Here is a followup message by one of the members of the AIUSA staff (sent
via the chair of the AIUSA board) arguing that AI management did not
intimidate workers (although they did use legal challenges to exclude
leaders of the union drive from the bargaining unit). --NN
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:44:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Mort Winston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Nathan Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AIUSA union matters
====================FORWARDED TEXT====================
Wed 30-Oct-96 4:51pm
Roger Rathman (RRATHMAN.ATC) noted Latest
To DYU
Subject Note to Nate
David...FYI
RR
====================FORWARDED TEXT====================
Wed 30-Oct-96 11:17am
I informed Latest
To mail @ ih {[EMAIL PROTECTED]}
Subject AIUSA and unions
Dear Nate Stone,
My name is Roger Rathman, Media Director for AIUSA in New York
City. I was both a member of the designated bargaining unit
slated to vote on the issue of union representation and a member
of the Organizing Committee that was formed to explore the
options available to staff for collective bargaining. It is in
the latter capacity that I write in response to your note on the
net.
The organizational efforts here at AIUSA were and remain to be
designed to bring more democracy to the staff/management
relationship and to find a way to give formal voice to the
concerns of the staff.
In mid-summer of this year, 60-65 members of the staff signed
cards indicating their desire to have Communications Workers of
America, Local 1180 represent them as collective bargaining
agents. The signing of cards is the first of many steps in the
process. These cards, along with a petition to hold elections,
were forwarded by CWA to the National Labor Relations Board
(NLRB) for adjudication. At that time there were 90 employees, 7
of whom comprised the senior mangement of AIUSA, leaving 83
potential members of a bargaining unit.
While the management of AIUSA could have at that point elected to
recognize the union, they, under advice of counsel, choose to
legally challenge who would be considered eligible for the
bargaining unit. The NLRB then held three days of hearings with
both the management of AIUSA and the CWA represented by
attorneys. Senior level managers were made to defend their
challenges as to the eligibility of certain staff. While it can
safely be assumed that any attorney retained to defend challenges
by any management group would by neccessity work for the best
interest of their client, I do not hold the view that this was a
"union-busting lawyer". That description is way too
confrontational and does not add to the debate.
It was the NLRB, and not the attorney, who excluded 30 of the 83
staff members based on long-standing and legally recognized
definitions of supervisors and confidential employees. Of the
30, approximately 8 hold sensitive positions dealing with
personnel, payroll and privileged information. The remaining 22
are indeed supervisors and I can insure you that they do indeed
manage other people.
Throughout this process the management and the organizers handle
themselves with the utmost decorum. In my opinion no ethical,
legal, or moral issues were breached. I consider all to have
walked the high road on this. At no time did management or
others use intimidation to sway the results. No threats of being
fired were ever issued.
The 53 remaining members of the bargaining unit spent
considerable time discussing issues and debating best paths to
take. It became obvious that 1) CWA wasn't ideally suited to
meet the needs of the unique staff needs at AIUSA, nor did they
have experience in dealing with non-profits such as ours, and 2)
NOT ONE OF THE 53 WANTED A UNION VOTED IN BY A SLIM SIMPLE
MAJORITY, a distinct possibility that loomed large as the date to
vote approached.
On October 17 the bargaining unit held a democratically conducted
vote to determine majority opinion. By a vote of 40 for
withdrawal of the petition, 8 abstentions, 3 unavailable, 1 no
longer employed, and 1 position vacant. the staff elected to
notify the CWA of our desire to withdraw the petition. This has
now been accomplished and the vote cancelled. The petition can
be refiled after 6 months.
We have informed mangement of this and have indicated to them,
that we are willing to listen to and work with them to solve
issues affecting all staff. We have asked the Executive Director
to personally deal with these issues himself and to make this a
priority. We have made it clear that staff concerns require his
time and energy. We have agreed in principle to allow up to one
yaer for this purpose, and in the interim we will move ahead with
the formation of a formally recognized Staff Association.
I'd like to thank you for both your keen interest and support of
the staff here at AIUSA. It's heartening to know that the
membership is solidly behind us in our efforts and I hope, if the
need arises, that we can count on you in the future to back our
requests for a voice in the issues that affect us all.
Sincerely,
Roger Rathman
================END OF FORWARDED TEXT=================
