Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on February 4, 2013 at 6:21pm

Rick,
First of all do you understand how a PAC and such work? It is a fallicy that union dues are going to a PAC, because it is illegal to use the union dues for politcal campaigns. There are two forms of PAC....committee and conduit. With a committee, individuals can choose to have money go towards a PAC, be it by personal check or by payroll deduction. For those funds to be used for a political donation, the committee head or personnel MUST obtain expressed consent from that member to use the funds. So essentially if a member disagree with where the money would go, they can say no, and that money can not be used.

 

With a conduit, the money raised can be used without asking permission from the individual. However, the money being raised is mentioned that it will be going for the conduit and towards political action. So if there was ay a 50/50 raffle at a union meeting, the winning ticket gets 50% of the pool and the rest goes to the conduit. It thus is the option of the member if they choose to play or not. So for a conduit, such fundraising can be done that way.

 

When it comes to making the donation, there are rules in place as to contributions by people and only so much can go to the different levels the candidate is running for. (a person running for Congress gets less than what one running for Senate could raise....same with the state level, and down to local) When it comes to making a donation, donors are to be named. So essentially saying that dues are going to political candidates is wrong.

Should members have a chance to openly discuss and vote on who receives our money? Should members who contribute to PAC Funds be able to openly discuss and vote on who receives those funds?

 

Yes, and as such it does occur. Again if giving to a PAC it is up to the individual if they want their money going to the candidate or not. For a conduit, it is up to the member to participate or not.

When it comes to ENDORSING, now there is a different aspect. Endorsing can be a decision of the body and like most decisions, conform to a 2/3 majority vote of the members present. So if say a political candidate was seeking an endorsement from a union, it is up to the members present to vote if they will support the candidate or not. The endorsement only means a majority of those present chose to endorse the candidate, it by no means obligates money, nor time from union members. As a result, you tend to see mailers etc to members reminding who the local endorsed etc to promote the candidate. It by no means tells someone how to vote or that they need to spend money on the candidate etc.

 

In my own local we have both PAC (committee and conduit) and we make endorsements. We have members who give to the PAC through payroll deduction who will refuse to have their money go to a Democrat or Republican at the federal or state level, but will give money for local races. With endorsements, we have members who disagree with who the local endorses, but it was the majority of those who were present at the meeting to make the endorsement.

 

 

Should Fire Department Members have open discussion forum on their websites?

 

Depends upon the website. If it is an official department site, then no, because that can be construed as endorsing a candidate over another, while on duty, and in an official capacity, you can not campaign on duty. It would be the same as putting political endorsement stickers on the fire engine etc, you can't do it.

For union related site or volunteer association site, such discussions could take place and I have seen debates especially on our Facebook site, but that is all it is, debate. For any actual business or decisions to take place, then business takes place at the union meeting or association meeting (for us is monthly). For business to take place, it does mean that members need to be present, be it a union or a volunteer department. If you are not present at the meetings, then your voice isn't going to be heard.

 

 

 

As for political action and what "good" has it done, well depends on perspective. From my standpoint on the local level, by endorsing and political contributions, to candidates for city council, we have staved off cuts the mayor wanted to impose and so forth. Working with them and having "friends" on the council have helped with communication to have our issues heard. Same thing at the state level, but we have also seen legilastion pushed through and passed that defines LODD and benefits associated as well as heart and lung and infectious disease provisions. From a federal level we have seen cuts to SAFER and AFG grants restored, etc. So it all depends on perspective.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by FETC on February 5, 2013 at 11:07am

John is correct. Union dues are not supporting PAC funds. It is against the law. This is a common misconception by  non-union citizens especially people who dislike unions all together. PAC fund money is a seperate donation, therefore the donation is individualized.  PAC funds around my way actually work. We have seen results from the effort. The issue with results is PAC money is targeted for specific challenges we face and/or benefits we are fighting for. The downside is it is not going to benefit the entire community's workforce or all firefighters everywhere. 

 

Open discussion forums on websites are available to departments but the official website of a fire department is not the place for an open forum debate. Most departments have an official site and the firefighter association or union will have their own website that can "endorse" political candidates, speak freely about legislation that is beneficial or threatening the service, etc. Those venues are more appropriate.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick on February 6, 2013 at 1:52pm

 Maybe I stated it wrong: I agree that "Fire Department websites" are the wrong place - I meant open forums on our Union websites.

 Also, I believe all members should be notified prior to when these actions - donations/endorsements - are going to be discussed or voted on at open meetings. Don't you agree?

 Also, saying unions dont fund PAC Funds is just not factual. You can spin it and state, "Its a seperate" donation" - or "Its your choice" - thats not factual either. The amount of each members PAC Fund Donation is set by their Union. That amount is added into the amount of dues directly withdrawn from their paycheck - not a seperate line item deduction.

 Stateing it as "Voluntary" is no factual/accurrate either - for this deduction to be made - a seperate form to authorize this is supposed to be explained to and signed by each member. In the majority of cases the employee doesnt know that law and they have never seen the form.

 Last point - for me personaly - I fully support my Union and have been a dues paying member of the U.A.W. and IAF for over 40 years(combined) - just looking for openness and honest discussion/debate and exchange of factual information. How about you?

This study done by: National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

Showed:

 " Recently, the Federal Election Commission has audited some well-known national union PACs to see if they had written authorizations from employees for the contributions the PACs were receiving. The results were astonishing.

  One national union PAC, according to the FEC audit, could not produce written authorizations for 93% of PAC contributions the FEC examined. Another national union PAC was unable to show authorizations for at least 67% of the contributions the FEC examined.

  This suggests a widespread problem: union PACs are making political contributions to federal candidates with employees' money taken without their written authorizations____________________________________________________________

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on February 6, 2013 at 3:48pm

Rick,

I think you are sill speaking in generalities than knowing what is going on. In regards to PAC money from the fire service standpoint, there are rules in place and union dues can not go towards PACs. If this is happenng in your local, then that is an issue I would be taking up with your elected officers and trustees, it is illegal for dues to be going towards PACs.

 

Now you may have a PAC deductions established and it may be going to a conduit as opposed to a committee, but you should have had knowledge of this when signing up. It is still should be a seperate line item apart from dues. It is your personal right to make those contributions or not as well as expressing where you want your money to go. If this is not happening then you need to look at the internal aspects instead of believing this is a widespread aspect, because it is illegal to use dues in that way.

 

I recall my first day on the dept and after being told how much we would make, we started seeing how fast the paycheck goes towards other aspects. We have money going towards union dues, we have money going towards a benevolent fund, money going towards a welfare fund, and can elect for a PAC etc. Being a new hire it is easy to sign forms, especially in the first days of paperwork, and not be truly informed in all the aspects. From my view here, that is what I'm seeing as a possibility, that the PAC money has been authorized but the employee may not have researched enough to really know.

 

Also, I believe all members should be notified prior to when these actions - donations/endorsements - are going to be discussed or voted on at open meetings. Don't you agree?

 

I can't speak for the actions of your local, nor your involvement, but I do know that one needs to go to meetings and be involved with the union aspects to be informed. Too often I hear members say stuff like "what is the union doing for me" etc, rarely if ever go to meetings, don't read the minutes from the meetings, and so forth....but have all the answers and gripes around the coffee table. Sorry, if you wish to be informed it does take a concerted effort on the member's part to be informed. Quite often, especially around election time, there is a build up of knowing the candidates, learning their stance on the issues and so forth......an endorsement etc typically is NOT a spur of the moment decision.

Essentially, one who actually attends meetings and stays informed is going to know abou this. As a union officer myself, I should not have to cater to any other member to ensure they know everything that is gong on or up coming. It is still a personal obligation on the part of the member to be involved and stay informed. If a member has a question or wants to know what is going on, I will tell them, but I sure am not going to make personal calls or go further out of my way to ensure members know what has transpired, there are meetings and minutes.

 

Also, saying unions dont fund PAC Funds is just not factual. You can spin it and state, "Its a seperate" donation" - or "Its your choice" - thats not factual either. The amount of each members PAC Fund Donation is set by their Union. That amount is added into the amount of dues directly withdrawn from their paycheck - not a seperate line item deduction.

 

I did already address this, but your knowledge here is wrong or your local is doing things wrong. If the amount to the PAC is added into the dues deduction, then the treasurer should be able to say how much per member is above the dues amount. Dues money can NOT be used for political candidates, dues money funds the operations of the union, there to fight legal battles, send members for educational aspects or pay for union functions etc. Dues money can't go towards candidates.

 

Where dues CAN be used for political action is in the realm of a referendum, media coverage etc that benefits all members. Say the dept is facing cuts and the union wants to get the word out to the public to contact elected officials or support a referendum, then dues money CAN be used for that. The dues money just can't be given to a candidate as a donation.

 

When it comes to dues money and spending, every member has a voice and can speak at a meeting. If one doesn't attend, then don't vetch about results later. It does take participation to have the voice heard and it is up to the member to keep up with what is going on. Every union meeting I go to there are organizations asking for money, be it charity or another local asking for a donation for an ailing member etc. It is the decision of the body to spend dues money to such things and so forth. Same thing with an endorsement, again there is a difference between an endorsement and spending money, an endorsement only needs a majority of those attending a meeting to vote. If not, who do you blame for being uninformed but yourself?

 

 

 

It seems to me that you need to be speaking up at a meeting and learning some more of how things are going on. I can't speak on the UAW aspects or other outside unions on how things are done, I do know the IAFF does differ from other unions. When it comes to PACs and political money, there are rules in place to abide by and if your local is spending dues money for candidates, that is illegal. There are parameters in place on how PACs go and anyone from the IAFF can help you on understanding things. I have been in enough conferences and so forth when it came to political action to know dues can not go towards candidates and a PAC does need permission to use the money. A conduit does not need expressed endorsement to spend money, but it is up to the individual to participate in the conduit or not. Personally, I think you need to be going back to your local and discuss your issues there, not on the internet.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick on February 6, 2013 at 4:22pm

 You present valid points - yet you try to insinuate I have "wrong info" - are you saying the study using facts from the Federal Elections commission that states, "FEC audit, could not produce written authorizations for 93% of PAC contributions the FEC examined. Another national union PAC was unable to show authorizations for at least 67% of the contributions the FEC examined.

  This suggests a widespread problem: union PACs are making political contributions to federal candidates with employees' money taken without their written authorizations."

Your saying their wrong?

 How can you say I am wrong they did the study?

 I also respect your encouragement of being at Union Meetings - don't assume you understand my level of involvement.

 Yes, there are rules and laws - but for far too long - most members don't even know that there's donations or contributions being given - why - many members as you know dont have the ability(due to work or family) to be at every meeting or session - so where do they get this info?

 If you as a "Union Rep" don't feel it's part of your job to "Go out of your way" to inform others - who will?

 Lastly - I take great exception to your statement, "Personally, I think you need to be going back to your local and discuss your issues there, not on the internet"

 

 So you feel open discussions about this topic is wrong ?

 

  That's part of the issue and question : How do we get the information when even Union Reps feel it's wrong to openly discuss it or they refuse to acknowledge the problem exsists - even when a Federal Study proves it?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on February 6, 2013 at 7:46pm

Rick,

 

I take a study facilitated by a group that is looking to weaken union involvement with a grain of salt. I am further saying I can't speak as to how other unions are operating such as UAW, etc, I am only familiar with the IAFF and the factors you are speaking of of union dues being used for political campaigns is illegal.

 

I don't understand your level of involvement with your local, but you come across as someone who isn't really familiar of how things work, or supposed to work. Again, much of the stuff you bring up here should be brought up at your own union meeting. Every member has a right to know where there dues are going as well as any other money for anything else. The same thing with endorsements, discussions on local sites and so forth, all stuff you can bring up at a meeting to facilitate changes or at least grasp a further understanding.

If you say most members don't know there are contributions being made....again address your local, bring the subject up at a meeting, get people informed so they attend meetings.....it really is that simple. I understand many members can't be at every meeting, but there should be meeting minutes, there should be stewards and contact info, it is as simple as sending an email or making a phone call, or even talking with someone at the station who does attend more. However, when it comes to decisions like endorsements and debate on the business of the local, that can only take place at a meeting. If you wish to address an issue or raise a topic, then make a concerted effort to make it to a meeting.

 

 

If you as a "Union Rep" don't feel it's part of your job to "Go out of your way" to inform others - who will?

 

When I said as a rep and going out of my way to inform others, it comes down to essentially doing my job  and ensuring the message gets out in form of minutes or available for calls. Basically, I am not going to look at a meeting sign in and see who attended and who didn't and then make a personal phone call to someone to inform them of what transpired. That is why minutes are sent out and I'm available for calls. There are some issues that do entail more detailed accounts as well as going to stations to talk with members, but there is also an area of personal responsibility as well. Much of the stuff you are bringing up here truly does befall the personal responsibility of a member. If you have an issue with who the local endorses etc, make a meeting, I can not cast a vote for you if you are not there.

If you don't contact me or ask questions, then how do I know you have an issue? I will send out a meeting notice to all members and ask for input if people have issues. If only a couple respond back, should I have to make a personal call to everyone else? No. I put out the minutes and give my report, if there are no questions or feedback, is it up to me to make a personal call to you to bring you up to date? No. There is some personal responsibility that needs to take place by the member.

 

 

Lastly - I take great exception to your statement, "Personally, I think you need to be going back to your local and discuss your issues there, not on the internet"

So you feel open discussions about this topic is wrong ?

 

Not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying the issues you are bringing up here should be addressed at your local level. I am not attacking you, nor dissuading discussion, but much of what you are bringing up here is easily addressed from a local standpoint. I can not speak as to how your local operates, I do not know how dues and financials are established by your local. I do not know how politcial action is addressed in your local. I do not know what websites or facebook pages your local uses and so forth. Much of the issues you bring up here......in a general format......is easily addressed and answered by your own local. I am trying to help you and guide you to seek that route to obtain a better understanding and information.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick on February 6, 2013 at 8:35pm

 Thanks - for the most part we seem to agree.

 All Unions should present agendas for their meetings and "meeting minutes" should be sent out afterwords - is that a fair statement?

 All dues paying members should be informed of the PAC fund contribution as being "Voluntary" and all members should sign deduction authorizations. Is that fair to say?

 I don't like to assume - but are you stating everyone in your organization has been informed of the PAC fund laws and have all signed - either saying yes or no ? ! ?

 Do you agree or disagree that if members choose to discuss these issues at Union Meetings and or on the members website - that should in no way interfered with or denied. Do you agree?

 

 Yes you do seem helpful - maybe we are getting sensitive in this exchange - its not my intention to insult or down play your opinions.

 We just disagree.

   In a perfect world - we would all be equal - I just don't think supporting Politicians who are the voting force behind our benefits and bargaining rights being reduced is a smart move.

 I for one and there are others who agree - that the forms should be filled out before the money is taken - that agenda's should be made public before the checks are written and a open member vote should take place prior to checks being cashed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on February 7, 2013 at 12:22am

All Unions should present agendas for their meetings and "meeting minutes" should be sent out afterwords - is that a fair statement?

 

Pretty fair. Presenting an agenda perhaps not so much, unless there is a pressing issue that needs discussion. Although, for the most part, those tend to make themselves known when you have members speaking up and hoping to address particular issues. For the most part though an agenda works itself pretty constant, so one would see how things go.

Minutes should definately sent out afterwards and in a relatively quick turnaround...no more than a couple days. For us, minutes are sent through dept email and posted at each station as well as available online through our local site.

 

All dues paying members should be informed of the PAC fund contribution as being "Voluntary" and all members should sign deduction authorizations. Is that fair to say?

 

This should be noted to all members that such contributions are on a voluntary basis. When it comes to deduction authorizations, I would also ensure that it is known if it is a committee or conduit to which the funds go. A committee takes a bit more work because each individual member would have to be contatcted seperately in order to use funds, a conduit that doesn't need to happen.

 

I don't like to assume - but are you stating everyone in your organization has been informed of the PAC fund laws and have all signed - either saying yes or no ? ! ?

 

For those that participate in the PAC, yes. We don't have every member opting to pay into the PAC and I know a guy I was hired with who contributed and is contacted to use money for candidates. I chose not to sign up then and I don't have auto withdrawl to our PAC, I prefer to write my own checks. However, for those that do have auto withdrawl, they are contacted any time their funds could be used for a candidate. We don't have a auto withdrawl for a conduit and our conduit funds tend to be built using 50/50 raffles.

 

When it comes to the political donations aspects though, our guys are very informed and on top of all the rules. There have been some issues within the state organization etc where funds were wrongly used for political donations and there was fallout ensuing. Another issue was a couple retired guys asked about the local paying for the first year membership for the retired FF state organization. It was approved, but the paperwork then mentioned that $5 of the $40 renewal fee would go towards the organization's PAC. We had to look into this to ensure that union dues were not being used for a PAC contribution and had to change what was given to ensure only the member opted to contribute.

 

Do you agree or disagree that if members choose to discuss these issues at Union Meetings and or on the members website - that should in no way interfered with or denied. Do you agree?

 

Debate, differences, and compromises have been the basic establishment of our current form of government. Free and open debate should be encouraged and dialogue established. Not everyone is going to agree with everyone else. Having a voice and opportunity to have one's say is just as imperative to a union local as it is with our government. Having that discussion in a union meeting is absolutely imperative and is the place to have it and it should be encouraged and not hindered in any way. Having the debate in a private, secured social media page, or section of the local website is fine. I would caution have private debates in a public atmosphere without having some checks and balance in place. I wouldn't advocate having such debates affecting other union members on say an open forum page on facebook etc, especially if the general public could misconstrue what is being debated. Keep the discussions in house.

 

In a perfect world - we would all be equal - I just don't think supporting Politicians who are the voting force behind our benefits and bargaining rights being reduced is a smart move.

 

Nor would I and I think about those aspects of a candidate before I worry about how they stand on other issues. From a union standpoint, it is imperative that a union endorse and back those candidates who are most supportive of the union position. It is no different than the NRA supporting gun candidates, etc. I do think the IAFF is one of the better unions when it comes to such things because there is that local autonomy and if the IAFF endorses certain candidates, a local can choose not to.

 

This is why if there are issues people may see with a certain candidate that they have their voice. When it comes to local elections or state elections, it is imperative people know where the candidates stand on the issues. When a local endorses a candidate, it should be the one that would best support their causes and it is important for the local to make that infomed decision. I have seen members who did not agree with the local position because they felt social or gun issues etc were more important. So in the end it is about that informed decision and also why a member should be able to elect how their PAC money would go.

 

I for one and there are others who agree - that the forms should be filled out before the money is taken - that agenda's should be made public before the checks are written and a open member vote should take place prior to checks being cashed.

 

I would agree with you there, so it is important on your end to ensure you know how things are being conducted internally. Again ensure you know if the funds are going towards a committee or conduit. If it is a conduit and members chose to sign up, then all it takes to use that money is a simple majority of members present at a meeting. It is possible to facillitate change and even impose rules of when or how checks are made, but you do have to get people to agree with you and to get those changes established. Same thing with your local's Constitution and By-laws, those could also be looked at and changes made....it does take a vote of the union body as opposed to a simple majority of the members present at a meeting to incur those changes.

 

If you question how things are being run, it is your right, and any other member's right, to know how the local's money is being spent and to have that transparency. If the elected officials of the local give you grief on things, you can go to the IAFF and charges can be made and so forth. There are avenues to ensure transparency and that rules are being followed. If you do have questions on things, it helps to talk with those who are elected, it is their job to work for the members. I would also encourage those who have issues with the elected leaders to run for positions as well. I learned so much more once obtaining a position on the board than what I learned through just meetings and functions.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick on February 7, 2013 at 12:52am

 Solid advise - I wish everyone could strive to be more correct in their dealings and less Politically correct. :)

 

 I believe what i heard is you say - get involved - inquire when unsure or concerned - educate yourself and speak up! I like that!

 

 I have been bumping heads over this for a while - you have actually restored some of my motivation. I know most people want things to be correct - its just some times those in controlling positions(Politically Speaking) have alternate agenda's.

 I hope and also encourage more people to get involved. Unfortunately - especially with newer guys - they tend to follow the status quo. The older guys just either play the game or divorce themselves.

 Thanks for the exchange. We did actually educate some people with these posts - Thanks again.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion