- To ALL State Employees -

* IMPORTANT NOTICE *

$$  The Partnership (WINS) WANTS YOUR MONEY  $$

…and they’re coming to get it.

Colorado WINS is about to move into your life – whether you want them or NOT!

Of the 31,447 ballots sent out to state employees last year only 35% of us returned them.  Of that, 7,993 voted yes.  That means that out of 32,000 state employees it took less than 8,000 (25%) to vote in WINS!

As a result…we may ALL have to pay dues soon.

Why?  The state payroll system will pay salaries of nearly $1,320,000,000 in 2009 (rough est.). 

WINS wants 1% of that (their current dues rate) – or $13,200,000…that’s why.

HOW?  Right now only members pay dues. 

BUT, WINS will make every effort to get the Governor and/or Congress to force everyone to pay dues.

Why do I KNOW THIS?

AP News report 1/21/09:

Court sides with union in legal fees case

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has unanimously upheld the right of a local public employees’ union to force government workers who are not union members to pay a share of legal fees.

The ruling Wednesday in a case from Maine involves a small fraction of the fee that local affiliates pay to national unions for litigation that may not directly benefit the locals.

The Maine State Employees Union represents workers in contract negotiations with the state. The court has previously held that people who choose not to join the union still must pay fees to the union because they too are covered by collective bargaining.

But there are some activities, including politics and lobbying, for which unions may not charge nonmembers. The question for the court was whether national litigation costs are among the forbidden charges.

State workers who are not union members sued in federal court. A U.S. District judge and the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the state. The high court affirmed those rulings Wednesday in an opinion by Justice Stephen Breyer.

The case is Locke v. Karass, 07-610.

WHAT CAN YOU DO? – NOTHING?

Well…maybe not…

If you want to learn more…

·         Visit our website…www.coloradoloses.org

·         Become a LOSER and get on our mailing list…(we don’t charge dues)

·         Report union activities when you hear about them…so we may keep everyone informed of their activities.

·         If you are a union member and have fallen out of love with their efforts, go to our website to learn how to resign.

NOTE:

I am currently working on organizing a nationwide effort of state employees to fight state union groups.  I am open to your ideas on how to make this happen.

David Ohmart

The Biggest Loser

www.coloradoloses.org

Colorado Loses Newsletter

010  12/19/08

Forced Dues Will be the NEXT Effort by WINS

So – You don’t want to do anything to fight the partnership knows as WINS.  You believe it won’t affect you. BULL!  This is what one California union leader said about you…the non-union member:

“This election is about fairness, it’s about security and it’s about investment. State law requires Local 1000 to represent all employees regardless of whether or not they are union members. That means non-members get the raises, pensions, health care benefits and other rights that members have fought so hard to win. That’s not fair. We believe everyone needs to share the cost of winning. It’s an investment in economic security, job security, and retirement security.” Davy Hart, SEIU local 1000 president. [emphasis mine]  http://www.bloggernews.net/112330#comment-834020

Once WINS establishes itself…they will come after YOU!  Unions have been organizing state employees across the country.  Here are several examples of how, once established, they forced ALL state employees to pay dues:

This is what happened in California:

“Sacramento, Calif. – Marking another step forward in the Foundation’s efforts to stem the tide of compulsory unionism abuse in California, the United States District Court has allowed 14,000 California State University (CSU) professors to challenge more than $8.5 million in forced dues seized from their paychecks under a new compulsory unionism law.” [emphasis mine] http://www.nrtw.org/foundation-action/fa_49.htm

How was this done?

“Pushed through to its passage by union lobbyists, California’s faculty forced dues law requires that the 14,000 non-union professors must either quit their teaching jobs or pay about $600 annually to a union whose agenda they do not support.”

It is my belief that WINS, once fully established, will begin to push legislation, or another executive order, to force non-union members to pay some form of dues.  Why do I believe this?  Because it is happening all over the country…

Here’s what happened in Maryland:

Unions want non-members to pay fees

Nathan Cohen Issue date: 2/27/07 Section: NEWS

 “Gov. Martin O’Malley is pushing a controversial bill that could allow unions that represent state employees in collective bargaining – including a union that represents university staff – to charge fees to non-union employees.

“Current state law prohibits unions that represent state employees from charging fees to non-members. The bill, hailed by union leaders and criticized by some General Assembly Republicans, could change that for the approximately two thirds of university staff that do not belong to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union, AFSCME Local 1072.”

http://media.www.diamondbackonline.com/media/storage/paper873/news/2007/02/27/News/Unions.Want.NonMembers.To.Pay.Fees-2744563.shtml

Here is a story from New Hampshire:

Non-union state workers to pay fees after Sept. 5

By Associated Press

CONCORD – The union covering state workers says it has reached the enrollment figures necessary to allow it to collect fees from about 4,000 workers who aren’t union members. http://seacoastauction.com/2005news/08272005/news/59930.htm

This article goes on to show that union members pay 1.35% dues based on their gross pay while non-union members must pay 1% dues.

A story from Maine:

Some state workers quit over union fee
By Lindsay Tice , Staff Writer  Wednesday, August 29, 2007

But Valcourt also loathed the thought of paying a service fee to the Maine State Employees Association, a union he didn’t belong to and really didn’t like. If he stayed, his wages would be garnished to pay that fee.

http://www.sunjournal.com/story/227302-3/MaineNews/Some_state_workers_quit_over_union_fee/

After sending out my original message to all state employees last summer and said we would be forced to pay dues, I was called a liar in an email to all unemployment insurance email recipients for this belief.

What do you believe???

Colorado Loses Newsletter

 008  11/9/08

 The voting is over and the unions won BIG!

  ·         47 Failed, so this will give WINS the belief they now have carte blanche to come in and run roughshod over state employees.  I have already heard stories of WINS reps making their push at various offices trying to sign up members.  Their goal, from what I heard at the convention (until I was thrown out) is 2,000 members by next Spring.

        o   Unions spent $30+ million to defeat 47.

·         49 was defeated, so those joining WINS means having your dues withheld and paid from your monthly paycheck through the state payroll system.  It’ll be like it never happened.

 NOTE: I did not get involved, here, with election issues for the very reason that this is not a forum for politics.  LOSES was created when I spoke up against the partnership.  Others heard me and encouraged me to say more.  I did not design this as a political platform.  One of the aspects of unions that I despise is when they become politically active instead of working with current (and future) administrations to solve issues related to state employees.  I believe their political activism places a wedge between members with differing political beliefs.  (I thought the word “union” meant to bring people together.)

What can YOU do now?

1.   Copy this poster, print it out, and hang it at your workplace.  If you wish, you may post it wherever WINS has any postings.  You should also be able to post it even if there is no WINS poster.  You may put it up at your personal workstation, too.  Let me know where you put it and if anything happens to the sign if you do.

2.      Engage others in conversations about WINS.  Direct them to the website if they would like to know more about LOSES.  If they are in favor of the union, ask them to at least listen to the other side.

 3.      Attend WINS meetings, take good notes, and get handouts from them.  Keep me informed of what WINS is doing in your area; send it to me so I can use it in future newsletters and on the website.  Scan and email is the best way. 

 David Ohmart

The Biggest Loser

coloradoloses@comcast.net

COLORADO LOSES NEWSLETTER

006 – 9/11/08

Greetings Losers!

This Newsletter will go through the Executive order and explain why having a “partnership” will have little or no effect on State employees.  The order is attached to this email so you can read it yourself to be sure I didn’t misquote anything.  The meat of this is at the end, but here are my thoughts on other sections as they appear.  This is not a statement against Governor Bill Ritter.  It is an explanation as to how the Partnership has not teeth despite the concept.

David Ohmart

A Deconstruction of

Governor Ritter’s Executive Order D 028 07

Authorizing Partnership Agreements with State Employees

1.      Background and Purpose

Over the past ten months, my administration has initiated a series of state government reforms that reflect modern management principles…

A brief history:

In 1851 cigar makers formed the first union in the United States (The Labor Movement in America By Richard Theodore Ely, p63).  Unions grew until 1945 where they maxed out at a total representation of about 37% of the workforce. 

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: 

“Membership by Industry and Occupation:  The union membership rate for public sector workers (35.9 percent) was substantially higher than for private industry workers (7.5 percent).”  http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

You can see by the above statistics unions have stronger representation with state employees.  The above percentage, however, is misleading.  Realize that when a majority of the minority vote in a union they proclaim themselves as representing ALL the state employees (even though they declare they do not require all employees to join).  As a result, skewing the percentage.

I, therefore, believe that the desire to bring state government into modern management principles is false since modern management principles shy away from unions.

State employees possess unique insights, skills, and ingenuity about the public services they provide.  By establishing a formal employee partnership program similar to practices undertaken in the private sector (remember…7.5%) state government managers and frontline workers will be able to jointly craft workplace goals and expectations and to collaborate on strategies to achieve those goal.

I have two thoughts about that:

1.      The union is not interested in “workplace goals and expectations.”  They are not interested in making our jobs easier.  They are interested in us paying dues.  They want our money!

2.      Why didn’t the governor just do this by simply talking to his employees?  If he held a roundtable discussion or a town hall meeting at state offices, he could hear from us.  I have expressed the idea of having an elected state employee sit on the cabinet to represent our needs and “expectations” to the governor.

Why does it take a “formal partnership” to achieve this?  It only adds one more layer into an already burdensome bureaucracy.  Come on down and talk to us, or have one of your office staff do it or Rich Gonzales the executive director of DPA visit us.  Isn’t that his job?

E.  ‘Certified Employees Organization’ means an employee organization selected by a majority of the employees voting in a secret ballot election…

As I recall, there were bar codes on the envelopes.  I would love to hear from WINS how they were used– identifying individuals?  Not very secret if you ask me.  Now they want Card Check…talk about a lack of privacy.

E.  1.  entitled to exclusively represent all employees in the Partnership Unit on issues covered by this Executive Order.  2. …and without regard to employee organization membership.

I take you back to the statistics once again.  Only 24% of state employees voted for this “partnership” yet the union now represents all of us.  Quite frankly I don’t want them representing me.  I represent myself.  So when they say you don’t have to join the union…it sounds like I have whether I wanted to or not.

A Covered Employee who is a dues-paying member of an Employee Organization shall be deemed to have expressed a show of interest in favor of the Employee Organization in which he or she is a member unless and until the Covered Employee expresses a contrary intent in writing. (Emphasis mine)

If you voted for the union, you can opt out.  That’s a good idea.  I wonder if we could convince a large number to opt out using this method, how that might affect WINS?  However, even if you quit the union…they will still demand your dues:

The employees filed the parallel lawsuits in March citing multiple violations of employees’ rights by Turnpike and Teamsters union Local 77 and Local 250 officials in confiscating forced dues from employees who, in the case of the Pittsburgh employees, who had resigned their formal union membership. In Pennsylvania, a compulsory unionism state, nonunion members can only be forced to pay for a union’s proven collective bargaining costs.

http://www.nrtw.org/b/nr_645.php

***

Here now is the meat of the matter:

4.  Limitations on Scope of Partnership Agreements

Nothing in any Partnership Agreement may diminish the Governor’s discretion to prepare his proposed budget, including setting the amount allocated to total employee compensation in that proposed budget…Moreover, a Partnership Agreement may not include a requirement or agreement that the Executive Branch or any department negotiate with respect to any of the following matters: (1) matters constitutionally and statutorily delegated to the State Personnel Board; (2) the statutory function of any department or agency; or (3) matters related to the Public Employees’ Retirement Association.” (PERA)

F.  No Strike or Work Stoppage

Partnership Agreements negotiated pursuant to this Executive Order shall contain an agreement not to strike.  Moreover, it shall be a violation of this Executive Order for any Certified Employee Organization to engage in or threaten a strike, work stoppage, work slowdown, sickout, or other similar disruptive measure against the State of Colorado or any of its agencies.

Where is their power?

I doubt that this governor (or future governors) is going to make dramatic changes to our working conditions, wages, and or benefits that will be worth the dues paid, just because there is a “partnership.”  The partnership has not teeth.  I’m sure its bark is worse than its bite.

***

Another topic: DUES

E.  3.  …to have organizational membership dues collected from members of the Certified Employee Organization by payroll deduction…

Here are some facts to consider about dues.  WINS states that no one will be forced to join the union or pay dues.  Here are some examples of what has happened in other states:

In other states dues were still forced on x-members:

Robert Hunsick informed officials from Alaska State Employees Association, Local 52 (ASEA) of his decision to resign from the union, union brass improperly demanded that he continue to pay full union dues or be fired.

But ASEA union boss Jim Duncan told Hunsick that he could only resign his formal union membership in a union-designated 30-day window every June.  (A technicality of the union agreement.)

Alaska is one of 28 states without Right to Work protections that ensure employees are not forced to pay any union dues as a condition of employment. Hunsick’s struggle against ASEA demonstrates the chasm between Alaska’s compulsory unionism laws and its tradition of rugged individualism.

http://www.nrtw.org/press/2008/06/union-bosses-forced-drop-threats-aga

While dismissing their violation of thousands of Washington State workers’ First Amendment rights as “technical,” union officials have so far failed, however, to return literally millions of dollars in forced union dues seized from thousands of state workers as a result of these illegal “pay up or be fired” threats.

http://www.nrtw.org/b/nr_491.php

And this latest atrocity:

Main state employees were forced to pay dues.  They took their case to the Supreme Court and LOST!

http://www.mpbn.net/News/MaineNews/tabid/181/ctl/ViewItem/mid/1858/ItemId/9009/Default.aspx

NEWSLETTER

005 – 8/6/08

Greetings Losers:

I’ve been asked why I don’t like Unions.  Here is my thinking: (The following is a non paid, political announcement)

Unions should support their constituents, not politicians.

When money is diverted from union activities and sent to political parties (only one in fact – the democrats), that money is taken away from, what I thought was, their main purpose – to present the desires of employees to management.

Unions should learn to work with both parties and with management.  Their efforts should be to seek solutions that better a business and, in return, better the situation of the employees.  All they seem to want to do is constantly say, “I want.  I want.” like little children demanding a toy or candy. 

I believe their funds should never be used for supporting political parties.  Of course I understand why they do it…they support the democrats because they hope legislation will fall in their favor by doing so.  But when they take dues from people and not use it to find ways to help their members, it is my opinion they are wasting your money.  (What I would do with that money is listed at the end of this newsletter)

One reason I won’t join the union is because I don’t want my dues going to ANY political party.  And the US Supreme Court agrees with me (or me with them…)

“The U.S. Supreme Court last week articulated what should have been obvious: Unions do not have a First Amendment right to spend on politics the forced dues taken from nonunion employees. But right-of-center activists would be unwise to embrace the misguided law that the high court just upheld.” http://www.nrtw.org/pdfs/profiles/davenport/06-22-2007%20-%20The%20Detroit%20News.pdf

This is a copy of the first page of the SEIU website.  SEIU stands for Service Employees International Union.  They are one of the three unions who have formed this “partnership” concept for Colorado State employees.

As you can see, their frontline effort is to give support to a specific political party.

The second reason I don’t like unions is because they don’t support individuals. 

They only support a group.  I am against this socialistic concept.  When I become a part of the “group” I lose my identity and no longer see myself as an individual.  Everyone I’ve talked to about this “partnership” believes that it is going to do something for them specifically.  NO…they are going to try and help everyone (or so they say).  That means your personal goals or needs are not supported by the union unless yours are theirs.

If my job does not meet my specific needs (health care, wages, hours, day care, etc) then I should find other work.  I should seek an employer who offers what I need and go work for them.  I find it selfish to demand that an employer alter his structure just to meet my specific needs.  However, I am not against trying to find ways to improve the employee lifestyle…(again, see my statement at the end of this.)

However, if I were an employer, I would want to make an effort to better serve my employees, find better ways to make their work environment safe, fun, and economically satisfying.  I would want to work with them to seek satisfaction for them and the company.  Unfortunately, not all managers have the same goal. 

I believe that a representative of the employee base should be a member of the board of directors, because they should have the same goal in mind…the success of that business.  Employees are stake holders because it is through their efforts that the business even gets done…

But, I’m dreaming; am I not?

I expect a Union to do something.

I scoured the SEIU website for them to explain exactly what they have accomplished for their members.  Not one achievement was listed.  They talked about what they wanted to do, what they hoped to do, and that by joining them, they expect to service us…

If I came to you to ask for support, I would want you to know what I have actually done for others in the past.  These unions have been in existence for many years…What have they done?

When I asked Ryan, the SEIU rep at 251, he mumbled something about helping with some health care for employees in Michigan.  There were no specifics given.  I would want to know how much dues was paid during the time it took to improve the health care coverage and if what was provided made the payment of those dues worthwhile.

The union will want non union members to pay dues, too (eventually).

I have come across story after story where non union members are now forced to pay dues.  Here are two of them.

“Trenton, N.J. (June 1, 2004) — Three employees of the New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection today filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court against a Communications Workers of America (CWA) union affiliate for illegally deducting compulsory dues from the paychecks of thousands of nonunion State of New Jersey employees.” http://www.nrtw.org/press/2004/06/nj-state-employees-challenge-union-s-statewide-collection-compulsory-union-dues

“On November 2, 2005, the Washington Federation of State Employees (WFSE), Washington state’s largest public employee union, delivered a list of 800 workers’ names to the state Labor Relations Office. The state then notified those employees they would be fired just after Christmas if they did not acquiesce to the union’s demands.  Their crime? Not paying union dues.” http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=18394

What would I do with union dues:

I would strive to help the state find ways to make their employees’ jobs easier.  Upgrade equipment and software, so the jobs we do become more productive.  Greater production reduces the use of state funds freeing more money for salaries and benefits.  Unemployment Insurance is using software that is 25-years old (CUBS).  Yes, it’s functional, but antiquated and not user friendly.  It takes weeks to learn how to use it.  Thankfully, a few of us were able to modernize CUBS by installing pushbuttons in it to help move through CUBS speeding up production.

But I’m not a union leader or member.  I’m just a guy trying to think for himself.

Your non union rep…

David Ohmart

The Biggest Loser

coloradoloses@comcast.net

NEWSLETTER

003 – 7/25/08

Greetings losers…

eMAILS>>

I requested from DPA the email addresses of all state employees…I doubt it will come, but I tried.  Copying them from the website takes a great deal of effort and for over 30,000 names to copy…it’s a daunting task.  I want to just send out one blast introducing Colorado LOSES to everyone…

BALLOTS>>

According to Glenda Berry, the ballots were mailed out this week.  Have any of you received one yet?  I haven’t as of Friday.  This may be over before it gets started…I’m now sorry I didn’t get inspired sooner. 

THE PRESS>>

I’ve alerted the press (The Post, 4, 9, FOX).  Not sure if they will pick up on it…But I would love to get something going with them before everyone votes.  Mike Rosen of KOA knows about us, but has not offered any broadcast support.  The Independent Institute, a conservative think tank in Colorado, is aware of us too…They are receiving our newsletters and may be able to offer some advice or help if we need it.

TIME is against us right now.  I hope we have moved others even though they have not contacted me.  Unfortunately I have only been able to put up a handful of posters, so I’m sure our exposure is terribly limited.

Have a great weekend, everyone.

David Ohmart

The Biggest Loser

COLORADO LOSES NEWSLETTER

002 – 7/19/08

(Watch for our new letterhead)

Hello Losers…

Since my last newsletter I have added several new names to the list of recipients…welcome.

My word of the day:

PLATITUDE>>> “a pointless, unoriginal, or empty comment or statement made as though it was significant or helpful.” (Encarta) 

CAPE is one of the unions represented by WINS.

I went to the CAPE website (http://www.ecape.net/about/) and found this:

A track record of winning higher wages, better health care and secure retirements.

A partnership approach that focuses on solutions instead of conflict.

The strength to stand up for all hard working state employees.

So I emailed and asked them to provide details of their “track record.”  That was over two weeks ago.  So far I have not heard from them.  I asked them to describe their “record of winning higher wages,” but have heard nothing.

I say to you, that the statements above are nothing less than platitudes and not substantive.  My heart tells me that their number one purpose is to gather more people to pay dues.

SEIU, another member of the WINS, has this on their website (http://www.seiu.org/faqs/faq_changetowin.cfm):

At the federation’s founding convention in 2005, members pledged to focus their efforts on uniting the 90 percent of workers not yet in a union (emphasis mine) so that all working people in this country can build the power to make their voices heard in their jobs, their communities, and in Washington. 

This makes me wonder…if only 10% of workers are union members and 90% are not…what does that say for their results?  If they were more effective I would think they would have a greater percentage of membership.

May I suggest you not be moved by platitudes, but, rather, seek substance in statements made.

 DUES>>

Where will your dues go?  I’ve been told that Ryan, the WINS representative who has taken up residence in his own glassed-in office in the foyer of 251 (the unemployment office in downtown Denver) is not even from Colorado.  You mean to tell me…they couldn’t find a local person to represent local people with local issues?  That makes me ask, “Where will your dues be going?”  I hope to challenge WINS to find out what their plans are. 

My first question to them is, “What percentage of dues paid by Colorado State Employees will remain in Colorado and used for state issues?”  If I find out…I’ll let you know.  I’ll let you know if I find nothing out, too.

My second questions is, “For which political party will dues be used for supporting candidates running for office?”

POSTER>> (copy attached)

A poster has been designed and printed.  Copies were placed around 251 and 633 (the L&E HQ in Denver)

EMAIL BLAST>>

I have requested permission from HR to send a single email blast to ALL state employees introducing Colorado Loses. 

This is my email to Mike Dawson:

Mike…the policy states:

“Volume (broadcast) emails, defined as emails of broad general interest to multiple state

employees not concerning a specific employment matter between an employee and his or

her representative or other specific topic related to a small group of individuals, must be

delivered after 6:00 PM.”

¨       Does this mean I can send a broadcast email to the state from my work computer so long as it is after 6 PM or must it be from an outside computer?

¨       If I must send it from an outside computer source, how do I get the email addresses for all the state employees to do that?

Next:

“No political endorsements or opposition, and no emails commenting on

managers, administration officials or other employee organizations will be

sent through the state email system.”

¨       By political endorsements or opposition…does that include opposition to a union or is that specifically addressed to political parties like republicans and democrats?

¨       By employee organizations, does that refer to the union?

This would be my email if I sent one:

“Colorado Loses is an unofficial gathering of minds to discuss the upcoming vote on whether to allow a union representation for state employees.  It seeks to find accurate information to be relayed to those who wish to know.  If you are interested in what we represent, please email coloradoloses@comcast.net for more information.  If you wish to receive our newsletter, please send your home email address along with your request.  Watch for our website www.coloradoloses.org to be available, soon.”

I’ll keep you posted…

Tell others of our efforts…get them to sign up for this newsletter.

Your non union rep…

David Ohmart

The Biggest Loser