades, ask yourself why this is the first time it’s been a problem.

posted by: redlady | August 2, 2012  8:29am

The one person who voted for NO union was the worker with the most courage and the right solution to the problem.

posted by: rankandfile | August 2, 2012  3:00pm

galt, you do know that even if the State laid off every last state employee, your taxes wouldn’t go down one dime? The legislators and governor you elected would just spend the money on more buses and first fives and UCONN expansions and high speed rails and green energy and entitlements like universal health care and taxpayer funded pensions for all state residents? Heck, they might even raise your taxes if we all get laid off!

posted by: Major Shmuck | August 2, 2012  5:29pm

Major Shmuck

Galt:  So you pay state employee’s salaries and you feel that gives you the right to judge that they get paid too much?  So I assume you are in charge of oil companies because you buy gas and oil from them, and Stop and Shop employees because you might shop there, or insurance company workers because I assume you have insurance.  Do you fly?  You may want to chime in on your airline saleries, or the care you drive, auto workers make too much too…..  Please tell me you are not this stupid…..  Oh wait….  Never mind…Major Shmuck says…...“Citizens of Connecticut….We have found our Genius”

posted by: gompers | August 2, 2012  10:26pm

Kudos to the corrections captains and lieutenants for seeing threw a business that is faking it as a union. NCEU is related to UPSEU, which is part of IUJAT. Google the words “IUJAT” and “arrest” and see what pops up.

posted by: illogicallyl logical | August 2, 2012  11:12pm

Like I stated before about Galt…he was trolling.  What he did was a prime example.  Offered up no solutions to a problem that wasn’t even listed in the article.  He just complained, complained, and complained.  Now that everyone else recognizes this blogger for what he is, back to the article.  I know I mentioned it, but I’m still wondering why so many people DIDN’T vote…they fought so hard just to get this far (by signing and returning the blue cards) that it seems such a waste.  Even if everyone showed up and voted SEIU, then I wouldn’t really be having such an issue with this.  In the future, if the SEIU sticks it to their union members like they just did with this new contract, they only have themselves to blame for not using the power of their vote.

posted by: Major Shmuck | August 3, 2012  3:19pm

Major Shmuck

Gompers:  I am hearing their vote was delayed, delayed delayed and then all of a sudden, “Hey you vote in 2 weeks”...  I also heard that the new union was not allowed to talk to the employees at their place of business…....  So how does one spell Corruption?????  I for one hope that P-4 does not allow any of that BS to take place…  Hopefully this puts CSEA SEIU on notice that you pulled it once, YOU WILL NOT PULL THAT again…...  P-4 Members best get ample notice of when the vote is and USPEU best get access to potential members….  CSEA/SEIU will not get away with the CSEA SHUFFLE…..........

posted by: rankandfile | August 3, 2012  6:13pm

gompers, SEIU is a PAC masquerading as a union. Google SEIU and corruption and see what comes up. Or just try Chris Donovan and AFSCME union leaders and federal corruption.

posted by: Truthmiester12 | August 4, 2012  9:15pm

I did research and UPSEU is UJIAT Local 424. UJIAT Staff and officers arrested by FBI. Totally Mobbed up and not a real union only a Republican would want it. One wonders what DOT engineers who manufactured lies about CSEA stand to Gain. hmmmmmm

posted by: rankandfile | August 5, 2012  8:10am

Truthmeister, CSEA is part of SEIU. Google SEIU and federal corruption, that will keep you busy for hours.

posted by: CT Jim | August 5, 2012  10:30am

Truthmiester is actually telling the truth here and trying to ignore the fact that UPSEU has some real problems with the FBI is dillussional. The indictment that came down April 18th details some really shady dealings including stealing of union funds and connections to the Genovese crime family. Now i’m a big proponet of inocent till proven guilty but I would assume that rank and file would want this sort of info especially when it involves misuse of the members funds. most unions have strict ethics rules when it comes to thier officers and their employees and SEIU is one of those that have strong ethics rules. Can there be some in the ranks who break those rules? Well when you have more than 2 million members I would say well duh.
But by and large most are honorable people

posted by: Vote Yes!!!!! | August 5, 2012  9:12pm

Vote Yes!!!!!

Hmmm…...  From my experience, Engineers deal with facts.  They also analyze the heck out of everything.  I am going with the engineers….  CSEA SEIU has lied and lied and lied….Engineers don’t lie…......

posted by: Vote Yes!!!!! | August 5, 2012  9:15pm

Vote Yes!!!!!

Kind of weird that
CSEA
SEIU
And
LIES


Have the same amount of letters

Things that make one go ....hmmmmmmm…..

posted by: rankandfile | August 8, 2012  7:16pm

CTJim, where’s Jimmy Hoffa? Have you seen “Kill the Irishman”? Ignoring the AFL-CIO connections to organized crime, or SEIU/AFSCME corruption,  seems delusional to me.

posted by: CT Jim | August 9, 2012  11:56am

@rankandfile, LMAO!!!! Are you kidding me all you got is Jimmy Hoffa???? Really??? He’s been gone for more than 40 years!!!!! The UPSEU indictment happened in April of 2012!!! I’m not ignoring anything but forgive me if I really don’t care what went on when I was 10. thats like labeling every republican corrupt because of Nixons ties to the underworld and the disgraceful way he was forced to resign. I’m not even saying UPSEU is guilty I just think that while your out there promoting your agenda you might want to be honest with the rest of the Rank and File about the true nature of this so called union. You might want to tell them that they have never organized one unit, never. You might want to tell them this organization’s mission is to create dessention amongst the ranks of already organized union members and when it gets into a frenzy with half truths and out right lies they come in with cards and if successful they get the dues. Thats what there in it for. Not clout to move a pro worker agenda, not to work for safer worksites. They are in it for one thing to transfer monies to enrich themselves. You can post away but you need to be honest and as of yet you aint