capsfightingunioncaucus

Rank and File Scientists Demanding our Rights

CAPS Fighting Union Caucus Election Bulletin #3

Brothers and Sister CAPS members,

We have stated before that CAPS is an undemocratic organization whose leadership does not believe in a role for the Rank and File other than trusting the lawyers with our 1.5 million dollars a year.  We have stated that the leadership and the law firm that directs the board have colluded to make it impossible for members to assert our rights.   Many of you may have thought I exaggerated because such a claim is unbelievable but just this week the Executive Director stepped in it again.  Look at the series of emails between CAPS Fighting Union Caucus Candidate for Treasurer  Giorgio Cosentino and CAPS executive director Chris Voight.

In short, following our discovery that the bylaws were changed in February 2011 without notice to the membership, we learned that the members no longer had the right to an annual membership meeting but that a membership meeting could be convened if a petition was submitted with 5% of the membership signing.   So Brother Giorgio wrote to Blanning and Baker employee Executive Director of CAPS Chris   Voight and asked, “I understand members should not be provided with the membership list, so what procedure does CAPS want-expect members to follow when a member wants to circulate a petition for signatures in accordance with the bylaws?  Thanks for the clarification.”

If the new rule in the bylaws was genuine the answer would have read something like.  “Attached is the PDF of the proper petition fill it out with 126 signatures and the staff will convene a membership meeting.”  But no, instead we got this damning incitement of the lack of respect for bylaws by these thieves posing as labor consultants.

Chris responded to the request thusly:

“CAPS has that language in its bylaws as a requirement of the California Corporations Code, on advice of counsel.  Every Mutual Benefit Non Profit Corporation (MBNPC), as CAPS is organized, should have it.  But that doesn’t mean the process is practical or that it would ever be used in an organization the size and shape of CAPS.

MBNPCs take every shape and size.  In CAPS case, a “meeting of the members,” would be difficult or impossible given the size and dispersion of the membership—and the quorum requirement (50%).”

This is gibberish.  Scientists know the difference between difficult and impossible!  Going to Mars difficult-time travel impossible (given knowledge of physics today).  Holding a meeting of an organization under attack by the state, the politicians, the media pundits and the billionaires club may be difficult, especially if you have nothing to offer the membership but selling out, but it is surely not impossible!

If  CAPS did what every union does when it wants to win, in other words, ORGANIZE by offering a real discussion on how to save our salary and benefits then the membership might wake up out of their Austin/Voight imposed slumber. To the fake labor leaders of CAPS organizing means send out last minute emails.  But the members don’t come to the meetings because they see CAPS as a dues collection agency picking our pockets.  Voight and company then shrug their shoulders and blame the membership while shaking their heads claiming they did the best they could do!

A real organization that wanted to organize its membership would put all its staffers on the phone and call each member to get a commitment, staffers/(I refrain from calling them organizers because they are not) would visit job sites to build participation they would visit every worker and build the organization.  But that is not Blanning and Baker’s intention they want you to stay asleep and keep forking over the monthly dues.  Maybe we are stupid but we just talked to over 60 CAPS members in the Bay Area in the last week and not one had a good word for CAPS leadership or Blanning and Baker.  With this level of demoralization it is no surprise these fake labor leaders can’t organize a meeting!

Not to beat a dead horse (call PETA if you must) but then Voight explains in his response to Cosentino, “… that doesn’t mean the process is practical or that it would ever be used in an organization the size and shape of CAPS.”  We know we have about 2500 members but what shape is he referring to prone?  No he means top down.  Top down organizations have no interest in the members finding a road to democratic participation. In law they work on the concept of intention (recall all the right wing drivel about original intent as regard Constitutionality).  Clearly the intention of this wording is that the membership have a means of meeting.  Voight tells us this wording is enshrined in our bylaws due to the law but then when a member tries to employ this right he gets shut down.  This is clearly disregard for members rights.

But this is no surprise as we reported in CAPS rank and file election bulletin #2’s attachment with the record of the November 2010 meeting at DTSC David Miller (board member) explained to us then that no one wants to know what’s in the bylaws.  This is quite cute considering the bylaws are a contractual obligation between the membership and the organization.  The phrase I was quoting from the bylaws stated there shall be an annual membership meeting. This is what Miller told us no one cares about.  But many CAPS members work in a regulatory setting.  We know what “shall” means.  We enforce “shall” all the time.  Shall does not mean, “well if its difficult then we don’t have too”.  No it means SHALL. Now Miller stands for election in CALPERS one should wonder which of the regulations, which effect CALPERS, will Miller dismiss with such caviler disregard?

There is no doubt in our mind that the February 2011 change in the bylaws was instigated by Blanning and Baker because we caught them with their pants down and their fingers in the cookie jar. When we noticed them of their criminal neglect they hurried to the next board meeting to try to hide the evidence.  CALL CAPS DEMAND YOUR OWN COPY OF THE 2007 AND 2011 BY LAWS. READ THEM SIDE-BY-SIDE!

THEN SEND A LETTER OF DEMAND FOR THEFT OF SERVICES

ELECT:  WRIGHT, RACHLIS AND COSENTINO!

WE WILL DELIVER THAT LETTER!

Below and in reverse chronological order is Voight’s explanation that we ain’t never gonna get no damn meeting!  Not while he is running the show!

 

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Chris Voight <cvoight@capsscientists.org>
Date: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 9:35 AM
Subject: RE: CAPS petition process?
To: Giorgio Cosentino <gcosentino1964@gmail.com>

Giorgio:

CAPS has that language in its bylaws as a requirement of the California Corporations Code, on advice of counsel.  Every Mutual Benefit Non Profit Corporation (MBNPC), as CAPS is organized, should have it.  But that doesn’t mean the process is practical or that it would ever be used in an organization the size and shape of CAPS.

MBNPCs take every shape and size.  In CAPS case, a “meeting of the members,” would be difficult or impossible given the size and dispersion of the membership—and the quorum requirement (50%).  It is often challenging to get a majority of members to show up at a worksite meeting during lunch break, even with ample advance notice, a relevant agenda, and offering refreshments.  Recall the last meeting in the Oakland State Building where we have many more members in that building than showed up—even after repeated notice and the contract ratification at issue.  The logistics, cost has never prompted anyone to attempt one.  Rather, the direction of the organization is determined via regular communications, representation at the worksite, polling and periodic elections, among other things.

Christopher J. Voight

Staff Director

“Important Work Deserves Fair Pay”

www.capsscientists.org

916-441-2629

From: Giorgio Cosentino [mailto:gcosentino1964@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 9:15 AM
To: Chris Voight; pvelez@capsscientists.org; jbudroe@capsscientists.org; mcommandatore@capsscientists.org; Lisa Crvarich

Subject: Re: CAPS petition process?

Thanks, Chris.  I understand members should not be provided with the membership list, so what procedure does CAPS want-expect members to follow when a member wants to circulate a petition for signatures in accordance with the bylaws?  Thanks for the clarification.

Giorgio

 

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Giorgio Cosentino <gcosentino1964@gmail.com> wrote:

Then please tell me how to get the signatures for a petition.  What do I do?  The bylaws say I need 5% of membership to sign it.  How is it circulated?  Thanks, Chris.

Giorgio

 

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Chris Voight <cvoight@capsscientists.org> wrote:

Giorgio,

CAPS doesn’t supply the membership list to anyone, based on state law and CAPS policy.  If you want to inspect it, you can, and that can occur in neither (sic) the SF or this office, at your convenience, during business hours.

Christopher J. Voight

Staff Director

“Important Work Deserves Fair Pay”

www.capsscientists.org

916-441-2629

From: Giorgio Cosentino [mailto:gcosentino1964@gmail.com]Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 5:24 PM
To: Chris Voight
Cc: Marc.Commandatore@cdph.ca.govSubject: Re: CAPS petition process?

Yes, but the individual needs the membership list, right?  Can I please have the procedure to follow for this process, including how to obtain the membership list.  Thanks, Chris.

Giorgio

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Chris Voight <cvoight@capsscientists.org> wrote:

Giorgio,

Not sure exactly to which petition you refer, but any petition mentioned in the CAPS bylaws would need to be circulated at the behest of an individual, not the organization.

Christopher J. Voight

Staff Director

“Important Work Deserves Fair Pay”

www.capsscientists.org

916-441-2629

From: Giorgio Cosentino [mailto:gcosentino1964@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 3:55 AM
To: Marc.Commandatore@cdph.ca.gov; cvoight@capsscientists.orgSubject: CAPS petition process?

Hi Marc and Chris,

I just read the revised bylaws.  Can you or someone please explain the petition procedure?  Does CAPS circulate the petition for a member?  Thanks for the clarification.

 

Giorgio

Advertisements

September 2, 2011 - Posted by | CAPS election 2011 | , , , , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: