Rebuttal To CSEA’s President Alan D. Clark


Every month C.S.E.A. members receive a magazine entitled “FOCUS”. The reality is, it should be called “Out Of Focus”.

Let me start with the first few lines of his message. “In two weeks, the future of education and our rights to participate in political action will be decided.” Really, the “future of education.?” If this was the case, the C.S.E.A. would stop endorsing candidates that drive up the cost of doing business in California, and thus driving them out-of-state. And how are our “rights” going to be denied? We, as a union, won’t be forced to have our money spent on people and propositions that we do not agree with, and do our union more harm than good.

It gets better: “We have been working for months to educate our members and the public about what is at stake on Nov.6.” Translation, we have been blowing millions of dollars trying to convince people that raising taxes will help get us out of this financial mess. Sorry, taking more from the working population of California is a pay cut. And the C.S.E.A.’s top brass has been misleading its members for years. Once again, look at where we are and who has been in power in Sacramento for over thirty years?

Mr. Clark states; ” Proposition 30…stops $6 billion in cuts to education this year and stabilizes education funding for the next six years while our economy recovers.” Really? It raises our taxes this year, and for the next six years. Yup,the same plan that has brought us to the financial mess we are now in. How about asking Sacramento to cut spending, cut taxes, and bring companies to California? That’s right, the C.S.E.A does not support candidates and props that do these things.

O.K., now for more ridiculous claims by Mr. Clark; Prop 32…..,is a blatant attempt to silence our voices,strip us of our free speech rights, and if passed, will only be the beginning of attacks on collective bargaining, pensions and our rights as working men and women.” This is just too easy to disprove. How are our voices being “silenced”? They are not, each C.S.E.A member has the right to vote for, or against any person or prop. We have the right to give money to support any person or prop. We should not have our dues going to people and props that we disagree with Mr. Clark. Talk about silencing voices? The C.S.E.A.’s leadership “silences” the conservative voices quite well. As for collective bargaining? Read the words of F.D.R.:

“All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters. Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable.”
As for pensions and benefits? Folks who work in the private sector wish they had our deal! These pensions are guaranteed by the state, and this is one more reason public sector unions should not be able to collectively bargain for pensions and benefits. Don’t misunderstand me, people who are currently receiving these benefits, and pensions, should be left alone. Going forward, new public union employees need to use their money, not the states, to provide for their golden years. They can band together and do this without state money.
Finally, because I am tired of taking apart Mr. Clark’s and the C.S.E.A’s propaganda, I will end on this quote; ” This election is not about right or left, but Right and Wrong.” I just have to agree with this. The “Right” is right, and the “Left” is wrong.

I am finding growing support in my bid for my chapter’s presidency. Some of the people are seeing the hypocrisy and the lack of respect for rules and civility, and are coming to my support. I may, or may not win, but I have some folks questioning our union’s leadership. This is a start!

Advertisements

2 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Carl D'Agostino
    Oct 28, 2012 @ 17:33:06

    Where’s FDR when we need him?The public sector’s benefits in Miami are outrageous. Police and fire and such retire with near 75% of pay after 20 and most elected and employed local govt get the same and full med for life. As a teacher I get 48% of pay after 30 years. But it is taxed and now pay own group rate med ins which lowers that quite a bit. I am against the abuses but candidates speak that the public sector needs to be congruentized with the private sector. Oh great. No pension, no health care(forget family too) no sick leave, unpaid vacations, no worker’s rights and $10 an hour take it or leave it. Capitalist exploitation and union busting at its max. The private sector needs to become upgraded to what the benefits of the public sector have. One problem though with public union protests over cuts it that how can a status quo be held when it takes say $10 to run things and a town or state is raising only $7 ?

    Reply

  2. The Conservative Hill Billy
    Oct 29, 2012 @ 08:50:49

    If a person does not like their private sector job they are free to seek employment else where. The vast majority of private employers compensate their employees fairly. If not, again, they are free to leave, I don’t think it is right for the taxpayer to “guarantee” the retirements of public union employees. Let us band together as private citizens and take care of ourselves, if we so choose. We need to get the feds out of healthcare, and health insurance if we want to see the prices go down. And I don’t believe that healthcare/insurance is a right, and I don’t think private employers should be forced to provide it, though I do think it is a great benefit to their companies moral if they do..
    Good to hear from you Carl. Are you surving the weather? 🙂

    Reply

Hand me a beer and tell me what you think

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: