SEIU-UHW (Service Employees International Union)
vs. NUHW (National Union of Healthcare Workers)
Trial: DAY 12 - April 6, 2010
"Closing Arguments"
San Francisco, CA
As the final witnesses took the stand Monday, the door was opened today to start the "closing arguments" in the trial of SEIU-UHW vs. NUHW.
Many members have long awaited the details revealing foul behavior by ousted leaders as they deemed to make SEIU-UHW ungovernable upon trusteeship. The very detailed testimonies of many witnesses include an array of secret plans to remove, alter and destroy UHW property - organize UHW members against their International - breech fiduciary responsibility - store UHW membership contact information onto private, offline undetectable data bases - occupy UHW offices to prevent trustees from entering - provoke violence towards SEIU staff and trustees - divert funds under false pretenses to the PEF (Patient Education Fund) - and using UHW resources to build NUHW while still employed by UHW. These were among the many alleged charges against Rosselli and company.
The list goes on and on but there are basically two top items that really guide what happened before and after the trusteeship. The first pertains to abiding by the "rules" of the governing SEIU International Constitution (in which all officers are bound to as sworn in under oath). The second is the subject of the "consequences" of not doing so.
SEIU-UHW Attorney Gary Kohlman reiterated to the jury that just as Federal Court Judge William Alsup ensures that attorneys from both sides adhere to the "rules" of the court and of the law - and that they play "fair" - he stated that this also applies to the NUHW defendants. Whenever an attorney attempted to detour from the rules of court, Judge Alsup quickly called it to attention and consequences were delivered appropriately.
During the final arguments on behalf of SEIU-UHW, Attorney Kohlman unfolded defendant Barbara Lewis' covert plan to teach members and staff how to "create an ungovernable situation" for the SEIU trustees and how it played a major role in constant attempts to "hobble and cripple" the trustees and prevent them from caring for the very same members that are being lured into NUHW. A timeline of events was exceptionally prepared by the SEIU-UHW counsel as evidence of the above allegations.
The timeline of the covert conspiracy was displayed as early as 2007 up until present. Each defendant was named as they strategically came into play in the operation.
There were e-mails involving various defendants, expense reports, meeting documents, and even documentation of a Kinkos purchase for disaffiliation forms adding up to over $41,000. The "Shakers and Makers/Breakfast Club" plan and efforts to circulate disaffiliation petitions to members of UHW in an attempt to move them into (NUHW) were carefully demonstrated as evidence against the conspirers. NUHW Attorney Dan Siegel's attempt to discredit SEIU-UHW witness Leon Chow failed as the rebuttal by SEIU-UHW counsel quickly brought it back in perspective. The "real story" behind the scene involved Mr. Chow being asked by defendant John Vellardita to "look into the open window periods for disaffiliation." The NUHW leaders' premeditated and urgent plan to find office space while still employed by UHW was disclosed as this space eventually became the office of NUHW. Closing arguments by the prosecution also revealed that as of January 21, 2009 there were thirty contract extensions being terminated by nursing home employers. The "missing yellow cards" given to members during "mega meetings" were examined as that information with the members' contact information was never put into the UHW database - but was last given to NUHW defendant Marti Garza by SEIU-UHW witness Jennifer Castro. Even the seventeen boxes of UHW files and information which "mysteriously appeared" at NUHW's attorney's doorstep was brought to the attention of the jury today.
The final argument by SEIU-UHW Attorney Kohlman stated that the defendants left behind two things: "A paper trail" and "their honor."
How can NUHW claim that their undemocratic behaviors happened "on behalf of the members" while it "happened to the members" in creating a deficiency for SEIU-UHW to care for them?
As NUHW Attorney Dan Siegel took the stage for his "Stars in the Sky" fantasy routine, the song and dance did not shadow the real testimonies from witnesses who testified under oath during the past two weeks. He seemed disappointed that SEIU trustee Dave Regan was not present - but he also had the same opportunity to invite him to the dance if so needed. He must not be aware that Dave Regan prioritizes himself second to the actual members who were hurt by the inappropriate behaviors of the former ousted leadership. Council Siegel even went so far as to state "I don't want to brag but my defendants are pretty well organized."
Mr. Siegel even tried to insinuate that the reason the defendants used outside, undetectable communications systems was so that SEIU could not spy on them. He then reverted to a memo sent from Andy Stern informing the defendants that a monitor was coming in to inventory UHW books - however, later in the SEIU-UHW rebuttal, it was shown how the defendants planned and purchased outside communications devices long before the Stern memo ever arrived. Besides...What ever happened to "transparency?" NUHW Attorney Siegel also stated that defendants Dan Martin and Laura Kurre developed "member assessment tools" as early as 2005 before all of this happened - but what he did not state was how it is unconstitutional for those very same tools to be used by staff and members against its own union in a conspiracy. Dahhh...
The day ended with the jury being given instructions by Judge Alsup as they went in to deliberation at 1:57p.m. today. We will keep you posted when the final verdict arrives.
Talk to you soon.
.
Let me interrupt these bizarre attacks to thank you for your time and efforts in covering this trial.
Don't these NUHW zealots remind you of something? The myopic focus, the stupid slogans, the exquisite belief that they have legions of enemies in the form of a shaddowy, secretive big government, er, union, the red-faced, spittle-spouting torrent of words devoid of sense or punctuation, the whole "I've made up my mind so don't confuse me with facts" thing?
They're tea party people!
Hey Tea Party People, while you're all hung up on why UHW didn’t call this person or that person to testify, did you even notice that NUHW didn't call half of the defendants that they were supposedly defending? If not putting someone on the stand means that the person has something to hide, what does that mean about all of THOSE people that NUHW didn't want opened up to questioning?
Oh, sorry, I forgot. Facts again. Never mind. Carry on (and we know you will. On and on and on and...)
SEIU: E P I C F A I L
against SaL and the other 25. Why didn't Sokel who was at all the so called conspiracy meeting
testify, he still works UHw , right. He doesn't want to lie for Andy Stern and do time for him, thats why
Why didn't Harris testify , same as Sokel don't want to do time.This is the part I Ilike the best about the defense closing,the defendants would have had to hire lawyers,hire PR, and seek advice to stay out of trusteeship,Thats the claim [remember stolen funds].And while they were stealing all this money to avoid trusteeship, they were secretly forming NUHW. Nobody is that smart, give me a break..When union reps go up against mgmt. for disclipinary grievances the good reps always clearly state the burden of proof is on mgmt. not the accused. Its those "rules". Don't change them in the middle of the game.And this my friends, the plaintifs have have failed miserably. They have not proved anything against anybody.The only thing proven here is once again SEIU has squandered hard earned dues money [$25 million] against union members, while allowing one of the nastiest lawyers known to labor to sit next to them while they attack members.Hard to believe
If you believe that there was no plan to implode the best local of SEIU International and ousted the threat that a state-wide local presented to the plans of grandioso and totalitarian Andy's loco regime, Here is the memo that clearly shows the intentions of implode our local. Is there to see if you want to see, but it seems that you close your eyes to bow to your master puppeteer Stern.
So ok, SEIU bought blogger bumble bee. Check the date
What was the document? It was our old friend the implosion memo, from way back in June 2008!
* How do we let members know what was decided at the convention
* Do we want to build on the e-mails and other communications from workers, exposing UHW's lack of attention to members' concerns
* Other locals - if this debate continues, it needs to be between UHW and the rest of the division about decisions democratically made at the convention) - and not portrayed as a power struggle between UHW and the International
* Staffing
* Field
* Communication
* Legal
* Overlap with CNA work
* Shoring up CA Public Services locals that will receive mischief from UHW
Bill Ragen
Service Employees International Union
1800 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
------
Perez rests!
* Going to work for other locals (possible 2 in LA)
Member outreach
* Information about decisions of the convention
Open Contracts
* Nursing Homes - 14,000 (9,000 in UHW)
* Hospitals - about 65,000
Issues to decide
Goals before, after LTC hearing
* Follow up with legal cases (and plaintiffs)
* Response to member complaints (It's in the Bag, DFR's)
* Follow up with members who have taken a public stance
Legal
* Education Fund (2 lawsuits)
* DFR's - Possible filing at Kaiser Sunset, elsewhere
Long Term Care jurisdiction
Internal
* complaints about UHW relationship with vendor It's in the Bag
* Kaiser SF stewards - internal appeal and possible DOL filing their dismissal by UHW
Members that have publicly spoken out, organized:
* Kaiser: Sunset, Woodland Hills, Panorama City
* California Hospital - CHW
* Independents: Good Samaritan, Cedars Sinai, Motion Picture
* Christy Brooks - homecare worker in Northern CA (blogger)
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 09:28 AM Eastern Standard Time
To: Thomas Debruin; Stephen Lerner; Denise Poloyac; Kirk Adams; Edgar N. James
Subject: a few thoughts about UHW
Post-convention UHW work
A few thoughts
* Trusteeship would be difficult - it's like Iraq, easy and then to get in and then a slog
* Implosion would be a better outcome but what will it take?
* Loss of LTC means half the local will be in the south, where there are pockets of dissatisfaction
* Local elections are early next year
* Some key senior staff may want to get out of a suicide mission