Unions Intimidating Gist
Thursday, March 17, 2011
The tension which exists between Education Commissioner Deborah Gist and the leadership of the teachers’ unions is simmering at a hotter level than usual this week as the Commissioner faces down an unfair labor practice complaint filed against her. But the complaint brings forth an important question of just who is intimidating whom when teachers and educational professionals are thrust into the midst of political battles.
The tireless and ever steely Gist was due for a complaint hearing before the union-sympathizing state Labor Relations Board (LRB) Tuesday which was prompted by an unfair labor practice charge filed against her by the union representing workers at her own RI Department of Education (RIDE).
The core of the complaint was that Gist violated state labor laws when she sent an e-mail out last February, at the height of the Central Falls teacher firing tempest, which basically advised her own employees that it would not be a great idea to physically partake in a protest rally which was designed to denigrate RIDE’s own school transformation policy effort at the failing high school.
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTThe email stated that she would not hesitate to take action against anyone purposefully working against RIDE’s own Education Department’s policies (what’s so unreasonable about that?)
After the email was sent, the union claims it requested “clarification” on the email from Gist, so that “if they so desired, professional RIDE staff could attend the rally free from fear of reprisal.” (What?! How long would a private sector worker last in their job if they insisted on marching outside with protest signs saying nasty things about their own boss and their company’s policies?!)
When Gist refused to “clarify” further, surprise, surprise, the union filed the unfair labor practice charge.
But a closer look at the multi-layered union complaint reveals that the same type of charges could be leveled against the leadership of the teachers’ unions themselves if you just transfer to a different venue. How about several teachers’ professional orientation sessions held at the height of the campaign season last fall where the unions displayed a disturbingly aggressive effort to manipulate the teacher vote as they targeted several high profile incumbents in General Assembly races, most notably in campaigns which defeated Doug Gablinske in Bristol and David Caprio in Narragansett?
First: The complaint says Gist “interfered with, restrained and coerced members”….Do they mean like how the teachers during professional orientations are coerced into showing the proper amount of political preference to the union-backed candidate, whose campaign manager is allowed to give a blatant political speech during orientation?
Second: The complaint says Gist “created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation”…. Do they mean like the kind of intimidation atmosphere which is created when hundreds of workers report as required during professional workday hours in a taxpayer-funded public school building then discover their orientation is actually a political rally and teachers are urged by a top statewide union official , speaking from the stage who to vote for and who to vote against? Does it seem like intimidation when they pass around sign-up sheets for campaign volunteering for a candidate and many teachers may feel uncomfortable to let that sign-up sheet pass by without faking some interest?
Third: The complaint also cites “…..members wanting to attend a rally, but fearful they could lose their jobs or face job punishment if they do not tow a certain line…..” What about the employees who don’t want to “toe the union line” when such strong-armed political pressure is applied by those who hold much sway over their jobs and incomes, with the vivid reminder they’re in every paycheck when dues are automatically deducted from their pay? Intimidating indeed.
Though the unions counter that they are permitted by contract to devote a block of time during orientation sessions to political speeches, the question remains why? And how does this remain tolerated and apparently legal in this state?
The Labor Relations Board and individual school districts have for too long looked the other way as certain officials in statewide teacher union leadership have intermingled the professional workplace with their vengeful political agenda aimed solely at keeping their contracts–and now threatened pension system—intact.
They can continue to claim they remain within the letter of the law, but it seems clear that it constitutes intimidation when the union blatantly connects a person’s job—to their vote—and connects a person’s job--- to their level of “political enthusiasm” during their professional workday at their professional place of employment.
Union leadership should be mindful of the unfair labor practice charges they file. Accusations of intimidation work both ways.
Donna Perry is a Communications Consultant for the RI Statewide Coalition (RISC) www.statewidecoalition.com
Related Articles
- Why Watson Is Not Wrong
- The Coming Collapse
- Chafee’s Budget: A Taxing Attack on the Middle Class
- Providence: The Capital of Insecurity
- The Rallying Cry of the New Rich
