News: IBEW Locals in 15 States and Provinces Have passed a Motion To Support The OMOV Proposal

  • September 26, 2020, 10:11:14 AM

Login with username, password and session length

*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 26, 2020, 10:11:14 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Shoutbox

Author Topic: IBEW Elections Are Unfair In My Opinion  (Read 1458 times)

Offline PSperanza

  • YaBB God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3874
IBEW Elections Are Unfair In My Opinion
« on: June 30, 2015, 03:05:54 PM »
Winning or losing an IBEW union election does not define a successful union activist, even when you lose you can have an effect by your participation. A an IBEW member does not need to win a delegate position to affect the IBEW. I believe they can run in opposition of the current establishment and represent issues that may be supported by members.

That sort participation and activism can affect issues in our union.

I intent to try to effect members and try to reform the IBEW because I believe it sorely needs to be reformed to make it a more fair union, more just union, where real and fair democratic practices determine policies and whom gets elected to official positions.
I love our local 353, SOLIDARITY and SUCCESS to the members in Alberta!

Offline Eric Klyne

  • Soon to be Freeman
  • YaBB God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3886
Re: IBEW Elections Are Unfair In My Opinion
« Reply #1 on: July 09, 2015, 05:57:23 PM »
From IBEW CE CW Program Monitors Facebook group:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/473226556061448/

Quote

?Michael Acree?

I have followed the IBEW Canadian elections closely on the 353 website and I am familiar with various documents concerning IBEW elections.
This is the condensed version of the opinion I have formed on Local 353 politics. Condensed because it’s on Facebook. There is plenty more to say.
This is my opinion.

The union had an obligation to run the mailing process in a fair and equitable manner. That obligation was not met.
The official election booklet was not mailed in a timely manner.
The conduct of IBEW elections are time sensitive affairs. If the responsible parties fail to understand that and act accordingly, they should be held accountable and penalized, up to removal from office.

Perry Speranza complied with all the requirements and obligations that they set before him concerning candidate mail outs, and still the union appeared to be deliberately shuffling their feet, and if not for his own proactive involvement, his mail out would have been delayed.
It would NOT be fair to say that they dropped the ball.
It would be fair to say that they never picked it up.

It matters not who is at fault here. In the grand scheme of things, the process failed.
Union Democracy suffers.

The Election Judge Slaght could have and should have taken action up to voiding the election and starting over and doing it all over again. And keep doing it, till they get it right.
That would have been the fair thing to do, the right thing to do, but it might have upset the people who put him in that position.
Slaght appeared to be just a surrogate for the entrenched bureaucracy, all the way up to the IO.

Vice President Irons didn't get his job done, either.
Irons doesn't have to be chained to his desk, as he claims, but he needs to be there when he is supposed to be there, not when it fits in with his social life.
It’s not a 9 to 5 job and it has certain obligations and responsibilities which he failed to take seriously enough to guarantee a fair and equitable process to the members of Local 353, who have entrusted that duty to him, thus failing the Local 353 members and Union Democracy.
He needed to do what he was supposed to do, what he was elected to do, what was expected of him, what the job demands, and not just what suited him or was convenient for him.
He didn’t do it and there are no excuses.

The legitimacy of the convention delegates themselves, is now suspect because their election does not comply with the Title IV election standards of the LMRDA, which the bylaws of LU 353 should reflect.
There is no conflict between Canadian and US law here.
The main difference is there is no recourse for a Canadian member through the Department of Labor. The only appeal process is through the IO, with predictable results.
This election is hopelessly flawed.

I share the outrage of all local 353 members and the rest of the IBEW as they become aware of the gravity of the pandemic of irresponsible officers and respectfully demand the resignation of Vice President Irons and the Election Judge Slaght if they don't recuse themselves in the rerun that this debacle demands.
This is my opinion.

July 7 at 9:50pm

Offline GoodTradeUnionist

  • YaBB God
  • *****
  • Posts: 843
IBEW Elections Are Unfair In My Opinion
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2015, 03:14:15 AM »
Arm chair intellectuals abound on the Internet and social media.

The way I see it, whenever you're a candidate, either locally, state or nationally, including union elections, you're responsible for you own promotion.

As a candidate you print flyers, stickers and campaign by talking to constituents.  It's all very traditional and time honoured.

The problem is the organization running an election isn't responsible for a candidates campaign literature, which is a conflict of interest.

There needs to be a clear separation of responsibility, which is lost when the union runs the election (ie., nomination meeting, coordinate ballot mail-out, & election day) and also prints election material for candidates.

From what I observed, Local 353 did it's job fairly in coordinating the election of delegates to the International Convention.  The candidate publication was posted on the union website, downloadable, which some candidates sent via email & posted on social media.

The candidate publication was also sent via Canada Post mail which I received before the actual ballot.

The whinning is laughable because the union is not responsible for candidate electioneering for any union position or ehen members decide to get their mail from the Post Box orvopen their ail.  The unin is responsible to run the election, not any candidates campaign.

This constitutes a clear delineation of responsibility which cheap free loaders have forgotten.

We now have a lazy class of union politicians who want a free ride.  Sounds vaguely familiar and like the Canadian Senate who have an extraordinary appetite for entitlement.

Nobody cheated or was lazy when it came to the administration of the 353 mail-in ballot election, particularly Jeff Irons or Mike Slaugt, who are decent brothers.

Bottom line, 80% of the members didn't give a shit about electing delegates to the IBEW convention.

Nor has there been a hue and cry about the recent 353 election from the rank-and-file members, except Perry Speranza a defeated candidate who knows how to nurse a grievance.

But Perry is too argumentative, and if in a room alone, he'd start an argument with himself.

Perry's union career is in shambles, and his declared mission is to be a contrarian whose mission is to reform the IBEW is laughable.

He routinely loses votes on the floor of union meetings regarding his piddly itch to secretly tape record conversations or the business transacted by the union.

Here we see union democracy in action as it suffocates Perry's infantile crusades, a form of cradle death for his still born union reform fetishes.



If you want tonbe a union reformer, the first place to start is getting elected to the Executive Board, or executive officer, including convention delegate.

This is where rubber meets the road.  If you can't get elected then you ain't a player.

It seems democracy has a way of winnowing the weak from the strong.  Amen to that.
Just retired, enjoying my pension.

Offline Conversationalist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
Re: IBEW Elections Are Unfair In My Opinion
« Reply #3 on: July 11, 2015, 10:02:58 AM »
If there is am potential for conflict of interest then why the mail in ballot?

In 2007 I hear the members voted unanimously against mail in ballots so why did this union go against the membership and their wishes?

Then why not let the election publication be the only mail out with each candidate writing what they want in that publication so no potential for errors and the  publication goes out before the ballots are sent out and  then there is no confusion.

That's why it did not work because the members wishes were put aside as trash  so to speak. What was the point of the special meeting in Dec 2007 and money spent only to ignore what was voted.  The questionnaire was nothing but a sneaky way to go against what was voted. I believe its because the runoffs of election made it that close for the election that people were running scared and the outing of contractor interference which was also true.

You guys are known for clerical errors --well that's what  you call it when important stuff arrives just before or after deadlines so don't try and weasel out of that one,




Offline Conversationalist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
Re: IBEW Elections Are Unfair In My Opinion
« Reply #4 on: July 11, 2015, 11:24:43 AM »
With the mail in ballot a person loses control after they put it in the mil and hopes it reaches its intended destination. When the regular process of elections is done with the ballot being deposited by the person into the ballot box then  they are assured it will count,

Then you hope cameras positioned properly will stop election tampering.

That  is in my opinion why the members resoundenly voted against mail in ballots. The questionnaire in 2010 was only an opinion based quetionaire that did not follow the ethical rules of accounting . The members in  2007 stated their wishes and that is what should have been followed. The  meeting was well attended . Very positive answer to --NO MAIL IN BALLOT--


Offline PSperanza

  • YaBB God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3874
Re: IBEW Elections Are Unfair In My Opinion
« Reply #5 on: July 11, 2015, 05:24:52 PM »
The following is a response from the Election Judge sent to me by email July 10, 2015


Complaint re Actions of Local 353 Office Manager VP Jeff Irons
electionjudge@ibew353.org  Add to contacts  10/07/2015   
To: Perry Speranza Cc: Daniels, William F., McNamara, Bruce

Good morning Brother Perry Speranza,

Thank you for your email in regards to the Election Publication and Election literature mail-outs being delayed by Canada Post.

The mail-outs were all delivered to Canada Post South Central processing facility located at 969 Eastern Ave in Toronto accompanied by myself Mike Slaght IBEW 353 Election Judge on the following days:

    1. The Election Publication was delivered to Canada Post with Brother John Stepko on Tuesday AM June 2nd 2015.
   
    2. The Martin/White mail-out was delivered to Canada Post with Brother Jeff Irons on Tuesday PM June 2nd 2015.

    3. The Speranza mail-out was delivered to Canada Post with Brother Perry Speranza on Thursday AM June 4th 2015.

Payment for each of the mail-outs are paid up front by IBEW Local 353 with the Candidates reimbursing Local 353 after the election and Local 353 paying for the Election Publication.
 
The Election Publication and the Martin/White mail-out were delayed due to a re-classification by Canada Post who deemed them not Publications but as Letters. The re-classification resulted in a higher charge  and the mail-outs were not released for processing until the difference in cost was paid to Canada Post.The Speranza mail-out was also deemed not a "Publication" but was released for processing Thursday morning June 4th 2015 as Local 353 had paid to much and were getting a credit for this mail-out so it was released.

Notification of the re-classifications was sent to Brother Irons on Thursday June 4th at 3:50pm. Brother Irons was busy closing up the office and did not check his messages till Monday June 8th as he had the day off on Friday June 5th.  Brother Irons informed me  first thing Monday morning and the matter was dealt with right away and both the Election Publication and the Martin/White mail-out were released for processing as Canada Post received the extra payment.
I conclude that there was no violation of the IBEW Election rules in regards to the mail-outs as the delay was due to the actions of Canada Post.

Thanks   

IBEW 353 Election Judge

Mike Slaght

From IBEW CE CW Program Monitors Facebook group:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/473226556061448/

Quote

?Michael Acree?

I have followed the IBEW Canadian elections closely on the 353 website and I am familiar with various documents concerning IBEW elections.
This is the condensed version of the opinion I have formed on Local 353 politics. Condensed because it’s on Facebook. There is plenty more to say.
This is my opinion.

The union had an obligation to run the mailing process in a fair and equitable manner. That obligation was not met.
The official election booklet was not mailed in a timely manner.
The conduct of IBEW elections are time sensitive affairs. If the responsible parties fail to understand that and act accordingly, they should be held accountable and penalized, up to removal from office.

Perry Speranza complied with all the requirements and obligations that they set before him concerning candidate mail outs, and still the union appeared to be deliberately shuffling their feet, and if not for his own proactive involvement, his mail out would have been delayed.
It would NOT be fair to say that they dropped the ball.
It would be fair to say that they never picked it up.

It matters not who is at fault here. In the grand scheme of things, the process failed.
Union Democracy suffers.

The Election Judge Slaght could have and should have taken action up to voiding the election and starting over and doing it all over again. And keep doing it, till they get it right.
That would have been the fair thing to do, the right thing to do, but it might have upset the people who put him in that position.
Slaght appeared to be just a surrogate for the entrenched bureaucracy, all the way up to the IO.

Vice President Irons didn't get his job done, either.
Irons doesn't have to be chained to his desk, as he claims, but he needs to be there when he is supposed to be there, not when it fits in with his social life.
It’s not a 9 to 5 job and it has certain obligations and responsibilities which he failed to take seriously enough to guarantee a fair and equitable process to the members of Local 353, who have entrusted that duty to him, thus failing the Local 353 members and Union Democracy.
He needed to do what he was supposed to do, what he was elected to do, what was expected of him, what the job demands, and not just what suited him or was convenient for him.
He didn’t do it and there are no excuses.

The legitimacy of the convention delegates themselves, is now suspect because their election does not comply with the Title IV election standards of the LMRDA, which the bylaws of LU 353 should reflect.
There is no conflict between Canadian and US law here.
The main difference is there is no recourse for a Canadian member through the Department of Labor. The only appeal process is through the IO, with predictable results.
This election is hopelessly flawed.

I share the outrage of all local 353 members and the rest of the IBEW as they become aware of the gravity of the pandemic of irresponsible officers and respectfully demand the resignation of Vice President Irons and the Election Judge Slaght if they don't recuse themselves in the rerun that this debacle demands.
This is my opinion.

July 7 at 9:50pm
I love our local 353, SOLIDARITY and SUCCESS to the members in Alberta!

Offline PSperanza

  • YaBB God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3874
Re: IBEW Elections Are Unfair In My Opinion
« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2015, 09:53:45 AM »
Complaint re Actions of Local 353 Office Manager VP Jeff Irons
electionjudge@ibew353.org  Add to contacts  10/07/2015   
To: Perry Speranza Cc: Daniels, William F., McNamara, Bruce

Good morning Brother Perry Speranza,

Thank you for your email in regards to the Election Publication and Election literature mail-outs being delayed by Canada Post.

The mail-outs were all delivered to Canada Post South Central processing facility located at 969 Eastern Ave in Toronto accompanied by myself Mike Slaght IBEW 353 Election Judge on the following days:

    1. The Election Publication was delivered to Canada Post with Brother John Stepko on Tuesday AM June 2nd 2015.
   
    2. The Martin/White mail-out was delivered to Canada Post with Brother Jeff Irons on Tuesday PM June 2nd 2015.

    3. The Speranza mail-out was delivered to Canada Post with Brother Perry Speranza on Thursday AM June 4th 2015.

Allow me to inject some colour and some other information in the way of addressing this response from Mike Slaght.

At the local 353 office in the mail room Mike Slaght asked me “How do want these done, do you want to just drop them into mail boxes?” I said yes, why? He said, oh I just want to know so we can hurry and up get this done and get ready to go to the meeting we have scheduled at 11:00 am at the facility where the ballot packages were being prepared by people working for PWC.

The office worker Sister was standing right beside us when he made that comment. Why did she not immediately inform us that she was stamping the mail as publication mail and that we would need to take it the Canada Post facility? She waited until the postage machine had finished before announcing that she had addressed it as publication mail. I questioned her as to why she had done it that way and she said that she thought all the mail was being done that way. Where did she get that idea? What official had instructed her to do it that way? Apparently it was not Mike Slaght the election judge and the person in charge of supervising my mail out. He consulted with me and we agreed that I was going to drop the letters in the mailbox immediately after postage was applied. Mike Slaght had arranged to have the envelopes prepared the day before so we could finish quickly and mail them after my literature had been inserted. It was known that there was a tight schedule. The actions of the office worker served to delay and she could have alerted us to what she was about to do before she did it because she should have heard it when Mike Slaght clearly stated to me out loud “So how do you want these done, do you want to just drop them into mail boxes?”

Why did she wait till after she had run the letters through the machine and stamped them with the wrong postage before informing us about what she thought we wanted? Or what she may have been instructed to do by others?


Payment for each of the mail-outs are paid up front by IBEW Local 353 with the Candidates reimbursing Local 353 after the election and Local 353 paying for the Election Publication.
 
The Election Publication and the Martin/White mail-out were delayed due to a re-classification by Canada Post who deemed them not Publications but as Letters. The re-classification resulted in a higher charge  and the mail-outs were not released for processing until the difference in cost was paid to Canada Post.The Speranza mail-out was also deemed not a "Publication" but was released for processing Thursday morning June 4th 2015 as Local 353 had paid to much and were getting a credit for this mail-out so it was released.

The Speranza Mail out was prepared as publication mail by people that reasonably should have known that there is a 1000 piece minimum for publication mail and my mailout was far below that number. My mail out was released because I was proactive and consulted with a supervisor informing her about what was happening and asked her to personally oversee the case and inform me about the outcome by email. She did that later in the day.

The contact person at local 353 to my knowledge is Jeff Irons and he knew about or reasonably should have known about the issues related to the election mail not being properly classed as publication mail on Thursday June 4 at approximately 9:40 am. In my opinion he and Mike Slaght should have acted to correct the mistakes and make certain that the Convention Delegate Election Candidates booklet mailed to local 353 members on Tuesday June 2, 2015 was not delayed any further that it had already been delayed by their actions.

Not only did they not act to correct their mistakes immediately on Thursday but allowed Friday and the weekend to pass before taking action. Their actions caused the mailout to members to be delayed by at least 6 days and consequently members received their ballot packages days in advance of the information they needed to be able to make informed decisions in the mail in election.

I believe these actions compromised the fairness of the election and damaged it irreparably. Therefore in my opinion the only remedy is to re do the election properly and fairly.

   

I was informed by the supervisor at Canada Post that my mail out did not qualify as publication mail because it did not meet the over 1000 pieces needed to qualify as publication mail. The paperwork handed to me by Steven Martin was not the paperwork required and when Canada Post inspected my letter to local 353 members it was deemed not to be a publication mail. All of these issues were the result of actions by the people at local 353. Not Canada Post.



Notification of the re-classifications was sent to Brother Irons on Thursday June 4th at 3:50pm. Brother Irons was busy closing up the office and did not check his messages till Monday June 8th as he had the day off on Friday June 5th.  Brother Irons informed me  first thing Monday morning and the matter was dealt with right away and both the Election Publication and the Martin/White mail-out were released for processing as Canada Post received the extra payment.
I conclude that there was no violation of the IBEW Election rules in regards to the mail-outs as the delay was due to the actions of Canada Post.

Thanks   

IBEW 353 Election Judge

Mike Slaght


If I had not accompanied Mike Slaght with the intent to intervene at the Canada Post Facility my mail out to members would have been delayed until someone from local 353 was contacted and the issues resolved. They were immediately resolved because of my intervention and communication with the Canada Post Supervisor. Local 353 was contacted and the proper paperwork was requested at approximately 10:20 am. To my knowledge Jeff Irons was at the office having arrived late that day at approximately 9:30 am. Reasonably the people in charge of paying for the mailout should have know about the issues related to sending election mail outs as publication mail and hence they should have realized that there would also be issues with other election mail improperly sent as publication mail and they should have been proactive to remedy the problems they had created. Certainly not checking your mail at 3:50 pm and then taking the next day off is not being proactive or responsible in such a critical situation when election mail that affects an IBEW Convention Delegate Election is involved. Officers carry smart phones paid for by the local union for convenience and ease of communication. Officers often comment about how their job is not an 8 hour a day job. Apparently Jeff Irons’ job on Thursday June 4, 2015 was less than 8 hours.

Taking a day off on Friday June 5, 2015 and not attending to important election literature key to the local 353 Convention Delegate Election was irresponsible in my opinion and has caused the fairness of the election be irreparable compromised and it should be re run to be fair and demonstrate to all that local 353 and the IBEW do indeed run fair elections.   



I love our local 353, SOLIDARITY and SUCCESS to the members in Alberta!

Offline GoodTradeUnionist

  • YaBB God
  • *****
  • Posts: 843
IBEW Elections Are Unfair In My Opinion
« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2015, 11:16:28 PM »
Brother Speranza, you raise some interesting points, but the errors were not so grievous as to warrant a re-run election.

To expect all mailed material to arrive simultaneously, begs the question whether all material should be issued in one envelop?

Frankly that too is unworkable.

To error is human, but it is important to hear the explanations offered by Brothers Irons and Slaught.

I'm curious, did Majesky protest, poke his snozz in the tent, or make his gargantuan presence felt this election cycle?

The other candidates seem resigned to the electoral count.

As for your contention there was a manifest error that affected the outcome of the election, I think not.

I guess you'll need to cross reference the voters list against your mailing list and start crunching numbers.

My impression is we had a good election, which reminds me of a saying "perfect is the enemy of good."
Just retired, enjoying my pension.