SEIU-the union that gave back.....

our parking and shoe allowances and much, much more wants to use the dues money received from the workforce to fund their favorite political candidates in the upcoming elections!
Threatening letters have been sent out to those workforce members who have not been paying dues.  With those letters comes a dues authorization form that they want you to sign and return to them. Failure to become a dues-paying member will result in termination of employment with Covenant Aviation.

So, what is wrong with all of this? SEIU has not told you that you have the option to become a union member at a reduced membership rate of 1.74 percent instead of the full rate of 2.3 percent.  This is a blatant violation of the Beck Rights law. And, if you read the fine print on the full membership form, you acknowledge that your dues payment begins 31 days after you become a Covenant employee. If you have not been paying dues at all and sign this form, you could be liable for payment of back dues.

But, you do have some recourse!
You can file a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, (NLRB) against SEIU for not offering you the option to become an "agency" fee member.

You can also file a complaint against Covenant Aviation for threatening loss of employment for your failure to become a member of the union.

These complaints fall under the National Labor Relations Act, sections 7 and 8. How far you are willing to go with this is purely up to you!

What is the truth? Where does the dues money go? (Submitted by a reader)

SEIU right now compels all Covenant workers to pay Full dues (2.3%) or agency Fee- Becks rights of (1.8%). We are the only airport in the U.S.A. that has to pay to keep this Job! How Insane! This is fundamentally wrong.

SEIU is telling all of us that they need all of our due's money. This is a lie!

The Facts are very little stays in the unit (chapter). The bulk of the money first goes to the San Francisco Labor council under Tim Paulson and then to the San Mateo County Labor council under Shelley Kessler and each take a “CUT” of it and do nothing for us! The rest of the money goes to the main International SEIU in Washington D.C. This helps pay SEIU President Mary Kay Henry a ludicrous salary of $350,000 (Not including benefits, perks, expenses and bonuses) and they also do nothing for us!

A "yes” vote – will release your obligation to pay union dues, and you can Continue to work at Covenant without paying S.E.I.U. The Collective Bargaining agreement will be unchanged except S.E.I.U. and their Shop Stewards will actually have to earn your money.

.

The choice is yours; it is time to vote!

Whether you vote yes or no is completely up to you. If you don't vote at all, it will be counted as a "no" vote. A "yes" vote will rescind the practice of forcing payment of union dues to keep your job..If you are undecided as to how to vote, just examine SEIU's past performance. Look at their track record regarding what they have done for, and to, the workforce.

Do you honestly feel that they have worked for what was in the best interest of the workforce?

This union has shown that the "only" thing that they care about is the collection of dues which they have failed to earn.

Have they ever negotiated or submitted an alternative counter offer to anything that Covenant has wanted?

Who can they blame for all the take-backs and give aways that Covenant has asked for and received?

Now they are asking the workforce to tell them what issues are important to us. Shouldn't they know the answer to those questions already? How about everything that that they gave away for starters?

A "yes" vote only removes SEIU's ability to force us to pay dues -- it doesn't relieve them of their responsibility to represent the workforce. Why should we, and why would we, want to pay dues to a union that has done absolutely nothing for us?

A pass along message!

If you received a second letter from SEIU,  use this form letter that was written by a attorney, and send back to the Union and send a copy to Covenant Payroll.


Sept. __, 2013



Secretary-Treasurer

United Service Workers West-SEIU

Northern California HQ

3411 East 12th St., Suite 200

Oakland, CA 94601



Dear Sir:



I am employed by Covenant Aviation Security at SFO, and I am in receipt of your “second notice” dated _______________, 2013. Your notice demands that I sign union membership and dues deduction authorization cards, and pay full membership dues to the union. However, your records should indicate that I am not a member of the union, and that I am already on record as being a Beck objector. If your records do not indicate this, then I will reiterate the following: I have no wish to be a member of the union, and I object to supporting any of the union’s political and nonrepresentational activities, as is my right under the National Labor Relations Act and CWA v. Beck. This objection is permanent and continuing in nature.

I request that you provide me with my procedural rights, including: reduction of my fees to an amount that includes only lawfully chargeable costs; notice of the calculation of that amount, verified by an independent certified public accountant; and notice of the procedure that you have adopted to hold my fees in an interest-bearing escrow account and give me an opportunity to challenge your calculation and have it reviewed by an impartial decision maker. Once you provide me with the appropriate reduced fee amount I will meet all lawful financial core requirements.



Sincerely,



______________________

Signature



_____________________

Name



_____________________

Address



Cc: Covenant Aviation Security HR/Payroll

An Interesting Article About Union Dollars

This may come as an eye opener to some!

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/hot-dogs-slick-ads-unions-spent-4-4-151032009.html

Does anyone need anymore proof that...

a for profit company should not be running security operations at SFO? 

We have heard from both the checkpoint and baggage communities that CAS upper management has submitted a plan to reduce several of the benefits that are currently in place .

Isn't it nice to be so appreciated?  Isn't it nice to work for a company that puts making a "profit" their main focus?  Once again they have proven that, "they are just in it for the money."

Does anyone in upper management believe in our "mission"?  Have they ever believed in our mission?

CAS is overlooking how they are able to keep this contract for almost 10 years.  Is it their stellar management style?  Was it all their suggestions on how to improve security throughout the TSA?  Was it all the secret backroom meetings?  Just what was it?

Could it possibly have been the dedication and professionalism of the workforce?

What say you?

What are the real reasons?

Just why did both Gerry L. Berry of Winter Springs, Florida and Mindy Pengel step down on the same day?  There must be more to it.

Why did they leave well paying positions in the first place?  Does Gerry's golf game mean that much to him?  All this takes on added weight when the president of CAS steps down.

Now the question remains to be asked, " Will the man from Texas be next?"

Don't let him go before he pays his tab!

Keep An Eye on the Drive-Thru!

If I were a truthy TV newsman I would always keep things simple.  People understand McDonald's and Burger King.  These can be useful examples that are short and simple for illustrative purposes.

But what if the example is too clumsy?  What if in the current reality we really should be talking about Federal Burger vs. Subsidy Burger?  And what if everywhere Subsidy Burger went, people started thinking about filling their tummies at others' expense?

In February 2008, Missoula Airport wanted an answer to their most important question:

Part of the reason Missoula is entertaining the idea is because of an additional $90,000 expenditure that resulted from the airport's $4.3 million remodeling project, completed last April.
To alleviate congestion at the security screening area, an exit lane was placed farther from the checkpoint and needed a security guard. Staffing that post 16 hours a day tacked on an additional $90,000 expense for the airport.
If a private company took over the Missoula airport's security, the company would pick up that expense, said airport director Cris Jensen. But no one Tuesday could promise that would happen.
from Missoula airport officials put private security plan on hold, by Chelsi Moy
Read more: http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/article_de0ef19f-268f-5e7b-9ae8-bc9003b541f1.html#ixzz1sdJTfOb3

So what was the plan?  Get a large enough subsidy to turn around and subsidize others?  Did they think no one was watching the drive thru window?

It's just plain wrong to blame Pistole or the AFGE for holding up a hold up!

Letters, We Get Letters About Life in the SPP

We've recently been contacted by some people out in federal TSA land. They are worried about their airports' showing interest to go private and they are worried about their futures. One thing they want to know is if it's true there are no shift differentials at SFO, as reported at this blog. It seems that the differentials are an important part of their overall package.

Well, they are correct to worry and to start asking questions. John Pistole has been hinting that 10% higher costs in the SPP is not cost-effective in his eyes, which might give TSOs hope that Pistole will reject SPP applications. But in Washington, Pistole will be an army of one with that kind of thinking. In Washington, 10% is within reason. He's likely to lose in the long run (as planned by Obama's good pals in labor, of course). The possible exception is small airports where the contractors can't cut essential staff and claim enough efficiencies to pocket the difference.

Our new contacts have honed in on a very important detail. Where's the differential? It must be implemented, and it must be factored in!

What is Rep. John Mica really up to?

It should be more than obvious the Gerry Berry has this guy in his pocket, and we would like to know how and why!

(This relates to the 16 airports that are now part of the SPP. Maybe he thought that no one would notice.)

Eight of the sixteen airports in this program are Essential Air Service airports carrying very few passengers on subsidized flights. If Mica wanted to save the government money, why has he exempted these airports from cuts to the Essential Air Service program (in the same bill he's bragging about)?

SFO and CAS are using the same lobbyists!

Why are we not surprised?

CAS is covering all the bases. (or, at least they are trying to.)

With the already cozy relationship CAS has with SEIU they have added the services of Smith, Dawson and Andrews.

Just how does a for profit company like CAS expect to make a profit spending all this money? Let's see.....no new shoes, no shift differential, no laundry services, lower wages, etc.......

We seem to be holding the short end of the stick!

http://www.sda-inc.com/clients.php

And The Fight Goes On!

The list of Doctor's and Scientist's against the use of body scanners keeps growing. In an article published yesterday in the SunSentinel, the head of radiology at Florida Medical Center in Fort Lauderdale, a Dr. Edward Dauer, focused on specific areas of the body that could be particularly susceptible to these x-rays.

And yet, the TSA seems to be still be refusing to acknowledge what anyone, aside from their own biased sources, has to say about the safety of these machines.

When will they concede to the obvious? These machines are a health threat!

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-12-25/news/fl-tsa-scanner-concern-20111223_1_body-scanners-backscatter-machines-millimeter-wave-scanners

So, what is CAS up to?

In less than 2 weeks the new FSD will be on board. Will CAS keep this adversarial relationship with the TSA in place? What are the real reasons behind this openly defiant posture? And why are they doing it now?

For over 8 years CAS has fully complied with the TSA, whether or not, it was written into the contract. Their position now is, "if it is not in the contract, we will not do it!" What is their "ace" in the hole?

And, where is Gerry Berry? Normally, during our Thanksgiving and Xmas luncheon, he is here shaking hands and pretending that he cares about us. Is he out there fanning the flames to have the TSA allow more airports to opt out? Is he planning a strategy with his blood brother Rep. John Mica? Let's see how this all plays out!

We will continue until something gets done!

The health warns keep coming out from more and more sources.

Columbia University's Head of Radiological Research, a Dr. David Brenner, states that the radiation produced by these body scanners is 20 times higher than the official estimate.

At what point will the TSA admit that there is a health risk? At what point will they start caring about the rank and file? At what point will they start caring about the public who are being scanned?

Isn't this where our wonderful union should start carrying our banner? And, for that matter, where is the union that won the right to represent the Federal TSO workforce?

Mr. John Gage, head of AFGE, which is the union that represents the federal workforce has been very silent. This issue should be a top priority for both of these unions!

Who is looking out for our well being?

Pull up a chair and read this article.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/308754

It Didn't Take Long....

for the two unions who are competing to represent the TSA workforce to come to the rescue.

Nothing motivates a union more than the possible loss of dues paying members, or in this case, potential dues paying members. And, just how are they attempting to come to the rescue? Why, by reaching out to key members of the Democratic Party and crying foul!

The TSA has stated that this reduced budget, if it passes, will cause a reduction in numbers somewhere around 5,000. Now, one union is putting out a more dramatic number of 8,000. Let's sit back and watch these unions use scare tactics to make sure that this budget reduction doesn't pass.

The full story can be read at: http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/tsa/165639-unions-vying-to-represent-tsa-push-senators-to-oppose-amendments-passed-by-house

This time the "Empire" will not strike back!.

There is a battle over who will be the overseer of the TSA and their ever increasing numbers. Currently, responsibility for TSA is under the control of Pete King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. If Rep. John Mica gets oversight of TSA, as he is attempting to do, there will be drastic changes. The TSA workforce levels will change and so will the number of managers versus screeners. There will also be a greater push to allow more airports to "opt" out and to use private contractors.

House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Rep. John Mica has reduced TSA's budget by 10 percent which amounts to 270 million dollars. It now must be approved by the Democratic Party controlled Senate before it reaches the desk of President Obama for a signature. Will SEIU open its purse strings once again?

According to the TSA, the plans of Mr. Mica would result in a reduction of 5,000 needed screeners. Maybe the TSA should reduced the number of the 3,700 personnel in Washington, D.C. who make, on average, 100,000 dollars per year. Let's have fewer chiefs and more Indians! How does the TSA justify the current ratio between managers and screeners?

Whether or not the TSA can successfully protect its turf, for the moment, depends on the outcome in the Senate. Is there a dark helmet in the house?

Is CAS planning on eliminating LTSO's ?

There has been talk that CAS plans to increase the responsibilities of Supervisors in order to reduce the number of Leads. We have heard that CAS will not announce any new promotions to LTSO. If any of this is true it would be a violation of TSA staffing policy.

Is this an attempt by CAS management to impress TSA? Is this what Rep. John Mica is referring to when he said that the private sector has been a leader in security innovations? Or, is the head of corporate greed rearing up again?

The Case of the Missing SOPs

As much as we love to rail against the ineptitude of the CAS management, we have equal feelings when it comes to TSA. One must remember that the number one objective of any good bureaucrat is to maintain the status quo. A good bureaucrat starts his or her day thinking one thing: "What do I have to do to ensure that everything stays the same?" Because change can not only be frightening, it might also mean that it will require more work and effort on one's part. Which means that the good bureaucrat will do whatever in order to avoid change.  Not maintaining the status quo could potentially lead to opportunities of being terminated.

So what is the deal with the missing SOPs? It turns out that TSA HQ wants airports to lock down the access to SOPs and want a daily accounting of those SOPs. Being the good bureaucrat that Ed Gomez is, and don't let his grandfatherly facade fool you otherwise, he had to deal with this order from his bosses. Instead of making use of the several hundreds of thousands of tax payers' dollars that are spent every year on those TSA suits by giving them something to do, he opted to have them removed from all of the locations. Now that those books are in one central location, it's very easy to have a daily accounting for the SOPs. Simple, yes?

The next time you or or your STSO have a question about SOP and can not easily get an answer, you know who to blame.

We have been asked to explain....

We have been asked to explain just why we feel that the TSA Administrator "caved" in to Rep. John Mica.

Some of our earlier postings outlined the position of Mr. Mica, and even highlighted and challenged his statement saying," “I have also asked GAO to continue to review what other factors gave the all-government model a cost advantage. It is my intent to make certain that TSA cannot arbitrarily deny any future application from an airport to participate in the private screening program. “I am confident that the private sector can not only perform better, but do so at a lower cost to the taxpayers.”

It is very obvious that he is using SFO in his comparisons to the TSA workforce. Or, do any of you really think that he is using any of the other 15?

Mica also stated, "Nearly every positive security innovation since the beginning of TSA has come from the contractor screening program. I intend to launch a full investigation and review of this matter."

Once again we challenged that statement and asked for proof of the "positive security innovations" that came from us or any of the other 15.

We are still waiting for evidence that Mr. John L. Mica must produced to back up these statements.

A letter sent out by TSA to one of you, asking why TSA has not federalized SFO, generated, almost word for word, the exact position of John Mica. "Administrator Pistole affirmed that the current airports participating in SPP remain a valuable resource to be utilized as a comparison between private and Federal screening operations, as well as a tool to generate innovation in operations."

Notice how quiet Mr. John L. Mica has been after CAS was awarded a new 5 year contract?

The power of Nancy Pelosi, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, The San Francisco Airport Commission and, let us not forget, the substantial contributions to re-election campaigns that SEIU made, and will continue to make, to the Democratic Party.

Money and influence pedaling at its best!

It's not about doing the right thing and it never has been. It's about special interest groups with special agendas. When will someone stand up and put the safety of the flying public first and foremost?

Will anyone ever review the bid lines?

Can we have someone, before it is posted, review the bid lines? How many times will they let this person keep making mistakes before they replace him? And, what is this statement saying that they will put footnotes on Ascent instead of making bid line changes to correct their mistakes?

And where is our wonderful union? Shouldn't they be dealing with this ? Exactly what is it that they do for us? Oh, that's right, they are too busy making campaign contributions, attending fundraisers and making backroom deals.