UnionMaine

Trust me, I work for the Government

Will the Presitdent add More Taxes on State Employees?

Judd Gregg, U.S. Senator from New Hampshire.Image via Wikipedia

Is the president planning on taxing health benefits? What would that mean to State Employees that were just hit with a nearly $900.00 per year increase? Depending on what kind of tax and at what level State Employees could face from nothing to several thousand dollars a year in pay cuts. It gets worse later. If the benefits are based on a fixed dollar amount then at the rate health care has been increasing for twenty years 90% of your health care would be taxable within ten years.


President Obama seems to be turning 180 degrees from his campaign attacks against John McCain’s suggestion that health care benefits should be taxed. He said it to McCain’s face and he ran TV spots chastising the Senator for even thinking of taxing health care.

Now he has told Democratic senators that he is willing to consider taxing employer-sponsored health benefits to help pay for a broad expansion of coverage.

This is thin ice for Obama who said, while debating John McCain “For the first time in American history, he wants to tax your health benefits,” “Apparently, Senator McCain doesn’t think it’s enough that your health premiums have doubled. He thinks you should have to pay taxes on them, too.”

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said Obama seemed willing to change the existing tax break for employer paid health care. The decision will anger supporters and especially supporters who are in the same unions that had so much to do with Obama getting elected.

White House officials said taxing health insurance benefits provided by employers is not Obama’s first choice, but did not rule out the possibility.

Republican Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.) supports imposing a tax on certain health plans (read that as Union plans). Sen. Democrat Sherrod Brown (Ohio) says such a tax would unfairly hurt middle-class workers with good benefits.

Several ideas have been floated, taxing all benefits, a benefit cap, that could kick in at some dollar amount, only taxing benefits for employees that make above a certain income level. Health Care should be available to all. I don’t know if we can get there if the plan is to take it away from the middle class with tax policies that make a good plan unaffordable.

I do know that the Republican party on the whole will do everything it can to keep your health care dollars going to make profits for the few, not health care for all.

Enter your Email

Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

June 10th, 2009 Posted by narsbars | Maine State Employees, SEIU 1989, state employee pay cuts, taxing employer paid health care | no comments

Will the President add More Taxes on State Employees?

Judd Gregg, U.S. Senator from New Hampshire.Image via Wikipedia

Is the president planning on taxing health benefits? What would that mean to State Employees that were just hit with a nearly $900.00 per year increase? Depending on what kind of tax and at what level State Employees could face from nothing to several thousand dollars a year in pay cuts. It gets worse later. If the benefits are based on a fixed dollar amount then at the rate health care has been increasing for twenty years 90% of your health care would be taxable within ten years.


President Obama seems to be turning 180 degrees from his campaign attacks against John McCain’s suggestion that health care benefits should be taxed. He said it to McCain’s face and he ran TV spots chastising the Senator for even thinking of taxing health care.

Now he has told Democratic senators that he is willing to consider taxing employer-sponsored health benefits to help pay for a broad expansion of coverage.

This is thin ice for Obama who said, while debating John McCain “For the first time in American history, he wants to tax your health benefits,” “Apparently, Senator McCain doesn’t think it’s enough that your health premiums have doubled. He thinks you should have to pay taxes on them, too.”

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said Obama seemed willing to change the existing tax break for employer paid health care. The decision will anger supporters and especially supporters who are in the same unions that had so much to do with Obama getting elected.

White House officials said taxing health insurance benefits provided by employers is not Obama’s first choice, but did not rule out the possibility.

Republican Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.) supports imposing a tax on certain health plans (read that as Union plans). Sen. Democrat Sherrod Brown (Ohio) says such a tax would unfairly hurt middle-class workers with good benefits.

Several ideas have been floated, taxing all benefits, a benefit cap, that could kick in at some dollar amount, only taxing benefits for employees that make above a certain income level. Health Care should be available to all. I don’t know if we can get there if the plan is to take it away from the middle class with tax policies that make a good plan unaffordable.

I do know that the Republican party on the whole will do everything it can to keep your health care dollars going to make profits for the few, not health care for all.

Enter your Email

Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

June 10th, 2009 Posted by narsbars | Maine State Employees, SEIU 1989, state employee pay cuts, taxing employer paid health care | no comments

Looks Like Socialism From Alaska

Senator Shelby as Chairman of the Senate Commi...Image via Wikipedia

This chart has almost gone viral. Huff Post and a lot more. For the rest of the story follow the credit link to Conor Clarke.

Have you heard that the United States is headed toward socialism? Jonah Goldberg says says it is. Alabama Senator Richard Shelbysays it is. Phyllis Schlafly says it is.. Richard Viguerie says it is.. The Republican National Committee says it is. We must be getting pretty close.

Credit: Conor Clarke

How close? This is what socialism looks like:


Enter your Email

Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

June 9th, 2009 Posted by narsbars | Phyllis Schlafly, Richard Shelby, SEIU 1989, Socialism, conor clarke | no comments

Is that collar getting tight?

No Cartoon, No jokes, this is too serious for humor.

I must put in a disclaimer. I am not an attorney. I am not giving legal advice or counsel.
This is not an official or unofficial Union communication. This is my opinion and my opinion alone.

Ask a Union representative before implementing any of these suggestion. Take any questions to a professional.

Since the State has money troubles State Employee are expected to chip in, and we have always been willing to chip in if we were only asked.

The legislature refused to bargain and claimed that since they could club us, we had given concessions. A request to help would have worked, but they saw us as they must see themselves.

Now it is going too far.

This is aimed solely at Overtime eligible employees. I will go over what we can do about abuses of the system for salaried employees in another post.

Hourly employees are being told that no overtime is allowed and then given fifty hours of work to do in a week. Upper management is hinting that if you can’t do your work………..maybe you will be in trouble.

First always do what your manager orders you to do, unless it is a clearly illegal or personally dangerous action.
You and your Union can file a grievance later but it is hard to fight insubordination.

This is the advice I am giving to State Employees.

Many State Employees are working over 40 hours every week, but not allowed to collect overtime. Are you and your friends being told not to write down time you work?. If you don’t YOU are the one falsifying a time sheet.

This is the only solution I can see. You must refuse to work over 40 hours in a week unless you are paid. No free work. It is against the law to give you personal days in place of OT.

If you have meetings four hours away, go there, let management know you can not stay unless OT is approved if the end of the day will put you over 40 hours in a week. Vacation, Sick, and Holiday hours do not count.

If time is authorized or refused, act according to what they say. Remember, you must obey any directions given, then file a grievance, if the boss says stay, you stay, if the boss says go, you go. Then the employee says “Here is your grievance”.

At the end of 40 hours even if it is on a Wednesday or Thursday make sure you tell your supervisor your plan to be back at your reporting station at the end of 40 and go home if OT is not authorized.

You must request permission in every case, you must follow directions even if permission is not given, and you must fill out an accurate time sheet. If OT is refused, take notes, save emails, and go home!

Hourly Employees can be given personal days in addition to OT, but not in place of. That is an illegal practice under Federal law.

The Fair Labor Standards Act makes it illegal for you to falsify your time sheet. It is also illegal for an employer to refuse to pay hourly employees for hours worked over 40 even if they have a policy against it.

On the other hand you can be disciplined for filling out a false time sheet, or for working over 40 hours if there is a policy in place.

If your management is aware of this happening on an ongoing basis you can get Federal protection.

State employees must only work for what they are paid for. The dedication we have always brought to our jobs, the willingness to give a little more has been laughed at.

We are not respected for the free work.

No more Free Work. We will give them everything they are paying for.

They like to pretend respect for our labor but they think like mill owners of old using their victims with no respect.

These are our politicians. When they want power they promise or say anything to get elected but when they get the power they forget about the voters, and discard their ideals.

Enter your Email

Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

June 4th, 2009 Posted by narsbars | MSEA, SEIU 1989, shut down days | no comments

January 2010 They will be back


Maine State Employees are already facing cuts of as much as fifteen percent over the next two years.

The legislature says the cuts will expire on June 30, 2011. I don’t believe them and I don’t know anyone who does.

So far not a penny of the wasteful contracting in the State has been cut. Jobs that can be done by State Employees go to private firms at up to twice the cost because the politicians “can’t increase head count”.

Tens of thousands of square feet of empty State owned buildings will be either heated for no reason or torn down to ensure that landlords can keep getting rich.
California has led the way for years
The future of Maine is shown by the present in California. Well before the State of Maine started talking about shut down days and take backs California was already demanding furloughs and pay freezes.
Now Arnold is coming back for an additional 5% pay cut for all State employees and massive cuts to services for the poorest that will in turn cause thousands of layoffs for State Employees.

That is bad for CA., and we can expect the same or worse in Maine in January 2010 unless we find the waste and stop it now.

The Maine legislature is already talking about how to gut the pension system and you know it won’t be only for new employees. Thanks for thirty years…….Get out!

The good is that California State Employees know how to fight back and how to work with the State at the same time. They have been fighting the outsourcing of State jobs to more expensive contractors. They have just won their first major victory.

State Personnel Board backs Local 1000 on outsourcing

Ruling ousts contractor; state workers to take over security at SF Civic Center

Backing a challenge by Local 1000, the State Personnel Board (SPB) has disapproved an expensive outsourcing contract for private security guards – costing up to $10 million – at the San Francisco Civic Center.

The ruling forces the Department of General Services (In Maine the Bureau of General Services) to bring these security jobs into state civil service, where state workers will take on those duties.

The SPB executive officer backed Local 1000, finding that the state failed to prove a legal justification for using private security guards – rather that state workers.

Two months, later the full SPB board sided with Local 1000. The SPB’s board’s order gives the DGS 120 days to fill the positions with state employees. Over the past three years Local 1000 attorneys have challenged more than 120 contracts, winning more than 80 percent of the cases.

Is this the time for us to start spending our MSEA dues to challenge the State? This is the kind of campaign that the public would support.

The Civic Center Plaza ruling may boost a larger security service contract challenge that is expected to be heard by the SPB this summer. If Local 1000 wins that case, state workers could be filling about 900 security guard positions all over California that are now be held by higher-paid contractors.

Local 1000 research and independent studies have shown that outside contractors cost twice as much as state employees who already do the same work.

Enter your Email sign up for email updates when new posts go out.

Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

May 31st, 2009 Posted by narsbars | Maine State Employees, SEIU 1989, government waste, outsourcing | no comments

Bargaining Updates Bargaining team and Contract Action Team meet to make tough decisions.


AUGUSTA - Members of MSEA-SEIU The State’s largest union met Saturday to debate a State proposal for benefit cuts that would mean thousands of dollars out of employee’s pockets for the next two years and possibly forever.

The State legislator says the cuts in benefits, that amount to 24 unpaid days in two years and up to $1200 or more in health care cuts are necessary to balance the budget.
A merit raise freeze will cost extra hundreds to thousands of dollars to employees over the next two years. This will make five of eight years with no pay raises and two years with large pay cuts.

There were a lot of upset members of the crowd Saturday. One long time member said “We offered to tell the State where the waste was in State government and they refused. They have refused to come to the table and listen”.

They are passing laws and refusing to talk. State employees know these are hard times and they are willing to chip in, but the State is afraid that the knowledge of the wasteful spending of State government would only be brought to light if they were willing to work with us. Many representatives have decided that as far as State Employees go “There will be blood” they have decided that they are going for the talk show vote instead of the truth.


Saturday’s meeting started at 8:30 and went until late in the afternoon with members staying to tell their negotiators how they wanted them to vote and what was important to their families.

What has been put in front of these members is a joke. This is not negotiations, this is blackmail. The legislative blackmail calls for the equivalent of a 4.7 percent wage cut and a freeze on merit raises for one year while at the same time steeply increasing health care costs.

None of these options have been passed into law yet, but the message was clear. “Take it, because if you don’t we will hurt you even more”.

There are so many cutbacks included in various bills in the legislature that if they all passed the only good job in the State would be a State representative.

The best proposal floated would still have multiple painful cuts, but would put two rank and file State employees on a new board to help find waste in the State.

I can just see the business representatives faces when the true cost of their services is put up against the almost always lower cost of State Employees doing the same work.

Cutting Merit Raises is irresponsible and the current policies that allow the most experienced workers to be laid off while keeping new hires to cut cost is both cruel and wasteful.

The no lay off promise is coming from the same Governor that promised no shut downs, no furloughs. I think the State will start laying off employees as soon as the next contract is signed. First they will fund the positions, then they will cut them in order to fund pet projects.

They did it the last time things were this bad and there is no reason they won’t do it again. It’s ugly, we are trying to keep our jobs, and our lives, and the legislature has bypassed the bargaining process.

Union leaders have explained the pros and cons of all of the options but are waiting for the membership to tell them how to act. Our leadership works for us and that is how it should be.

Will the State want more blood if we don’t bend our knees and kiss the ring?

There is no “crystal ball,” but everyone I know is taking the threat seriously. The State wants millions and the Executive Branch has been told they will carry most of the concessions. Like many States across the country, Maine is facing huge deficits, no Union member thinks that they deserve more than the public, yet they don’t feel they should take cuts that are far out of proportion to what others are facing.

The Turnpike Authority just received a 10% plus raise with no health care cuts. The State “raised taxes” by raising tolls to fund a fair contract but a temporary one cent raise in the sales tax has completely rejected.

It is likely that many branches of State government may see little or no impact. The publicity is what they want and we are the source.

Tax revenue has fallen, a $500,000,000.00 hole in the budget doesn’t even seem to get a rise of of stunned Mainers any longer. If it is no time for a tax increase then it is no time to increase taxes on State Employees far out of proportion to any other group.

I for one would volunteer to pay a one cent sales tax on everything I buy if they would only leave me at status quo, but the mob is howling, they want to spray the cockroaches.

Enter your Email
Sign up for alerts when new posts are up.


Preview Powered by FeedBlitz

May 10th, 2009 Posted by narsbars | MSEA contract, MSEA-SEIU, Maine State Employees, Maine Turnpike Authority, SEIU 1989, STATE EMPLOYEES, State lay offs, UNIONMAINE | one comment

Proposal Deadline

MSEASEIU 1989 is engaged in contract bargaining with the State. All proposals will be on the table by May 1 at 5:00 pm.

We don’t know if there will be any surprises. Maybe the State feels they don’t have to do anything but say no, and let the legislature do the harm.

If we are so important we don’t have the right to strike, then nothing should be done without bargaining. Lots of rumors flying around, no facts yet but maybe the Gov. (I voted Democratic and all I got was this lousy Governor) will make an announcement early next week letting all Mainers know how bad things are.

In N.H. they actually want to raise the income tax………….only on State employees. It is bad, they don’t care if we tell them where they can save money. State Employees know where the waste is.

How about a contract for 14 contractors that is being renewed for the 7th and 8th year for $133,000.00 per employee NOT counting the money we pay another company to manage the contract. I could find a hundred more examples if the idea was to save money or they actually cared.

Anyone that doesn’t think we could pay and provide benefits for State employees for less does not have their head screwed on tight.

They won’t listen because they want to keep feeding rich landlords when we have vacant State owned buildings, and paying bloated prices for rich contractors that might hire a ex legislator.

What about the citizens of Maine? Alone, I could point out 1/2 to one million dollars of waste a year. Many other employees could prove the same. It is time for the State to put all contracts for goods and services on the web for all Mainers to review. Then the public could make a fair comparison.

Enter your Email

Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

April 30th, 2009 Posted by narsbars | MSEA-SEIU, MSEASEIU, SEIU, SEIU 1984, SEIU 1989, msea maine | no comments

State Employee? Do you think you have Seniority?

Bumping Rights for Maine State Employees stink and you can’t put lipstick on that pig.


In the right kind of seniority system, the rights of workers with greater seniority whose jobs are abolished to replace (bump) workers with less seniority so that the worker who ultimately loses a job is not the worker whose position was abolished. Not in Maine.

First, let me say thank you to our fellow Union members, Local 1984, in New Hampshire. The SEA had a great article on “Bumping rights 101″ on their web site and this piece is strongly based on that article. We share many of the same concerns.

In Maine a bill has been put forward to get rid of seniority pay as a way of getting rid of older employees. The focus is on the bottom line, not retaining experienced employees to serve the citizens of Maine.

Fairy Tale

You may think you have “bumping rights”, but that is mostly a fairy tale unless you work in Augusta and even then you can lose your job while watching a new hire enter a building accross the street. You have almost no bumping rights except to vacant positions. In this economy there will be no vacant positions. Will the State try to eliminate bumping rights? They did. We lost any real bumping rights and Seniority rights years ago. We pretty much let the State take away our job security, they didn’t do it alone, we let it happen and even helped make it happen. Bumping rights are often misunderstood by the public and by MSEA members. What, are are bumping rights – and why would we want to preserve or better them at this time?

Bumping Rights 101

In the simplest terms, “bumping” means the displacement of a junior worker by a senior worker to avoid the layoff of the senior worker. The principle is sometimes referred to as “last hired, first fired.” In Maine the ability to bump is almost gone. The State has configured “unit divisions so that they can pick who they want to fire and when”. If you have thirty years of State service in the same job, but you are in a small unit division, maybe the only one in your class and a layoff happens in your unit division, you are out of a job.

They may have hired someone in your job class the day before in Augusta, but you work in Waterville…..too bad, good bye, do not pass go, do not keep your job. Bumping rights is a practice rooted in good, sound, core business practices. MSEA stewards and activists listen to your and know what’s most important to members. They have not lost sight of the need to preserve and better these rights.

In this economy bumping rights have taken on a new level of importance. State of Maine employees used to have State wide bumping rights. You had the right to choose to bump another junior employee in your area and they in turn could bump another employee in an adjoining area or even much farther away. A senior employee knew their job was secure due to their many years of service and valuable experience.

Now the State operates under the “unit division” method. To make it clear, you can be in the Dept. of Labor and so can the employees across the street, but you can be in different “unit divisions”. You can watch the new hire enter the building across the street while you pack the remains of twenty years memories in a cardboard box and go home.

In Public service and private industry, good managers know the importance of a highly skilled and experienced workforce. Recently AIG made the argument that millions of dollars of bonuses were needed to keep experienced staff and after a lot of speeches Congress agreed. The value of an employee who has been trained, and has developed loyalty and dedication through years of service can not be ignored.

Most businesses know the risks that come with mishandling the workforce. Abusing or marginalizing the workforce, taking punitive actions in response to temporary conditions. In the long term employees will be demoralized, and become disloyal, while the State hires inexperienced replacements for highly qualified staff.

The preservation of bumping rights supports the good practices touted by the most successful industries and public sector agencies while avoiding the serious risks that come with a loss of experience and loyalty. The proof that bumping rights promotes loyalty to the employer and preserves a qualified workforce was described well in an article on the Local 1984 website.

A retiree named Michael Andosca, Jr., of Webster, wrote: “Rarely needed, bumping rights are one of the rewards for faithful service; every faithful servant who can demonstrate the ability – by training or certification – should have the option of bumping down in order to keep working. Junior employees, however eager to please, need to pay their dues before they, too, can enjoy the benefits of seniority rights.”

Current bumping rights and recall rights must be a primary concern for any State employee. Current bumping rights are the result of a long history but are now 180 degrees away from good management practices. During the past, administrations have invested in initiatives designed to retain a qualified workforce. Fearing a substantial reduction in the workforce knowledge base because so many state employees can retire in the next 3 to 5 years, the administration made changes to longevity pay in order to retain experienced employees. The fears and risks associated with what is commonly known as “brain drain” are well documented.

Many state governments are facing the same risk and are faced with having to reduce the workforce while at the same time continue to provide quality services to the public. Laying off experienced employees at the top of their range and hiring new employees at the lowest scale has been touted by many as a great idea to save money, but shows no respect for the public or for dedicated, long term employees.

Why would the State resist bettering and preserving bumping? There can be only one reason: they intend to selectively target long-term employees for unethical reasons. Long term employees are more likely to be Union activists and to be at the top of the pay scale. The State is planning to punish and retaliate against workers who have earned a better paycheck or have been active in the Union. Politicians and agency heads would prefer to protect less experienced but “well-connected” favored employees. They would actively engage in age discrimination. Perhaps they simply don’t want to bother with following an orderly lay off process at all.

Why should we fight to improve and protect bumping rights?

1. It is essential to maintaining quality public services, not only today, but for years to come. Bumping rights – and the Personnel Rules that determine how employees are laid off – represent the most orderly and least-complicated process for ensuring that the most experienced and valuable workers are retained when layoffs are needed.

2. Eliminating bumping rights is clearly another attempt by the administration to abuse management authority and attack all employee benefits and protections. We’ve seen the negative effects of management abuse of workers in the private sector. As the largest employer, the State would set a poor example for all employers if they break their promises to their own workers.

3. If we lose bumping rights when we really need them, why even have them at all? We’ve been here before The State warns that there will be workplace chaos if bumping rights are changed or improved. The truth is jobs will be saved and Human Resources is unwilling to do the work needed with their highly reduced staff to manage bumping in the right way. At the same time they are being pressured to allow senior employees to be targeted as a budget reduction tool.

Leaving bumping rights as they are will end with disastrous effects. This year the employees at the Levinson center in Bangor lost their jobs. Even skilled nurses could not walk across the street to the Dorothea Dix center and bump. They had been exiled to a Unit division with no way to bump. DHHS had been ordered to reduce budget last year and agency heads identified the Levinson center as employees with no recourse.

In New Hampshire, SEA fought the State for nearly a decade and finally won reinstatement for 54 of 58 employees represented by SEA that had been fired under similar circumstances. The State paid tens of thousands of dollars in back pay. Why? Because these workers had been selectively targeted by the agency heads for elimination. Experience proves that the chaos predicted by Human Resources and even by some Union members will only happen if the State makes mistakes in handling a painful process in an incompetent and understaffed fashion. They will do it unless we can stop them.

Rubbing Salt into the Wound

To make matters worse, the resistance to improve bumping rights includes even more disturbing rehire provisions.
Currently, laid off workers who are qualified for future vacancies must be allowed four refusals. You have to actually be offered a job and refuse four times to be kicked off the list. The State wants be able to kick you off if you refuse two interviews.

If they don’t like a Union activist, or someone who could come back in at top step, in Portland, what do you think the chances are that the first two interviews for jobs will be in Caribou?

The proposal rubs salt into the wound. A laid off worker would watch a non-laid off worker, or worse yet, someone entirely new to state service, be eligible for a job that the laid off worker could not be eligible for simply because they wanted to stay with their family.

The same employees could watch an existing worker with no seniority or even a new hire take their job just because they work in a different building. This State has nearly succeeded in eliminating bumping rights already and has created the opportunity to retaliate against long-term workers. There is no other reason why the current set of rules is being fiercely protected by the State.

What do we need to do?

Contact your Union, 1-800-452-8794 and tell them to protect and improve your bumping rights. We are the UNION and that means you, your co-workers, all the way up, and every MSEA elected leader, needs to be part of that discussion.

You should:

Call or write to the members of your negotiation team. Call the Union and leave them a message.
Ask them to improve the current Bumping language – which has been in place for many years, is obsolete and does not protect your seniority rights. Tell them that improving bumping rights is good business practice and will protect quality public services for years to come. Tell them that ignoring bumping rights will leave many valuable State employees open to discriminatory treatment, and personal and political attacks that will harm State operations and cost taxpayers more money in the long run.

Let them know that allowing senior employees to be targeted in the middle of a recession sends a chilling message to workers everywhere that it is OK to abuse management authority. Lastly, but extremely important, is to talk with newer employees about the reasons we need to preserve bumping rights. The threat of lay-offs shakes out in the workplace many different ways.
It is important that we talk to each other, and help each other, during these difficult times. Long term workers have seen many more injustices happen in the workplace than short term workers; bumping rights could seem to be an unfair practice if a newer worker hasn’t been around long enough to personally witness selective hiring or firing practices play out.
Self-preservation is a keen sense that needs to be respected and understood. Newer workers may feel more at risk if bumping rights are retained and long term workers need to recognize that fact.

The bottom line:
Remember that weak employee rights will only allow employee rights to continue to get weaker.

But I don’t want to get involved, I don’t care, it won’t happen to me.

Enter your Email
Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

April 26th, 2009 Posted by narsbars | Maine State Employees, SEIU 1989, bumping rights, seniority, state employee lay offs | no comments

Saving Union Jobs, Saving Taxpayer Dollars


The picture has nothing to do with anything. I like it.

This is a cross post from SEIU 1000 in Califooorneeeyaa. Sorry Arnold. In California the SEIU has taken a hit, but they kept the State from taking everything. They DiD make layoff protections and seniority rights better. These are tough times, China says they will be the world leader in the production of electric cars in three years. Congress wants to pay bankers and crucify Unions. In Maine we need to look to the SEIU in California as a model (including the NUHW).
Get involved or get run over

Public Health drops outsourcing plans
Department to fill 53 positions
instead of contracting out

Updated 9:00 a.m., April 1

Bowing to pressure from Local 1000, the Department of Public Health (DPH) has dropped its efforts to outsource civil service work in four separate contracts worth a total of $3.8 million. The DPH decision comes as a result of Local 1000’s two-year campaign against wasteful private contracting that costs taxpayers more than performing the work in-house. Since 2006, Local 1000 has challenged dozens of state contracts and won more than 80 percent of our challenges. Outsourcing raises costs “This is a huge win for us – the department changed its policy because we have proven that it is not cost-effective for the state to hire private contractors,” said Marie Harder, a senior information systems analyst in the Department of Public Health. “It looks like DPH is finally starting to get it and learn not to waste taxpayer money on contracts when state workers can do a better job for less.” The news came as DPH made a budget request to the state Senate Budget Subcommittee on Health & Human Services on March 19. The budget request, delayed during February’s budget battle, was to hire state workers to perform work that previously was scheduled to go to private contractors, including an information technology contract and a janitorial contract in Richmond. In both those cases, Local 1000 challenged the contracts and they were overturned by the State Personnel Board. Avoid future litigation The DPH budget request cited Local 1000’s successful challenges and said “in order to respond to the State Personnel Board’s ruling and to mitigate any future litigation, the DPH came forward with” a proposal to hire state employees to perform that work at a lower cost. The agency said it planned to fill 53 new positions with state employees instead of contractors..

Sign me up for UnionMaine
Enter your Email
Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

April 3rd, 2009 Posted by narsbars | SEIU 1989, furlough days, nuhw | no comments

The Ed Schultz Show–P.S. He doesn’t like Limbaugh and he does like Unions



“Watch Limbaugh with the sound turned down” “He looks like Hitler” I just followed Ed’s advice and watched Limbaugh giving his CPAC speech. Scared yet, no? Stay with the the bloated one long enough to watch the audience. The applause for hate and greed. America is beautiful but this is an ugly mask Rush is trying on for size. His, is the ugliest face ugliest face of America, but it is a mask not the real country, not the face of Americans who love their neighbors without knowing their bank balance.

Every man is Dick Cheney and every woman is Ann Coulter or Sarah Palin, and they all mindlessly cheer for the new leader of the GOP. The Ed Schultz Show is coming to MSNBC. Get ready for a voice that likes Unions, likes the workers who built the country and thinks that a twenty three million dollar kiss goodbye to a fired GM CEO is sick.

It is against God and Country to break a contract with AIG executives. We have to pay them for sinking their company and our country. It is like sending a thank you note with flowers to a rapist. Thank you and come again.

Adolf Hitler – Closing Ceremony – Triumph of the Will -

Feds Seize Madoff Palm Beach Mansion and Boats. AIG executives to receive funds from sale.

U.S. Marshals today seized the Palm Beach Mansion of Bernie Madoff along with two boats.

The property and boats will be donated to AIG executives as compensation for having their feelings hurt due to being called scum, incompetent, and thieving bastards. Until the AIG executives can figure out how to maintain the property the estate will be “monitored and maintained” at taxpayer expense to protect the future owners.

Just wait a few seconds and watch the body language. Don’t bother if you shop at Wal-Mart because Rush says he already has you.

Sign Me Up for UnionMaine. Here is my Email. Send me Updates
Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

April 2nd, 2009 Posted by narsbars | MSEASEIU, SEIU 1989, ed schultz show, rush limbaugh | no comments