Patrick Wayne Germond: Informative, hilarious

Advertisement

To the editor:

Letters from Allen Hischke and Michelle Conroy were printed in the Daily Press on Oct. 1. Michelle's was informative, and Allen's was hilarious.

Amendment 47 grants freedom of choice to join a union or not. Allen implied union leaders still have to defend or support non-union workers (LOL). Unions don't incur costs from representing nonmembers. Ask any local teacher. The vice president of the local teachers association, Michelle Conroy, set me straight on that. There is no federal law that mandates it. I spent most of Thursday talking to union leaders and checking facts. (Note to Allen, do that before a public rant.)

Each union can represent whom they wish; it depends on their contract. The teachers' union here proves that. This is a confusing issue; a lot of the union leaders themselves were of conflicting views. The local teachers union is by far the best one I've seen. They are an all-volunteer organization.

Furthermore, some union entities do make purely political donations. Amendment 54 would shut that down. So do we want freedom to make political donations, but not freedom of membership?

One thing I have found is that federal law prohibits mandatory union membership (Taft-Hartley). However, the bill does not prohibit union leaders from mandating money from you. Non-union-members may get some benefits by osmosis, but no more than other workers in Colorado.

Amendment 47 will make the union leaders more concerned and attentive to workers' needs. Our local teachers' union does fantastic with this policy. When they lobby, they do so for the needs of our children. It's a thing of beauty. A system all the members support. Teachers are scared of 49.

If amendement 49 passes, public unions can't have their representation fees (dues) directly withdrawn from payroll checks anymore. Anyone who relies on direct withdrawl to make sure a payment routinely get made knows 49 will cause havoc for them and union treasuries. The opposition to 49 implies this step costs us all money. It does not. If the teachers' union falters, your child's state representation falters.

Amendments 49 and 54 are union killers. However, if unions are going to move into the future, Amendments like 47 have to pass. Passing 49 and 54 mean workers lose freedoms forever. These amendments are set up as a perfect trap.

Vote for union freedoms, vote yes on 47, no on 49 and 54. Unions need the rest of us to pull their butts out of the fire. More union members and leaders need to step up and publicly participate in the discussion of these amendments.

These amendments come with a lot of myths. It's not about who's right or wrong on this issue, it's about getting the facts right. What will these amendments do to your union specifically? What's the difference in the your contract currently and what is mandated by federal law? Tell us.

Patrick Wayne Germond

Craig

Comments

als362 6 years, 2 months ago

Patrick is the absolutely most misinformed person that has ever written a letter to the editor. He has no idea how unions work or what the law states. After reading his many stupid comments here it is obvious to me that he wishes to be one of the freeloaders I mentioned in my letter. Patrick you are an IDIOT!

0

lonelyone 6 years, 2 months ago

Patrick, Patrick, Patrick.........how many people have tried to tell you something and you have picked one person to listen to and have blown off the rest?? I can not say that Michelle is wrong, but to say Allen and the rest of the union people who have written to you have only been telling jokes is so wrong. DID you ever once triy to get ahold of someone from IBEW? Did you once try to get ahold of someone from UNITED MINE WORKERS? Do you understand what a closed shop means? I know people have tried to tell you things and give you places to go to on the web to find information and yet you have decided to believe only part of what you've been told. You've decided Michelle is right in her information (and I'm not saying she is wrong with her info from the Teachers Union) and all other just don't have a clue what they might be talking about.

0

Ray Cartwright 6 years, 2 months ago

Patrick, I just got in touch with my Local Business Agent and started asking questions. He then gave me the cell phone number of our Representative out of Denver. So I called and talked to him (he was on the golf course by the way) and asked him "specifically what law calls for the union to represent a non dues paying non member" his answer was the National Labor Relations Act (http://www.union-organizing.com/nlra.html) states "All Workers shall be entitled to representation as long as they are covered by a collective bargaining agreement." which means that they are working for a company that has a union and a negotiated contract. The NLRB (national labor relations board) later ruled that it indicated ALL EMPLOYEES not just members. Your statement that the teachers union isn't required to do so is a whole other matter. Public Employees are covered under a different rules and regulations than employees in the private sector. Therefore Ms. Conroy is correct in her statement but so is Allen. The offer to buy the coffee still stands.

0

lonelyone 6 years, 2 months ago

Hi Patrick, it's me again!! This subject has beome pretty exciting and a bit crazy. I must say that I have in no way meant to criticze Michele and how things are done with the Teachers Union. I have no clue how they do things and don't mean to undermine what she has said. I understand too that this has got to be an overwhelming issue for you too. As I've satated before, my husband is a union member for over 30 years and while we don't agree on everything concerning unions, some things I do get. It might take me a bit but sometimes I do get them!! I think the difference between what Michele has told you and what Allen is telling you is the fact that she is a public employee......I hope that is the right term. As such, their unon is different, rule wise then someone maybe from IBEW or UNITED MINEWORKERS or the FOODWORKERS. I hope we can contine to discuss this issue without getting to heated and disrespectful of one another, which means NO MORE NAME CALLING!!!

0

rhammel 6 years, 2 months ago

Patrick,

You are just a scab, scab, scab! No sense in trying to talk to you. You are just a non-union scab.

0

lonelyone 6 years, 2 months ago

oh come on rhammel, that didn't help the issue at all. It never helps either side when they are trying to force their beliefs onto the other side. But sides DO get heated over these issues as they can affect so many people no matter which way it goes. deep breath.........let out slowly...........better?? ;o)

0

Ray Cartwright 6 years, 2 months ago

I am ashamed to be lumped into the same class as Rick. Since when has name calling accomplished anything? Shame on you Rick, the guy is just looking for answers to his questions, take the time to visit with him and convince him. Patrick please accept my appollogies for his tirade it was uncalled for.

0

Ray Cartwright 6 years, 2 months ago

If you are asking how many will quit paying dues and drop out of the union, I can't answer that but alot of todays workers are the new generation and don't know what it would be like to work for the company without the protection of the union. They look at the company as good guys and haven't had to deal with negotiaions and hear that last and final offer knowing that you are going to have to make a decision on whether you take what they are offering you or go on strike. Hell why wouldn't they drop out and not have to pay dues for all of the benefits that a collective bargaining aggreement would afford to them. Why would I pay dues if Patrick is going to take all of the risk and pay for my benefits and I get a free ride. If I could go to the local Health club and get you to pay my membership just because I didn't think I had to why wouldn't I? I don't know what I have to say to convince you that you already have a choice and nobody can force you to Join a union. Amendment 47 is an unnecessary as all of those choices and rights are already in place. The only question that you have to answer is the forcing of the union to make you pay dues. IBEW history in the valley was in 1975, Local 111 held a security clause vote for Colorado-Ute and had it had to pass by a 75% margin, not a simple majority to make it mandatory for all employees to pay their share of the costs of representation. No worker can be forced to join a Union I don't care what your UMW contact said.

0

als362 6 years, 2 months ago

Patrick talks about the duty of fair representation being in a contract. NOT TRUE! That is a federal law. In that law it does not imply that unions must defend the nonpaying freeloaders it is mandated. You said that you would stand up for individual rights until it hurt someone. I think paying members having to pay the way for nonpaying bums IS hurting someone! Now is the time for you to sit down and read all the things people have written back to you over the last week. If you will just read and quit trying to justify your appearant need to not pay dues and take a free ride off the back of an honest worker, you would see what the good union members of this area are saying to you.

0

Ray Cartwright 6 years, 2 months ago

"Right to Work" 1. Statutes prohibit employers and unions to voluntarily negotiating a union security agreement. 2. Federal Law requires unions to represent nonmembers so dues-paying members are forced to subsidize union services. 3. An average worker in a RTW state earn about $4830 a year less than a NON-RTW State. 4. Hispanic workers earn on average $207/wk and African Americans earn $175 more per wk than Union members. 5. Union women earn $144/wk more than nonunion women. 6. RTW states have a higher poverty rate, & infant mortality rate. Schools also get on average $1680 less per pupil. Average teachers salaries are $6943 lower and ACT scores are 3.55% lower. 7. Workmans comp benefits are less in RTW states and workplace deaths and injuries (acording to BLS) is 41% higher in RTW states. 8. When workers earn higher wages, consumers have more money to spend, leading to more jobs and less unemployment. This data is published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. As you can see it is not just the unions that are hurt by this it is the schools, health system, small business', City, County, and every individual in the State in one way or the other.

0

Ray Cartwright 6 years, 2 months ago

I need to revise my number 4. in my previous comment it should have read. 4. Hispanic workers earn on average $207/wk and African Americans earn $175 more per wk than Non-Union members.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.