President Bellini’s Message To Members & Retirees About Anti-Union Radio Ads Currently Airing In VT

From President Bellini:

VSEA members and retirees have been asking me if I have heard this Janus radio ad that the Ethan Allen Institute (EAI) is paying to play on radio stations across Vermont. I have, and, frankly, there’s no information in the ad that VSEA wasn’t sharing years ago with members about the Supreme Court’s terrible Janus decision and how it would impact your union status. Saying that, the ad is a paid talking head, ranting against unions. The fact is that union membership increased after the Janus decision and that wasn’t what the anti-union forces wanted.

These kinds of pro-Janus, anti-union ads are being funded by wealthy, anti-union outside interests to be played on radio and television stations across the country. I’m guessing the Ethan Allen Institute (EAI) is probably benefiting financially from agreeing to run this anti-union campaign by sponsoring ads like the Janus one. You’ll notice that the EAI ad includes a pitch to visit the organization’s website, where visitors are greeted with a large button to donate. Truth is, this is a large radio-ad buy that had to cost a ton of money, which begs the question of who is really funding the EAI’s campaign?   
 
It’s been months since the Supreme Court’s Janus ruling, and VSEA did what it could years and months ago to ensure members understood the ruling, understood VSEA’s position and knew their rights under Janus. The EAI and their wealthy funders had hoped that Janus would have caused VSEA members to give up their membership, but that’s not been the case, which might be why they felt compelled to hop on the radio ad bandwagon now. I’m actually pleased to report that VSEA membership is growing, post-Janus, and I attribute it to members understanding and appreciating the power of a union and knowing full well what life would be like without one. 
 
Remember, there’s a reason corporate America and anti-union groups attack labor unions so hard. It’s because unions work, and they know it. Judging by the number of members VSEA is signing up after Janus came down, a large majority of Vermont state employees know it too. 

The VSEA Board of Trustees and I thank you for your continued solidarity. 

Woodside Workers Meet With Lawmakers To Discuss Future

On Wednesday, a group of dedicated Woodside Juvenile Rehabilitation Center members drove down from Essex— after their shift — to attend VSEA’s final Legislative Dinner of the year. The members had a very positive, constructive conversation with more than 20 Senators and Representatives in the room.

In an informal discussion, members spoke directly with legislators about the incredible outcomes they achieve for Vermont’s most vulnerable children, the challenges they face in the workplace, and the vision they have for the future of the facility. Lawmakers voiced their strong appreciation for the opportunity to speak directly with frontline workers, and expressed interest in touring the facility going forward—a project that several member-leaders are eager to help facilitate.

Lawmakers walked away tremendously impressed with the work being done at Woodside.

WPTZ Story On State’s Infants-At-Work Policy Doesn’t Sit Well With VSEA Member Featured In Piece

VSEA Department of Health member Erin O’Keefe agreed to go on camera this week with WPTZ when they reached out to her to appear in a story about Vermont’s new infants-in-the-workplace program, which O’Keefe was recently approved to participate in. However, O’Keefe was concerned that much of what she told the reporter, including a staunch defense of VSEA’s position that the policy must be bargained, did not make it in the story. Instead, she is quoted saying she "respects" VSEA’s position, which, while the only soundbite used in the story, is not at all the only message O’Keefe delivered to the reporter. 

O’Keefe wanted VSEA members and retirees to know what she actually told the reporter, so she asked VSEA to share the following message (which VSEA did on its Facebook page and now here):

"I am a proud member of VSEA and a full supporter of the collective bargaining process. I am in a position where this program was able to be financially and logistically beneficial to my family, however I can envision many instances where it could fall short for other state employee parents. In and of itself, bringing your infant to work is not a complete solution to supporting families. We need access to high quality affordable childcare and paid family leave option. With access to those supports, programs like Infants in the Workplace could help to retain families in the Vermont workforce."

Thanks Erin! 

Note: VSEA continues to urge every member and retiree who overhears a workplace conversation about the infant policy and VSEA’s position, pro or con, to please educate your co-workers about why VSEA is taking the position it has (policy must be bargained) and the ramifications for state employees if this policy is allowed to implement unchecked. Thanks!

VSEA Attends Fundraiser For Vermont State Colleges’ Scholarship Fund

Bad News. Three More Petition’s Targeting Labor Unions Filed At U.S. Supreme Court 

The National Law Journal reports yesterday on three new petitions filed recently with the U.S. Supreme Court, all bad for union members and all tied to the justices’ ruling last term against mandatory public-sector union fees.

According to the story,"two of the petitions—filed by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and the Buckeye Institute—confront laws that require a union’s exclusive representation of public sector employees. In the third, also brought by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, non-union home care workers seek refunds of about $32 million for fees paid to the union.

Here’s a brief synopsis of each petition filed:

Uradnik v. Inter Faculty Organization

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and lower courts are wrong that a 1984 high court decision—Minnesota State Board for Community Colleges v. Knight—approved of a state’s appointment of a labor union as exclusive representative of public sector employees, argues the petition. “The result of those decisions is to broadly sanction compelled representation of unwilling public employees and subsidy recipients like home healthcare workers, irrespective of their speech and associational interests. That result cannot be squared with this court’s First Amendment jurisprudence.”

The Eighth Circuit, which earlier had ruled in Bierman that Knight applied, affirmed the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction after finding no likelihood of success on the merits.
 

Riffey v. Pritzker

The Seventh Circuit erred in affirming a district court decision that the plaintiffs failed to meet the requirements for approval of a class seeking refunds of union fees, according to the petition. “Here, Illinois deducted agency fees for SEIU from the proposed class of personal assistants’ wages without their affirmative consent,” according to the petition. “Under Harris (v. Quinn) and Janus, each unauthorized fee seizure inflicted a First Amendment injury. The victim’s subjective feelings about SEIU are immaterial to the First Amendment violation. The compensatory damages owed to each personal assistant in the putative class equals all fees seized from him or her, plus interest.”

The Seventh Circuit panel, in an opinion by Judge Diane Wood, wrote: “The assistants spurned the opportunity to suggest a narrower class in favor of a ‘go-for-broke’ strategy. In doing so, however, they overlooked the substantial deference we give to the district court’s decisions about predominance and manageability. The judge here came to a defensible—indeed, sensible—decision on these points.”

Bierman v. Walz

“Regimes of exclusive representation, like other mandatory expressive associations, are subject to a limiting constitutional principle: exacting First Amendment scrutiny,” Messenger wrote in the petition. “Whatever its merits in a public employment relationship, no compelling state interest justifies extending exclusive representation beyond that context to a citizen’s relationship with government regulators.”

The Eight Circuit panel, led by Judge Steven Colloton, said in its ruling in August: “There is no meaningful distinction between this case and Knight. The current version of [state law] similarly allows the homecare providers to form their own advocacy groups independent of the exclusive representative, and it does not require any provider to join the union. According to Knight, therefore, the state has ‘in no way’ impinged on the providers’ right not to associate by recognizing an exclusive negotiating representative.”

VSEA NEK / St. Johnsbury Chapter Conducting Food Drive 

Throughout the month of March, VSEA’s NEK / St Johnsbury Chapter of VSEA will be reaching out to area members and retirees to solicit donations to local food shelves in Lyndonville and St. Johnsbury.

If you will be collecting at your office and want to arrange a donation(s) pickup, or if you have questions, please contact Ellen Hinman (Chapter President 751-0123), Dianne Rivers (Chapter Vice President 626-6497) or Monique Prive (Chapter Secretary/Treasurer 626-6364 )

Donations are being accepted until April 12, 2019.

Thank you in advance for donating to this worthy cause!

Union Rep Schedules Next Round Of Meetings With Vet’s Home Members 

VSEA Union Representative Rachael Fields asked WIA to announce that she has scheduled some new dates to meet with Vet’s Home employees to talk about their issues and concerns.
 
If you work at the Vet’s Home, please pick a meeting date and time that works best for you to stop by and talk with Rachael:

Friday, March 22 – Crispe Room

Friday, April 5 – Crispe Room (a.m.) / Upstairs Board Room (p.m.)

Wednesday, May 22  – Crispe Room

Tuesday, June 18  – Crispe Room

Available Times: 6:30 a.m., 1:00 p.m., 2:30 p.m., 3:30 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. 

VSEA
Insurance Benefits!

VSEA Insurance Benefits is now making the following Aflac insurance policies available to VSEA members!

Organizer’s Worksite Meeting:

• McFarland Building 
  Thursday, March 21
  12:00 p.m.
  McFarland State Office Building
  Economic Services Suite Conference Room (#150)
  5 Perry Street
  Barre

  Questions: Contact VSEA Organizer Carmen Scoles: cscoles@vsea.org

Chapter Meeting:

• Bennington Chapter 
  Monday, March 18
  5:00 p.m.
  Tap House @ Catamount Glass 
  Back Room 
  209 Country Street
  Bennington

  Questions: Contact Bennington Chapter President Victoria Thorpe: victoria.thorpe@vermont.gov

• Waterbury Chapter 
  Wednesday, March 27
  12:00 p.m.
  State Office Complex 
  AHS Building A
  Cherry C Conference Room 
  45 State Drive
  Waterbury

  Questions: Contact Waterbury Chapter President Brett Pierce: brett.pierce@vermont.gov

Know Your Rights Training

• Waterbury State Office Complex 
  Wednesday, March 20
  12:00 p.m. 
  State Office Complex
  Sally Fox Conference Room
  280 State Drive
  Waterbury

  Questions: Contact VSEA Organizer, Danielle Warner at dwarner@vsea.org

Site Ranks States; Strongest Unions To Weakest

Vermont came in at number 21, with the following information:

• Pct. of workers in unions: 10.5%
• Change in union membership (2008-2018): +0.1 ppt. (9th largest increase)
• Union workers: 30,619 (4th fewest)
• Avg. annual wage: $45,314 (12th lowest)

The Public Does Not Hate Labor

Jacobin posted a story to its website this week, titled “The Public Does Not Hate Labor,” which provides readers with a pretty comprehensive overview of the consistent support for organized labor, writing, “Overall, support for organized labor remained consistent over the twenty years we studied. In general, in each state, most respondents had a neutral, if not positive view of organized labor.”
 
Here’s more:
 
Based on our analysis, we can see that the American public — particularly those with lower incomes — does not dislike organized labor. The states that have adopted anti-worker policies have passed them in spite of, not because of, the preferences of most people.

On this issue, as with others, the US more closely resembles an oligarchy than a democracy. The preferences of those with more money win out over those with less. This is especially true when it comes to economic issues,where the very rich support much different policies than the average person. The nightmare scenario is that state legislatures continue to approve measures designed to weaken labor, which then amplify the power of well-off voices — and, in a vicious cycle, make it easier to approve to still more draconian anti-labor statues.

Workers do not dislike unions. They haven’t disliked them historically, and for the most part they do not dislike them now. But wealthy people and conservative donors sure do — and that, more anything, accounts for the anti-labor policies being passed at the state level.

"America’s First Craft Brewery" Workers Vote To Unionize!

If unionized, Anchor Brewing employees will join the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU).