|
H.E.A.R.D.
Don't see news about your
site and issues? Send an email to news@heardny.org
If your news is more of an
opinion or a gripe please use the forum.
Subscribers
receive more details. Subscribe now, send an email to news@heardny.org
Letters of
interests click here
December 2003
(correction and update)
Word has it that
our very democratic union has not treated the workers at the
health centers very nicely. All health center employees were
offered "buy-outs" in August of 2003. They are being
laid-off but if they wish to work in the new Harlem Center they must
reapply like any common person off the street and yet train new
staff at the new Harlem Center for positions they were denied.
These employees are members of Local 153/OPEIU.
Some other curious
facts about work at the health centers: 1) Security
temporary workers make $25 an hour and Union security workers make
$20 an hour. 2) Temps take one hour for lunch, do not punch in or
out for it and get paid for lunch, while Union security must punch
in and out for lunch and do not get paid for it. 3) Temps
work at their convenience; they pick the tours that are good for
them. Union security must change their tours and locations
to suit the temps, many times the day before, with no regard for
the Union security personal or family life. 4) Temps stay at the
front desk, doing very little patrolling, while Union security
must patrol all the time. 5) Temps take vacations and days off at
will, while Union security had vacation days cancelled to suit the
temps. There are a few other disparities but these should
suffice for now. It would seem that union
workers WITHIN the union have less rights than Hotel Union
workers. What's the story here? We would like the
Union to respond to these allegations.
Thank you
Claudio L. for the information.
Hotel Employee Advocates for Real Democracy
Newsletter
Vol.1 Issue 2 Issue2
August 2003
"It
is not the function of our Union to keep the membership from
falling into error; it is the function of the membership to keep
the Union from falling into error." –
paraphrasing Robert H. Jackson
Lets look at the REAL issues.
Our
Union has been doing a commendable job as of late with the
enforcement of our contract.
Our weekly newspaper, the Hotel Voice, regularly features
wins against management at various hotel shops.
This is a good thing, and all Union members need to
acknowledge these achievements.
The most urgent issue facing our Union today is its total
lack of democracy and subsequent lack of accountability of the
Union officers to the membership.
Part of the preamble to the Local 6 By-Laws states:
The democratic control of our union by its members since
its founding has been one of its distinguishing marks. Perhaps
that was true 20 years ago but is certainly is no longer the case
today.
One of the most essential elements of any democratically
run organization is access to information.
How many of the members reading this newsletter know the
answer to the following two questions:
How many membership meetings is Local 6 required to have?
How many delegates to the Local 6 Delegate Assembly can you
name and what hotels do they hail from?
As to the first question, none.
As to the second question, not even the writer knows the
answer, yet, the Delegate Assembly is the representative body
of Local 6!
We believe that it is necessary to amend the By-Laws of
Local 6 to help open up this very closed and undemocratic
situation.
We believe the following two amendments to the Local 6
By-Laws can start us off on the right track.
Amending Article III
by adding the following Section 2a to read as follows:
Section
2a: Meetings of the general
membership shall be held at least once a year.
The Business Manager or proxy will address the
membership and deliver a state
of the Union. This
meeting shall take place each January the date to be set by the
Executive Board. Special
meetings of the general membership may be held at the direction of
the Executive Board on not less than seven days written notice,
mailed to each member at his last known address.
Presently there is no provision or requirement for Local 6
to hold any membership meetings.
This amendment would address this serious lapse.
The meeting itself would provide the opportunity for
members to meet other members from various shops and possibly
exchange ideas.
Another amendment possibly even more important than the
above relates to the Delegate Assembly.
Amending Article V Section 7. Additions are underlined
Section 7. The
votes cast by members of this Local shall be counted, and the
results for each office shall be announced and published
separately in the union newsletter—the Hotel
Voice—or mailed directly to all members,
and the results for delegates to the assembly shall also
display their respective hotels and departments. The
Secretary-Treasurer shall preserve for one year the ballots and
all other records pertaining to the election.
According to Article IV Section 1d of the Local 6 By-Laws, the
Delegate Assembly
is the representative body of the membership of the Union.
If this is the case, how is it that Local 6 members do not know
who they are or how to reach them? This amendment would help
address this issue.
Do you agree? If
you agree that these amendments can help us democratize Local 6
please send an email to
petition@heardny.org
In
order to amend the By-Laws of Local 6 it is necessary to obtain
the signatures of 1000 members in good standing.
(Come to think of it, the way our By-Laws are amended need some
changes too.) If you email H.E.A.R.D. at the above
address we will send
you two petition forms for Local 6 members to sign.
June 17 2003
Yes the wheels of change revolve
slowly. The reservations delegate at W New York discovered
that not only were Whatever Whenever agents doing reservations
work (see March news below) but that Sales Assistants were also inputting and making
reservations and modifications--at all properties. [
For those who are unfamiliar
with what happened to the Reservations Department at Starwood
hotels in New York City see August news here.]
After accumulating the necessary
statistics showing that 30% of the reservations input was being
performed by conference and sales managers--Clearly, non-union
employees.--, the Delegate informed the union, which promptly
called a meeting between the Union and management. The
meeting was attended by Local 153 Business Agent, Rebecca;
NYMHTC Business Agent Oscar; the Customer Care representative,
Robert; Brad, representing Starwood; and Human
Resources Director Eric. Brad, the Area director of
the hotels in question, argued that
the Memorandum of Understanding, signed in June of 2002, permitted
non-union employees to perform Reservations tasks and that this
was premised on one line: Reservation related
work previously preformed by non-union employees would continue at
the company's discretion. The reservation delegate argued that
reservations
work was not the same as reservations
related.
We went back and forth on this issue.
The Union representative implied that an "emergency
meeting" might be required at each of the properties,
(Emergency meetings entail calling everyone off work to a meeting
in the hotel lobby.) or arbitration.
After looking over the report
provided by the Delegate that demonstrated that non-union
employees were doing 30% of the input, Brad realized that it pointed to a major
flaw in this new system they had developed. He therefore
decided that he would look over the situation to come up with a
solution to this very sticky situation.
The Delegate has no problem in
searching for solutions to this quagmire. The delegate is
comforted by the fact that if taken to arbitration the
Union will win. If perchance the Union fails, the
Customer Care Agents still will win because: reservations
work previously performed by non-union employees would continue at
the company's discretion, therefore, Customer Care Agents need
NOT perform them. We shall not be sharing work with
non-union employees, period! When we consider the
wording of the revised agreement's terms: As
to...the five (5) current Customer Care Reservation Agents...Starwood
may not terminate the ... Agents from employment by layoffs or
other economic reason.
Could there be anything
sweeter than that?
March 13 2003
The Union had to send
representatives to a W property to make clear to management that
WW agents and non-union personnel are prohibited from doing
reservations work. Oscar, from Local 6, & Rebecca from
Local 153, were the harbingers of bad tidings to management.
Oscar told management that illegal job combinations were never
part of the deal they signed in May of 2002.
It seems that the $8 agents
along with their "Atari" like reservations system in Massachusetts
are unable to handle the simplest reservations task. Since
the management has in effect eliminated on-site reservations staff
they have had to open up the reservations menu to everyone in the
hotel to make reservations and changes that guests are
demanding. This has certainly thrown a monkey wrench in
management's machinations to install a computer in housekeeping so
that room attendants could effect changes as well--just
kidding.
The issue is far from
settled, however. Management has deluded itself into
believing that only one of their five W properties must adhere to
the prohibition of illegal job combinations. Fortunately for
us, nothing could be further from the truth. I cannot give
the details why in this space but the truth will out soon.
February 2003
As
a member of the Sheraton Customer Care (formally reservation) . I
was wondering why all these so called update negotiation
between Starwood and the Union only seem to reflect on the W
Hotels? Are we not of the same company? Shouldn't any update/amendment
to the contract reflect all NYC Starwood reservation
departments? Or is this something as a "side agreement"
limited to certain properties?
My next question is? Has Starwood been able to convince the union
that all these so called changes in reservation fall under
"technological" which requires job modification at their
will? First, It was to down size the departments and
transfer all the calls to Fall River- which we know is
ineffective. Second, to have certain Internet bookings such
as Travelscape forward to Fall River to process, we have even been
told that larger convention groups booked thru housing bureaus
such as Travel Planners will be forwarded to Fall River. The
Sheraton has even been selected as a test hotel to have certain
FIT's accounts book their allotments online. The bottom line is we
are evolving into more of a "complaint and fix"
department. It seems that this whole situation has already been
mapped out for us since the beginning of these Starwood and Union
negotiations. It's a shame we as adults are left in the dark with
no voice, while we can see the writing on the wall.
[ Go
to Forum for an answer to these questions.]
November 2002
The union and Starwood have agreed to now
decentralize the W Reservations agents. Implementation to be
completed by February 12th
October 2002
The Union has taken notice of the working conditions that the
reservations department is working under based on the pictures
from this website and has requested that Starwood correct the
situation. The options available are: find a bigger office,
breakdown a wall in the current office, or decentralize! We shall
see.
September News
Sept 17th 2002
Michael Simo and Peter Ward were able to forge a new agreement
with Starwood Hotels and Resorts that restores the job security of
the reservation agents at W New York. This is very good news
indeed; however, it does not protect the jobs of the Sheraton
employees or the future of reservations in New York
City. On behalf of my unit I thank the New York Hotel
& Motel Trades Council for making a
major--albeit--incomplete correction.
Sept 8th 2002
I met with Mr. Michael Simo--President of Local 6 and Regional
Director of the NY Hotel & Motel Trades Council--on Sept. 9
2002 over the revised wording of the Memorandum of Agreement. He
is in agreement in principal that the agreement should be
modified. Now it is up to Starwood and the lawyers to hash it out.
Overall I had a good impression of Mr. Simo and he seems sincerely
concerned. We shall see what time brings.
August 2002
MOVED TO MEMBERS ONLY
|