Christie's Financial State of Emergency

NJ insisted on that clause (0.00 / 0)

Every contract has had that clause.  NJ requires it.  Let's not beat up on CWA for something they had nothing to do with.

It's the new way of reading that clause (due to Sweeney) that you should be upset with.

---

by: princetonblue @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 14:56:48 PM UTC

Insisted? (0.00 / 0)

Everything in a contract is agreed to .

Everything!

CWA leadership must be held accountable.

Law enforcement unions DO NOT  have that clause.

CWA leadership only cares about the DUES COLLECTION  clause.

They do not care if 15% of the members get a layoff slip. They will still get the dues from the other 85%.

CWA leaders are NOT STATE WORKERS.  A layoff does not effect them. What kind of Union has leadership NOT  from the rank and file?

If you want to see their true colors have their dues collection tied to layoffs.  Reduce the dues percentage when there are layoffs.

Those CWA ba**ards will go to the Supreme Court then!  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 16:51:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Law Enforcement and CWA (0.00 / 0)

There are lots of clauses where the CWA contract differs from that of Law Enforcement.  It's because Law Enforcement is in a much better political position than the other unions.  as everyone wants the support of the police.

Even if CWA leadership were perfect, that clause would always remain, unless CWA would be willing to strike over it.    Since I can't imagine that as a strike issue, it's not the leadership's fault.

The fact that CWA leaders are not state workers is how unions work.  It's true in all public unions.  There's nothing wrong or corrupt here.  In fact, it's what you want since being a leader of a large union is a full-time job.

---

by: princetonblue @ Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 14:43:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]