buy Deltasone online pills A recently obtained a list of CTA contributions from its Association for Better Citizenship political action committee shows that a proportionally great deal of it is going to San Bernadino and San Fransisco.
For November 2011 local elections, CTA donated $14,432 to county party committees, ranging from $80 to the Tehama County Democratic Central Committee to $3,500 to the Orange County Democratic Central Committee.
In addition, the union PAC contributed $226,542 to at least 63 local elections. These ranged from $350 to the Chualar Teachers Association to support the school board candidacy of Rosalba Moreno to $20,000 contributions each to the United Educators of San Francisco PAC and the San Bernardino Teachers Association PAC (three of four school board winners).
Here’s the full list of PAC contributions to local affiliates and their ultimate destination, if available:
Alvord – $3,000
Baldwin Park – $3,234 ($1,078 each to Jack White, Natalie Ybarra, and Mary Ferrer, school board candidates)
Banning – $2,000
Beverly Hills – $2,000
Brawley – $1,500
Burlingame – $600 (Measure E – education parcel tax)
Chaffey – $4,250
Charter Oaks – $1,800
Chualar – $350 (Rosalba Moreno, school board candidate)
Citrus – $2,000
College of the Canyons – $10,000
Compton – $5,000
Culver City – $3,000 (Nancy Goldberg, school board candidate)
Dixon – $1,400
Eastside – $2,000
El Centro – $500 (Patricia Dunnam, school board candidate)
El Monte Union – $1,500
El Segundo – $2,000
Empire – $1,000
Eureka – $2,500
Fairfield-Suisun – $9,466
Garvey – $1,450
Hacienda La Puente – $4,200
Hart – $8,000 ($4,000 each to Gloria Mercado-Fortine and Steve Sturgeon, school board candidates)
La Canada – $1,000
Laguna Salada – $830 (Yes on L – parcel tax increase)
Las Virgenes – $9,000 (Measure K – parcel tax)
Lynwood – $5,000
Modesto – $9,000
Mountain View – $1,890
Newark – $575 (Measure G – school bond)
Newhall – $4,536 (Measure E – school bond)
Norwalk-La Mirada – $6,300
Oakdale – $4,000 (Synthia Jones – $3,000, Tina Shatswell – $1,000, both school board candidates)
Pacific Grove – $2,000 (Measure V – parcel tax)
Palmdale – $13,500
Perris – $1,000
Pomona – $6,000
Potter Valley – $1,000 ($500 each to school board candidates Tammie Smith and Diane Johnson)
Rio Hondo – $10,000
Riverbank – $2,000
Riverside – $4,000
Rosemead – $500 (Qui Nguyen, school board candidate)
Salinas – $1,600
San Bernardino – $20,000
San Francisco – $20,000
Sequoia – $5,000
South Tahoe – $1,400
Sulphur Springs – $2,200 ($1,100 each to Denis De Figueiredo and Rochelle Weinstein, school board candidates)
Sylvan – $3,436 (Steve Miller – $2,000, Chuck Rivera – $1,436, both school board candidates)
Temple City – $1,925
Ukiah – $3,500
Vacaville – $5,000
Visalia – $3,000 googletest
Westside Union – $1,400
Wilsona – $1,200
In each instance, the above money is in addition to whatever money may be raised and spent by the local affiliate. In large cities, this may be substantial. In smaller towns, this may be non-existent, giving the local teachers’ union power over local elections far beyond its numbers.
How has your association been helped by having a professional representative guiding you through a contract negotiations?
As a professional educator, my education and training has prepared me for being an effective teacher, however it never prepared me for how to successfully represent employees at disciplinary hearings in danger of losing their jobs or how to prepare and negotiate a comprehensive labor agreement. G&A has brought to the negotiating table an experienced and polished professional negotiating staff and labor attorneys who are experts in their fields and at the top of their game.
What is it like to have the CIT Model working for your association?
Horizon Certificated Employee Association has retained Goyette and Associates since June of 2009. In this relatively short time, G&A has provided our association and its members many comprehensive and competent services by professional representatives including attorneys, professional labor negotiators and access to survey and research departments.
It is great having a multiple labor representatives and attorneys dedicated to our association, its members, and our school. Their intimate knowledge of how our school operates in addition to the understanding the nuances of our labor agreement have changed the dynamic between our school’s administration and our association. In three years G&A has provided exceptional representation for countless grievances, coordinating and overseeing multiple fair association elections, filed several unfair labor practices, provided representation during disciplinary hearings, assisted in the monitoring of school budgets, accounting and business practices in addition to coordinating contract negotiation preparation guidance and successful contract negotiations. G&A’s labor representative assigned to our association provides at a minimum weekly contact regarding personnel issues and any outstanding issues between our association and our school’s administration.
The most impressive aspect of the service provided by G&A is the personal connections they have made with our membership, our association’s executive board, and maybe even more importantly is the mutual bridge of trust, honesty and respect that they have built with our school’s administration and human resources department. The impact of this positive relationship building has had an immeasurable effect on our members, our communication and problem solving with administration, and as a result a better more effective school.
furosemide for dogs buy Union Independence, A Better Model
Adopting a model of union independence allows you to control your own destiny, respond to issues as they arise in an expeditious manner, retain attorneys and labor professionals to provide representation and negotiations and most importantly greatly reduce your dues, giving yourself a raise.
As an independent labor association you operate under your own by-laws which can be expeditiously amended by your membership as needed. It is imperative that your organization is fluid to respond to the ever changing landscape of public employee labor relations. You decide when and how to spend your money politically, influencing the politics that have a direct effect on the terms and conditions of your employment.
Attorneys and labor professionals negotiate and enforce labor agreements, meet and confer the employer regarding the terms and conditions of your employment and provide representation during the discipline process through retainer agreements at a rate significantly less than union dues paid to a state-wide union that simply provides shop steward training to your peers.
This model has been proven to be a great value that has been effectively employed by hundreds of police, fire and miscellaneous employee associations.
As an independent association you control your own destiny and have the ability to expeditiously respond to employment issues as they arise and retain attorneys and labor professionals to provide representation versus the shop steward model.
CalSTRS Response: http://www.calstrs.com/Newsroom/whats_new/pension_reform_response.aspx CalSTRS appreciates that Governor Brown has taken a very important step in addressing the critical and complex issues facing the state’s public pension systems. We look forward to receiving more detail on the proposal and having the opportunity to review it in depth. The most important reform CalSTRS needs is a plan of action to address its long-term funding shortfall, which only the Legislature and Governor have the authority to implement. We will continue to work with the Governor, Legislature and our stakeholders to develop a plan that includes contribution increases that are gradual, predictable and fair to all parties. It’s important to note that some provisions of the Governor’s proposal, such as board governance and health care costs, do not apply to CalSTRS. Moreover, since CalSTRS contribution rates are set in statute by the Legislature, our contribution structure is extremely predictable and has not experienced pension “holidays.” CalSTRS members contribute 8 percent of salary to fund their pension, while their employers contribute 8.25 percent. These rates haven’t changed since 1972 and 1990, respectively. The State’s contribution of 2.541 percent was reduced from 4.607 in 1998. CalSTRS administers a hybrid pension system consisting of a mandatory traditional defined benefit pension and a cash balance plan which is similar to a 401(k). CalSTRS also offers its members a voluntary defined contribution supplemental savings program such as 457(b) and 403(b) plans. A look at the average CalSTRS member who retired in 2009-10 further illustrates the unique aspects of CalSTRS: • Retired at age 62 • Performed 27 years of service • Earned a pension that replaces nearly 60 percent of salary • Receives approximately $49,000 in earned benefits annually • Does not earn Social Security benefits for their service • Does not receive employer-paid health care benefits after age 65
Chico CTP Unit Decertifies SEIU and Recognizes Chico Employees Association, represented by Goyette, by a vote of 54 to 2
In a landslide, the City of Chico Classified, Technical and Professional employee unit voted to get rid of SEIU and recognize the newly formed Chico Employees Association as their new representative. 54 to 2 (in a unit with a total size of 67) was the election result, counted on September 29 by the City Clerk Debbie Presson.
This was the second time in the past couple of years that this unit tried to decertify from SEIU and they did so resoundingly. The Chico City Council is poised to formally recognize CEA on Tuesday, October 4.
“This unit is filled with hard working, talented and dedicated employees of the City of Chico,” says Rafael Ruano, CAO, Goyette and Associates, who has been guiding CEA on this process. “We are looking forward to a long term relationship with CEA to help them work with the City of Chico to improve not only working conditions but also the services provided to the citizenry. “
The Sacramento Bee recently reported that a group, looking to abolish collective bargaining rights for all of California’s public sector employees, filed three ballot initiatives this week. The group is called the California Center for Public Policy and arrears to be led by a UC Santa Barbara economic lecturer named Lanny Ebenstein. Mr. Ebenstein’s group has started fundraising to begin a signature campaign to get the initiatives before the voters.
The three initiatives are focused on both public sector employees and retirees. The first measure would ban recognition of all public sector labor unions to prevent government from collectively bargaining with them. The second measure would impose a higher tax burden on pensions paid through CalPERS or CalSTERS for retirees who earn an annual pension of over $100,000.00 per year. The Third measure would raise the retirement age of state employees to 65 and, and public safety workers to age 58.
The most troubling aspect of the news was the initial reaction from representatives of public employee groups. Steve Maviglio, of a group called Californian’s for Retirement Security, responded by saying “these will end up in the same trash bin as the proposal to require Christmas music in public schools. These proposals are wildly out of synch with California; fortunately there is a $15 million dollar gap between dumb ideas and the ballot box.”
Let’s hope Mr. Maviglio’s comments are not shared by a majority of public sector employee organizations throughout the State. Californians and members of public sector employee organizations should take these measures very seriously. Many voters, especially those who work in the private sector would view positively some, if not all of the element s of the measures. Union recalcitrants, inflexibility and lack of creativity is exactly the posture that lead to the abolition of collective bargaining in other states, including Wisconsin. The public sector employee union can no longer used tried and true methods like strikes, picketing, or PR smear campaigns to meet their objectives. The world out there is much more complicated now and requires an entirely different and smarter approach. The public sector employee unions need to position themselves as partners with a solution and regain the trust and respect of the citizens of California. Mr. Ebenstein is quoted in the Sac BEE article by saying, “[g]overnment does not exist to provide compensation and pensions for government workers. Government exists to provide good public services at a reasonable cost.” A vast, vast majority of California voters would agree with this statement. Unions need to incorporate this message in their strategy and convince the public that the good public service Ebenstein references depends upon hiring and keeping skilled and motivated government workers. Remember, the California private sector employees out number public employees over 25 to 1 at the ballot box. California’s public sector employee organizations would be wise to take seriously the three initiatives filed by Mr. Ebenstien and similar ones that have already been filed or will be filed in the coming months.
If you would like more information from us, regarding how you can craft a message of cooperation and partnership, please contact Jennifer at the Firm.
If your union, association or bargaining unit has been struggling you are not alone. However, if you’ve lost your shirt at the bargaining table over the last few years, you are probably not represented by G&A.
Our Labor specialists have devised a tactical bargaining strategy combining diplomacy and concessions to acheive unpresidented gains. If you are your Borad would like to learn how G&A has been successful in our Association’s negotiations.
Click the following link to view our presentation on the web.
If you would like to learn more, to receive a more comprehensive pesonalized training, or are not curreently represented by a team who is making progress, email Jennifer now and discover how you can be succesful tomorrow.