My Interpretation of The Trusteeship Hearings

How can SEIU put a local Union into trusteeship?

Article VIII, Section 7(a) of the international Constitution and Bylaws allows the International President, Andy Stern, to appoint a Trustee for the purpose of correcting corruption or financial malpractice, restoring democratic procedures, insuring collective bargaining duties are upheld or to insure that the legitimate objects of the International Union are carried out. In these cases the International President can appoint a Trustee to take control of a local union.

What are the charges in SEIU’s Amended Trusteeship Hearing Notice?

1. The Leadership of UHW-W attempted to move $6 million of Member’s dues money off the UHW-W books for their own purposes, created false records, and misrepresented the real purpose for which the monies were to be used.


2. UHW-W Failed to take action to recover all Funds from the Patient Education Fund.


3. UHW-W Moved another $500,000 to an Attorney’s trust account as part of a continuing effort to move UHW-W funds of the books.


4. The leaders of UHW-W wrongfully converted the International Unions Convention Delegate Database


5. UHW-W has failed to cooperate with the International Union’s audit of UHW-W and the International Union’s assignment of monitors.


6. Leaders of UHW-W are alleged to have retaliated against members who have dissented from UHW-W’s leadership on internal union matters.

What did the Hearing Officer, Ray Marshal, believe the underlying cause was?

Ray Marshal stated on page 101 of his report that the charges in SEIU’s Amended Trusteeship Hearing Notice where just the symptoms of the dispute between the SEIU International Union and UHW. Ray Marshal stated that real problem was UHW’s reluctance to allow 65,000 Long Term Care workers to be removed from UHW.

Did the Hearing Officer recommend putting UHW-W into a trusteeship on the basis of the issues raised in the Amended Trusteeship Hearing Notice?

NO! To quote Ray Marshal: “In view of the foregoing, I recommend that the International Executive Board not establish a trusteeship on the basis of the specific issues raised in the Amended Notice but establish a trusteeship if the UHW refuses to abide by and cooperate with the January 2009 decision of the IEB to have California LTC workers unite into a single local union.”

Did UHW Leaders agree to the Transfer of the Long Term Care Workers as suggested by the Hearing Officer?

Yes, but with one restriction. They requested that SEIU allow long term members to have the opportunity to vote using a voting process consistent with the SEIU Constitution and Bylaws.

So how do you define Democracy?

If you are Andy Stern, then it is the democratic votes of the International Executive Board. They did not allow the actual union members to have a voice in their fate. They decided for them. They unanimously agreed to continue on with imposing a trusteeship without giving the actual members a choice.

This trusteeship was never about money... It was about the fate of workers like you and me. It was deciding if they have any choice on which union local represents them. It was about determining if a local union can disagree with the direction of an International

UHW SHOULD STAY MEMBER DRIVEN!

This video reflects the strength of members who are very well versed in their democractic rights and aren't afraid to step up and make it known. UHW leadership were removed because they fought for bottom up not top down leadership. We are strong because we are member driven. The Trusteeship has created lots of chaos. We will all suffer the consequences, if we don't try to learn the truth of what has led us to all of this.

Look at What's going on at Kaiser!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7411843066976203499

This is from a steward who I think was giving me fair warning, what do you think?

Reply Forward


From D To Denise




Denise I don't agree with what u are saying because I don't follow no one. And no I am not a coward. But have enough sense to keep my dam job. And I am not going to promote something that has no foundation and no contract. So that is not wise. It is pretty damn stupid if u ask me. Let that union get established and have something to offer and then I would feel more comfortable to consider it. Right know I am not concerned with fighting about a union. We all work for kaiser and if kaiser where to start making cuts. That is not a t or v issue it is my issue. And to be totally honest with u. T and V still have families to feed and need money to live. And just like we get our asses up everyday to go and work for Kaiser and we have to do shit and live through the bs from kaiser so do they. U do whatever u need to do to get a paycheck and benifits and work for kaiser. So check your self with u talk about ignorance. U can't feed kids and give them free benifits on looks. And today I am not going to put nothing on the line for something that has not been established. Unions need time to be established and recognised and I don't put myself under nobody to jeopordise my livly hood or anyone else. So you can keep all that crap u talking. Because it's has no weight. I could even read the rest of your email.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

I think this steward has completely forgotten who she represents. In my mind this issue is not about me or her, it is about all of us! It doesn't sound like she is giving her members a chance to make a decision about what is right for themselves ( she may be a mother but she is not our mother). How many members did SEIU start with? There is one thing we know as stewards and that is Sal is a union building machine( go on NUHW.org and see just how many unions he is ready to file petitions for! and it has only been a few weeks).
She also seems to forget that the Kaiser division is SEIU's second largest division. She also is forgetting we are simply speaking about our former union leadership.

Also, let us not forget! the contract we have today is the contract negotiated and won under the leadership that was removed. The leaders we have now have negotiated far less for the members they represented before us!

The contract although it is very important and first on most people mind is actually the distraction. What I think is just as important is our fututre, if we have poor leadership now what can we hope for in our future contracts or the backing of our members when we need Reps.
It is about the leadership and who will lead us in the direction we want to go.

Andy Stern has repeatedly appointed "Leaders" who are continuely being investigated by our federal government or having to step down for misappropriation of monies.
They accuse Sal of the same but have yet to provide proof, we have asked again and again.

And the farther I dig the more I seems the sole reason for this trusteeship is to squash UHW and divide us.

We as stewards know the importance of staying connected to Northern California and what is this I hear that SEIU wants to help Kaiser divide us North from South! We only got the this good contract because of our strength with Northern California.

Our strength comes from our members, we are a member driven union and because of this we can not keep information that we may fear from our members. But collectively, don't you think our members will make the right decision if you give them true information instead of scare tactics to keep them paralyzed and affraid? I honestly feel our members are stronger than you think they are and smarter.

Who is looking out for who?

PREFACE
THE NAMES OF THOSE WHO MAY NEED PROTECTING HAVE BEEN REMOVED

Re: Fw: Regarding ex leaders of UHW and ex Staff of UHW


I can not believe this is still going on. We are supposed to be stewards of SEIU-UHW and Leaders for our members. Where does it say we tell the Rep's what they can do? We do not give them directives and we are not entitled to do so. They are here to do their job and work with us. They have been nothing but respectful to us and supportive of us since coming back from Admin Leave. Yet here is another negative e-mail which in the being wasn't even shared with all. Some of us are getting really tired of having to defend our Union and Rep's from our own Unions Stewards in the Council.

We need to Remember who we represent and what Union we are. We took an Oath to SEIU-UHW to protect the CBA and the members that are covered under that agreement between SEIU-UHW and Kaiser Permenante. As stewards we need to remember that and move forward on building our Union strength and solidarity.

We can't afford for our council to get anymore Fragmented and Divided. We need to realize that we are not always going to agree, but need to meet in the middle to get the work done. We are after all Union Brothers and Sisters with the belief and conviction of why we do the work of the Union.

I think this comment was completely disrespectful of you, Cassandra (Please let T. know, this will not happen in the future.) You are not a new Steward, but a returning one and it wasn't your place to say this. Oh PLEASE, the whole Security staff, right. There was 3 guards and the supervisor in the am. After what happened when Jorge and Ralph walked in the Steward Council in the middle of the Trustee speaking with us. Which I felt was disrespectful, I am glad they were there. Be careful of how you state things in e-mails, because people can be offended.

We need to either stand up and be leaders of SEIU-UHW or make the decision that you can't support SEIU-UHW and Resign. We can't afford to cause anymore damage or division within our own Union during these difficult times. With Kaiser and our State in a Financial decline, now is not the time to be divided. Kaiser is using this division to go after members, not follow the CBA and push their own agenda without Labor being involved. We must stop fighting and work together.

Those who are still pushing the Decert and Petitions should really think hard about what you are doing. If you don't want to be SEIU-UHW, then why are you still a steward? Why represent the members of SEIU-UHW and the CBA if you can't believe in the Union UHW is? It seems like a contradiction when you are in the role of a SEIU-UHW Steward Leader, but moving to remove that very Union you have sworn an oath to up-hold and protect.

I am sure some of you will agree with me and some of you wont. But that is the beautiful thing about Democracy. We don't all have to agree, but in the end we need to agree to disagree and move foreward. For those who are still wanting more information, do the research. Here are the websites again

www.seiu.org
www. this wseiuvoice.org
www.NLRB
www.LaborLaws
www.factchecks.org
www.consumerwatchdogs.com

I also encourage you to read the COMPLETE Marshall Report, not just the last 6 pages given to us my our former leaders. Also look at the hearing documents and read them. I know it is alot, but after doing that and speaking with people it helped me. You may also want to sit down with the Rep's and talk with them. Ask them about how they were treated
by our former leaders and what they have been going through for the past 2 years.

It's just a thought!


Let me make a few corrections to this email.
Our union is not the leaders of SEIU-UHW or it's employees. (EDITED) herself many times corrected me on this point when I was a new steward (many moons back). We made an oath to the employees of Kaiser represented by SEIU-UHW. The union is you me and our coworkers. The reps and Leaders are those who we pay to represent our best interests.

We did not elect our current Leaders and made no oath to them.

Our Reps and Trustee were disrespectful to us at our last Steward Council when they refused to listen to our democratic voice asking them to step outside our council so we could decide what we needed to do about the situation. They forced us to LEAVE to the parking lot. They acted as if they were employees/managers of Kaiser when they ordered Security to escort Ralph and Jorge out. There was no respect shown to us or our members when they refused to allow any discussion ( even between ourselves ) that they did not agree with. And moments before they were talking about how they plan to protect our voice. Very Hypocritical.

In contrast, when Jorge and Ralph came in they barely said anything. About all I remember is them saying they would step out so as to not continue such a disruption that was being caused. This showed respect to us and even UHW Leaders.

Asking anyone to step down because they question the motives of our reps and our current Leaders is exactly what an Undemocratic movement would ask of dissenters.

To quote Harry S Truman:

Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.


By acting in the way that SEIU-UHW is, they are doing all the work for NUHW in convincing people why we would not want them representing us.

In my mind there are two options: 1) Join NUHW or 2) Struggle to reform SEIU.
Unfortunately, with SEIU's track record on dealing with those who oppose its views and how it has managed to consolidate power to the upper echelon, I don't think reform will be possible.

I ask all stewards to NOT BE AFRAID to voice concerns or debate what may be best for our members. Unlike N.S., I don't believe those who question our leaders should step down. I believe those who are afraid or unwilling to debate the issues should step down because they are doing their members a disservice. Your fellow employees voted you in as a steward because they believed you would be strong and not afraid to stand up for them.


Brent

YOU GO BRENT!

Let me quote David Regan " This is a sad day"

Not only are you betraying your members you are betraying yourself!

You say you are stand up people but you have deliberately cut Brent, Sandra and myself out of communication. This email only came to us by mistake. I say you are cowards!

Now get down to business

1. I told T. a long time ago when I was a brand new steward, Being a steward is not an extension of my character, being a steward does not, I repeat does not shape who I am or the morale's I live by.

2. You are right we did take an oath and to paraphrase " we promised not to be SHEEP".

3. I took an oath to be loyal to our members not to any UNION and to represent our members to the best of my ability not to David Regan.

4. President Obama even acknowledged that he must hear from both parity's and even us ( go figure) before he would make his decisions. He also said he would talk to the people and tell them the truth!( what a concept). Why on earth do you think you know better than he?

Have you done your research? I think not because if you did you would see that we are being lied to consistently. Ex. at our meeting our SEIU Reps explained away the phone system like it was something new and put in place so the members whose Reps quit SEIU would have someone to get advice from you know this is a lie. This system was put in place by Andy Stern along time ago and the members at Tenet hate it but does he care? Apparently you don't either!

Here's another one, did our Reps tell us that they signed a Loyalty clause to SEIU? Not a loyalty clause to us but to SEIU. If we are loyal only to our Reps and SEIU and our Reps are loyal to SEIU who is left to be loyal to the members or for that matter to you?

Did the Reps also tell us that they were forced to send emails out to us before they returned? Oh I forgot they may have told you but some of us were left off the email communication.

I am astounded by your collective ignorance Our Reps (bless their heart) have to maintain their jobs so they do what they have to do! What may I ask are you maintaining? Some of us have more than members to protect!

I sent an email out simply asking that we as stewards could come together and not one sheep was permitted to respond! I was not raised to be a follower and I wont start now! I mistakenly called you all leaders but it is clear you are not.

To question someone is a sign of I N T EL L E G E N C E
that is a proven fact. Being followers is how we as a country got in the whole BUSH SHIT. You have shown you have not learned your lesson and must wait for someone to tell you what to do next!

David Regan came into our council meeting and poo pooed on all of us and then had the nerve to ask us to commit to it. I bet If I had not interrupted him you would have committed to BULLSHIT. Well you go on girl, jump right in!

Cassandra or anyone else should be able to speak up without fear of being eaten by one of her own I submit to any common sense you have left isn't that what being a steward is? How dare you suggest or offer your opinion about stepping down because she has the fortitude to stand up. You apparently don't know what a steward is. If you all are so sure of yourself why in hell are you hiding behind these secret (oops) emails?

Think about it Sandra, Brent and I stand up for what we believe in front of all of you while you all hide, what does that say about you! Who is stand up?

By the way what coward started the move on Lori? I bet you feel real good about yourself. You not only don't do research you don't know history. Very few if any Leaders succeed when they rise out of corruption!

Finally, this is the first conversation we have had about this situation collectively and it only happened by mistake. I thought we were fighting against silencing our voice!

--One more thing, for all of you who did contact me about meeting with me
secretly step up speak out be heard be strong! No more secrets we all are not SHEEP or Cowards!

--- On Thu, 2/19/09,

From: t w
Subject: Fw: Regarding ex leaders of UHW and ex Staff of UHW
To: "N S
Date: Thursday, February 19, 2009, 6:57 PM


Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
>;
Amado David ( appointed Director of Kaiser Division SEIU)
Subject: Regarding ex leaders of UHW and ex Staff of UHW


As was stated in your stewards meeting the same process of calling Security or
the Police if necessary will continue. As stated by the Trustee. For any Ex UHW
Officers or Staff who are there solicting Decertification or stopping of Union
Dues.

Thank you
T W & V C

From Cassandra

Please let T know, this will not happen in the future.
What about the whole Security staff that was there. Who had them post at GGMO,
was some type of threat made and where did they receive direction? This is
another SEIU tactic to try and intimidate

From Ralph to Executive

Here is the e-mail correspondence between (edited) Vice President of
Human Resources for the Southern California Region, and me regarding the fact
that T. W. has no ability to call Security on anyone. Ralph


From (edited) to Ralph

Hi Ralph - I didn't hear about this until Friday evening. We have put
systems in place to prevent this in the future. As you can imagine we are very
busy ourselves. Hope all is going well with you.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


Comment: these emails were generated because 1 steward questioned our reps ability to remove people of whom the council invited to our council meeting. Our trustees showed up unannounced so definatley not invited. Now she like the rest of us who dare speak out are being blackballed and God knows what else!

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE MONEY??? heres some of it

9/26/08

LA Times exposes Andy Stern's corrupt SEIU

More SEIU stories: here • Andy Stern stories: hereJumbo unions' bigs abuse the dues and trust of rank-and-file membersThe Service Employees International Union's headquarters has paid millions of dollars to consulting firms, political nonprofits and individuals with family ties and other personal connections to some of the labor organization's top officers, records show.One company partly owned by a union director also received more than $1 million in SEIU consulting fees.The nation's fastest-growing union, the SEIU bills itself a standard-setter in the drive to reform and modernize the labor movement. It has adopted a code of ethics that bars officers from directing business to their relatives, although a spokeswoman said no competitive bidding process is required when such contracts are awarded.Labor Department https://cslxwep1.dol-esa.gov/Disclosure/OnlineSR30.jsp?ReportId=LM30 from 2003 through last year show that:* The SEIU and its political affiliate contributed $3 million to America Votes, an advocacy organization that was headed by Cecile Richards, wife of an aide to SEIU President Andy Stern, at the time the payments were made.* Melissa Mullinax was an SEIU political director when the political consulting firm she held a 20%-to-25% stake in, The Edison Group, was paid more than $1 million, including expenses. In addition, the SEIU has spent about $41,000 on a graphic design company owned by Mullinax's husband, Jason Abbott.* The union paid about $520,000 to a consulting firm co-founded by Democratic Party and labor strategist Steve Rosenthal, the husband of another SEIU director, Eileen Kirlin. Rosenthal, a longtime friend of Stern, also headed America Coming Together, a get-out-the-vote nonprofit that received $23 million from the union.* Pamela Kieffer, wife of a third union director, David Kieffer, has received about $70,000 in consulting fees and in separate payments from a firm that provided recruitment services to SEIU.In addition, the SEIU and an associated nonprofit paid roughly $210,000 in consulting fees over four years to Don Stillman, husband of the union's outside legal counsel, Judith Scott. Stillman helped edit a 2006 book written by Stern, a publication that has generated controversy because of how the union president profited from it.Although she is not an SEIU staffer, Scott disclosed her husband's relationship with the union on U.S. Labor Department disclosure forms filed by officers.SEIU spokeswoman Michelle Ringuette said there was nothing improper about any of the payments, which also were reported in the union's annual financial filings with the Labor Department.She said the expenditures comply with rules against nepotism and self-dealing that the union adopted in 2005. The officers had no input in the hiring of spouses or in their compensation, she said."They did not work for, nor were they retained by, their spouses, and they did a good job," Ringuette said.The SEIU represents about 2 million healthcare workers, government employees, janitors and others in the private and public sectors. Ringuette said the union received excellent services from Rosenthal's organizations, America Votes, the consulting firms and the individuals, Mullinax among them."She is a respected political consultant," Ringuette said.She said the money paid to America Coming Together was particularly well spent, considering the group's widely applauded efforts to turn out Democratic voters in the 2004 presidential election. Ringuette added that Rosenthal more than earned the $520,000 that his consulting firm received for political work.Rosenthal said any criticism of his relationship with the union would be "almost stunning." "I hold the work I do up to anybody's," he said.And Richards, now president of Planned Parenthood, said in a statement that America Votes is a coalition of more than 40 groups, and that its financial records are "transparent."Richards is the wife of former Stern chief of staff Kirk Adams, now a union director.Attempts to reach other officers and their spouses were unsuccessful.The SEIU's policies also require transparency in decisions to give union business to relatives. But the number and size of the SEIU payments were unusual, said a leader of a labor reform group."This is very uncommon in unions," said Ken Paff, national organizer of Teamsters for a Democratic Union. "We've had a lot of that in the Teamsters. . . . It's a bad indicator about a union when you have a pattern of husband and wife in that kind of role."The SEIU has come under scrutiny recently by federal criminal authorities, following Times reports last month that its largest California local and a related charity paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to firms owned by the wife and mother-in-law of the local's president, Tyrone Freeman.The local spent similar sums on a golfing resort, expensive restaurants and a Beverly Hills cigar lounge. According to the union, Freeman also spent union money on his Hawaiian wedding.Fallout from The Times' reports spread to other SEIU chapters, prompting Stern to call on all locals to impose a code of ethics similar to the national office's.The SEIU has brought internal charges against Freeman, who was initially appointed by Stern. The union alleges that the payments could not be justified for the services received, and instead were part of a broad corruption scheme. Freeman, who has been removed from the union payroll pending a hearing, has denied any wrongdoing.Unlike the national officers, Freeman did not file disclosure forms until after The Times inquired about the expenditures, which are required for union payments to spouses, Labor Department officials say.Two other SEIU local presidents have gone on paid leave, including Annelle Grajeda, an executive vice president of the national organization.Grajeda, a Stern appointee who heads the SEIU's California council, stepped aside because of allegations that her former boyfriend received improper payments from the union. She has said she did nothing wrong.Nelson Lichtenstein, director of UC Santa Barbara's Center for the Study of Work, Labor and Democracy, said the SEIU headquarters' payments to officers' relatives could set a bad example for locals, even if the business relationships are out in the open and ultimately beneficial to union members."Clearly, there's a kind of double standard at work," he said.Stern's harshest critic within the SEIU, Sal Rosselli, the president of a Bay Area local, says the 2006 book deal amounted to self-dealing. Stern received a six-figure advance for "A Country That Works," which the union helped fact-check and promote, and which union locals bought in bulk."The money should have gone to the union workers," Rosselli said.In denying any impropriety, Stern has said that the SEIU's board voted independently to promote the book and urge locals to buy it, and that he received no royalties from sales to the union.The SEIU has accused Rosselli and his board of financial malpractice for using members' dues to set up a nonprofit and legal defense fund to wage an internecine battle with Stern.Rosselli labels the charges retaliation. They are the subject of an internal hearing that begins today and could end in the SEIU's placing the local into trusteeship.(latimes.com)
Email this • Add This! • Fark It

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEFebruary 18, 2009 — Contact: Sadie Crabtree, 213-400-8845

SEIU UHW-W trustees team up with employers to deny healthcare workers a free choice
Caregivers protest at local union's headquarters in Oakland
Oakland, Calif.—Hospital and nursing home workers protested today outside the office of their own local union, SEIU United Healthcare Workers-West (SEIU UHW-W), which was recently seized in a hostile takeover by national officials of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Since the takeover, tens of thousands of members have petitioned to form an independent union—the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW)—and SEIU UHW-W's new trustees are working with employers to intimidate workers and stop them from having a free choice.

SEIU UHW-W has threatened workers that they can be fired from their jobs or removed as shop stewards for union activity to support NUHW. Maria Garcia, a union steward and certified nursing assistant at Bay Point Healthcare Center in Hayward, was fired for circulating a petition to join NUHW.

"I've circulated union petitions for years with no problem," Garcia said.
"But this time my boss said he was going to call SEIU Trustee Eliseo Medina and if he didn't like the petition, I would be removed. After he called SEIU, he fired me, and now the union won't respond when I call them for help. Union leaders should be on our side, not team up with administrators against us."

NUHW was founded after SEIU seized control of California's healthcare union in order to divide 65,000 homecare and nursing home workers from hospital workers against their will. Healthcare workers are now organizing to stay united in NUHW. In just three weeks, more than 25,000 workers at 110 facilities have petitioned to hold elections to join NUHW and thousands more will petition soon. Healthcare workers are also stopping union dues payments to SEIU UHW-W, and signing up for monthly contributions to NUHW instead.

"SEIU officials have wasted millions of members' dollars to enrich themselves and retaliate against whistleblowers, and we don't want to give them another cent," said Angela Glasper, an optical services clerk at Kaiser Antioch. "We want to use our money to fight for better healthcare for our patients and better jobs in our communities. NUHW is our union, by healthcare workers and for healthcare workers."

For details of SEIU's retaliation against workers who are joining NUHW, see http://nuhw.squarespace.com/storage/docs/SEIU-retaliation.pdf
# # #

Recent UHW Staff Meeting

Old UHW Leaders form NUHW

Background: Seiu sues UHW eboard members.

This is a little background on actions that were taken against UHW rank and file members by SEIU prior to the trusteeship.

video originates from youtube.com

Have a problem: Contact your Call Center

SEIU has begun rolling out call centers, called Member Resource Centers, to address responsiveness and member satisfaction. This is part of resolution 204a of the 2008 Constitutional amendments adopted during the 2008 Convention.

On the surface this may sound good. However, who will be on the other side of the phone when you call? When will they call you back? Will they be familiar with your contract?

Another concern is this may result in less availability of our Current Union Reps who may be pulled for other tasks such as organizing ( which is more lucrative to the union than actually representing members ).

Steve Early has written a good piece covering some of the issues which can be found here.

Seiu has a promotional video available on youtube.

Duration of Trusteeship

The LMRDA defines a trusteeship as a temporary remedy to correct emergency situations in a subordinate union.

The trusteeship is valid for 18 months from the date of its establishment and after this time is invalid unless the parent union shows clear and convincing proof that a trusteeship is neccessary for a purpose allowable under the LMRDA.

Read More at the U.S. Department of Labor's homepage.

LA Times coverage of SEIU Scandals

The Los Angeles times has a lot of coverage about what is going on within SEIU. Lots of articles that cover both UHW-W and others, giving a good background of the power struggles that we are experiencing as well as others.

La Times Special Report

Union Democracy

Both NUHW (previously UHW-W) and SEIU claim to be advocating union democracy, but if you look at article XXV on page 89 in SEIU's 2008 Constitutional Amendments you will see something far from democratic.

To paraphrase:

If the majority of a union wishes to disaffiliate or dissassociate from SEIU they must first notify the International 60 days before meeting to hold a vote and give a SEIU representative the opportunity to speak at the meeting. If seven members of the union -- regardless of size -- vote not dissassociate then the local is unable to disaffiliate.

How democratic is that? This language assures that regardless of the wishes of the union, they will be unable to disaffiliate from SEIU.

The article goes on to state if a union does vote successfully to disaffiliate, all funds and assets both real and personal shall become property of the International Union.

Accusations of UHW-W Subverting Democracy

To validate putting UHW in trusteeship, SEIU claims that UHW attempted to subvert the democratic processes.

What caused SEIU UHW-W to be placed under trusteeship?
The top UHW-W leadership has been found to have violated their duties to their membership, engaged in serious financial wrongdoing, attempted to subvert the democratic processes of our union, and failed to safeguard collective bargaining relationships.

This is ironic, since UHW-W (Rosselli) accusations that SEIU is moving to top down leadership excluding members from having a democratic control over their unions.

Prior to trusteeship, UHW-W had been in battle with SEIU over removing 65,000 long-term care workers from their union to merge with other unions to form a single state-wide long-term union local. UHW-W had collected petitions of over 125,000 union members protesting this split and had held demonstrations.