February 10, 2006
CSO Rep Council members, in conjunction with Organizing Team members, are in the process of conducting a second round of house meetings. Discussion will be around bargaining survey priorities and recent Council action reaffirming the longstanding CSO policy of “No Contract, No Work.” Whether it is three or thirty union members, house meetings have provided the opportunity to participate in meaningful dialogue and debate with their union colleagues. The feedback from these meetings continues to give direction to both the Bargaining Team and the union as a whole. The CSO Annual Meeting, scheduled for March 25-26 in Redondo Beach will also focus on bargaining. Participants will help shape the framework to support the bargaining process. All CSO members are highly encouraged to attend and be part of the building process.
Currently, CSO has two grievances at arbitration: one regarding appropriate working conditions (cubicles), and another regarding internal transfer rights. Having been in advocacy work for a long time, I recognize that labor and management must sometimes use the grievance procedure to have a neutral make decisions regarding contract language. What is not acceptable, however, is to abuse the procedure with stall and delay tactics in order to sabotage the end result. CTA is regularly practicing just such tactics through their legal counsel, Larry Steinsapir et al. In both of the pending arbitrations, Steinsapir et al. has used objectionable strategies and challenges to repeatedly delay the hearings, adding more days at additional cost to both parties. Steinsapir’s firm is the only winner to date, racking up substantial legal fees. Unfortunately, CTA has failed to direct their counsel to use, rather than abuse the grievance process. In response, the CSO Rep Council voted in November to boycott referring GLS work to Steinsapir and his associates, and encourages all CSO members to do the same whenever possible.
Currently, CSO has two grievances at arbitration: one regarding appropriate working conditions (cubicles), and another regarding internal transfer rights. Having been in advocacy work for a long time, I recognize that labor and management must sometimes use the grievance procedure to have a neutral make decisions regarding contract language. What is not acceptable, however, is to abuse the procedure with stall and delay tactics in order to sabotage the end result. CTA is regularly practicing just such tactics through their legal counsel, Larry Steinsapir et al. In both of the pending arbitrations, Steinsapir et al. has used objectionable strategies and challenges to repeatedly delay the hearings, adding more days at additional cost to both parties. Steinsapir’s firm is the only winner to date, racking up substantial legal fees. Unfortunately, CTA has failed to direct their counsel to use, rather than abuse the grievance process. In response, the CSO Rep Council voted in November to boycott referring GLS work to Steinsapir and his associates, and encourages all CSO members to do the same whenever possible.
