02/25/2006

Brother Andrew,

I have read your recent post to on the site and am responding.
One of the things you brought up was that of you running a clean campaign. If that is so, can you please tell me why your telemarketers or friends claimed that I was on Vincent Callaghan’s E-board? When the telemarketer was told this was untrue, she said she was not in the union, but that was what she was told (presumably by you). When the member could not be swayed, the telemarketer moved onto my age, stating that I was sixty and inferred that I was too old for the job. I will be sixty on Dec. 20 and I’m proud of it. Maybe it’s me but, if this what you call a clean campaign; I’d hate to see what you call a dirty one.
For your information, I was on the E-Board for 8 years, but, if you checked, you would know this was on Ed Callaghan’s board (Vincent’s Brother). During those days our P&W and general fund were constantly monitored and remained in healthy shape. As Sister Gleason states (as told by John Hall), it was the neglect from the last Trustees of our welfare fund that created the downfall in our Welfare fund (addressed later in this letter). Fortunately, under Ed Callaghan, we were able to build enough revenue to withstand Vincent’s lack of negotiating increases of P&W in our contracts. As a Trustee on the P&W board, Vincent did not seek other policies when the cost of healthcare increased. In fact, if you ask the members in the Jurisdiction, he actually negotiated P&W out of a lot of their checks.
I have been in the local for 35 years, but that should not be the issue of who is a better candidate. When I was in the local for approximately the same time as you, I was voted in as TV Trustee. The main reason was because I was involved in the union functions all along and that is what really matters at the end of the day.

A number of your proposals are contrary to what the members have expressed they wanted:
 

P&W, Contracts and Producers

The healthcare plan and the six month qualification period: If you had shown up to the general membership meeting of Dec. 2004, you would know that this is exactly what the membership does not want. The draining of the fund is somewhat tied to family coverage and that has to be confronted. If you had shown up to the general membership meeting of Sept. 2005, you would be aware that John Hall stated that members wanting family coverage would have to pay for it out of their own pocket. Ms. Gleason made you aware that the International has turned down our request to be part of their plan. You ask if we had questioned him why. There was no needed since he had also explained the reason at the Sept. meeting – we didn’t have the money to buy into the plan.
You claim that Kelly Gleason has suggested freezing wages in lieu of P&W increases. No one has ever made that comment. John Hall suggested that increases should lean more toward the healthcare fund instead of pay raises. He explained that our healthcare fund is dwindling at a steady rate. If we do not correct the situation, we’ll be stable for a year and a half before the fund crashes. The numbers you quoted from the office alone show you that: in 2003 the fund ran in a deficit of $408,793.00, in 2004 the deficit was $1,028,262.00 – that is a $619,469.00 increase in loss. That is more than double the previous years deficit. You should also realize that P&W increases are done in tax-free percentages which, in the long run, are more beneficial than an increase in salary.
I enjoyed reading your statement intimating that we can easily convince Producers to give us both pay and P&W increases. Obviously, you’ve had very little dealings with producers. They know better then you do as to what we’ve lost. I know this must be a shock to you, but they don’t care and will fight to not give anything back. As a matter of fact, at times, they have taken to hiring friends instead of union members (call the new JLo movie).
Since I’m almost sixty and have been in the local a little longer than you, I can list a few items that our Business Agent (mostly Vincent) had lost in our contracts that the Producers won’t want to give back: double time after 8 hrs, triple time after 14 hrs, platinum time, dinner penalties after 5 hrs, the meal penalty was equal to the hourly prevailing rate, we had a twelve hour turn around, 52 hour weekend turn around, we had vacation pay, we automatically went into double time for a night call which started at 4PM, Saturday calls were also double, Sunday was triple, penalties for calls before 6am, no NDB breakfast, we were clocked in at the half hour not on the tenth of an hour, there wasn’t an Area Standard Agreement contract, no 3 tier contracts, no national contract, no east coast council contract, 24 hour cancellation and stand-by pay was enforced. I’m sure there are some I’m forgetting.
This is what I suggest, you call a producer and tell them that the industry has turned around in New York and you think it’s only fair that they should reinstate some of our give backs. I’m sure after he picks himself up from the floor from laughing so hard he’ll be more than happy to give you what you want. If you can guarantee to reinstall these giveaways I’ll vote for you.

Suggestions You Made To Jurisdictional Members

You have mentioned to some jurisdictional members that you will bring back Tom Sobeck. The major problem with this is that 798 was not the one that fired Tom Sobeck, it was the International who had him removed. If you believe you’re going to reverse the International’s decision, you’re in for a rude awaking.
 

The Salon Idea

You have suggested we convert our main floor to a beauty salon that will rent space to out of work members. I’ll just briefly touch on some of the problems as if we don’t have enough already. The seed money, though you make it sound like pocket change, I can assure you it is not. Who would be the manager to operate this place? In your resume, you claim to be the CEO of a twenty-person salon. I have never actually heard that term used in a twenty-person hair salon before and I used to be a hair stylist for a much larger salon that catered to some of the richest clients in the country. Are you suggesting that you do both jobs? Come to think of it, what ever did happen to that salon you supposedly owned?
Does it concern you that this will be an investment of funds that belong to all of our members and will be primarily used by hair stylists, not make-up artists (excluding almost 1/2 the members in the local) and would be dominated by members in the tri-state area? Also there is no guarantee of profit. I’m sorry, this space can be rented to an outsider, who will make improvements and take all the risk.
Also, if you had come to at least one of the meetings, you would know all about Richard Callaghan. I figure, since you’ve recently spent time in the office trying to get information and numbers to use in your campaign, you might have run into him.

Mergers

In response to your letter to sister Gleason: In your platform, you had written "In order to save administrative costs, one idea would be to combine our coalition of unions...". There is no mention of healthcare anywhere in that paragraph, so it does in fact suggest that all locals merge into one.
Merging our operating or health fund with other locals to save money is the first step into a slippery slope to losing our autonomy. This is a bad idea and, I can assure you, it is not what the members want. You would know this if you would just ask them instead of trying to sell your ideas.
The only collaboration I can see with other locals is to band together for some sort of standard living increase – or to erase the Area Standard Agreement.

Constitutions and Meetings and Other Issues

Getting the members a constitution is just a phone call away. If you want the present constitution, all you have to do is call and they’ll send you one. Of course you must be aware that this constitution is going through major changes. The reason I am aware of this, is because this is the committee I volunteered for. We do read monthly reports at the meetings.
You mentioned that most of us did not attended meetings in the past three years. Guilty as charged. There is no defense. But, once we were made aware of what took place, we expended our time, effort and our own money to correct the problem. Where were you?
You mention in you resume that you are a volunteer fireman and participated in the 9/11 rescue, that is honorable. I joined the Navy straight out of high school for 4 years. I spent those years on a carrier during the Viet Nam period. Let me ask, do you think this information is important to a member standing in the rain or snow in the middle of the night, who is being underpaid by a producer?
You mention involving members in the negotiation process. Until Vincent took over, members were invited to attend. Most declined because they would have to sit across from the very people they would be working for the next day, possibly creating an adversarial position with production. It is the union’s responsability to provide a service that protects the members during contract negotiations, on the job discrepancies, monitoring their pensions and their healthcare funds, bookings and so on. You are trying to give the impression that we are trying to bar members from negotiations. We want them to participate through contract proposals gathered by the Stewards or E-Board. At negotiations, the President and or The Secretary Treasurer (or an alternate), will monitor the Business Agent to make sure he/she fights for our demands.

Your Candidacy

Why do some members have an adverse reaction to your candidacy? Simple, while they were doing all the work and pleading for volunteers you were hiding. Working at a job and working for a cause are two different things. For example: watching a building burn and actually rescuing someone from a fire is not the same.
Since you chose not to get involved, some feel you have a myopic view. Believing that everyone agrees on everything and we are all just yes people is ridiculous. Come to any meeting. There were and probably will be a lot of arguments and different points of view. The difference is, that at the end of the day, we respect each other and know what had to be done. I believe like most of the members that you have a superior attitude and will never bend because you will always feel you are right.

I could continue, but I feel there is enough material on this site to help you educate yourself.

As I stated before, the problem is not the amount of time you’ve spent in the local as a member, it is your lack of involvement, lack of knowledge of union functions and not knowing what the membership wants. Call a member and listen to their problems for a change. I do. Kelly Gleason does. The other Board members do.

Fraternally,
Joe Cuervo

© 2005 798members.com updated: 02/25/2006