Is IUPA gonna take it?

[Tin Man]

oops, double post...

Delete please... TY

I wonder, IUPA nor PBA reached out to the Retirees.

I ask; will they be represented too? Do their concerns matter? Do they get to vote? Is their rank at retirement and issue regarding a retiree’s representation?

I have read the IUPA Web Page and was impressed. I poked at their servers and found they are very well equipped to accommodate almost anything requested of them. (Please don’t ask me to define” poke” those who know me, know what I do.) Trust me… IUPA has very good and highly sufficient server capacity.

I have a productive suggestion. While I was wearing green, I would not appear at an advertised “Union Meeting”. We have become an Internet savvy society. I would like to suggest an Internet Meeting. I am sure there are a lot of questions and answers that can be quickly addressed without the feeling of risk of speaking out.

I have done this with gamming sites and it can be easily done for a matter as serious as this. Questions can be asked ahead of time so the union representatives can answer those questions after the initial introduction. At the beginning only the Union can speak or type. After that questions or statements could follow in an organized way. Everyone gets a number upon registering and then asked their question or passed when their turn came.

Everyone has some serious issues. We all have a lot of “Skin” in this decision. Everyone the Union potentially could represent; can be given a “Log On” to the chat to prevent “idiots” from disrupting the discussion / presentation. The Union’s use of this method would also be helpful in the future with other agencies.

As I said when I joined this site, “I will never do an anonymous post” and this post makes me a bit nervous because I’m under attack by the Administration’s civilians now (and it hurts). There is a very large number of Retiree’s. Does our retirement Rank matter to join? If our votes count too; we should be included. (BTW, my rank was very low)

A third meeting could be done without the fear of personally appearing at a location.

Just my suggestions, feel free to attack the suggestion, but please don’t attack me. I’m just trying to help.

Interesting suggestion. I would hope that something like this could be accommodated. If you can log into your bank account, with various codes and password(s), why not the union site. Once your approved as being a member or perhaps a retired member, then, you could vote and vote once, programs are used to make sure you vote only once. Then, the pressure would be off.

I wonder, IUPA nor PBA reached out to the Retirees.
*******To answer your question, no. Retirees will not have input and cannot join the union. This is for current employees. However we will obviously lobby for your concerns as we will be retirees soon as well. You can join the IUPA as associate members. Simply go to the their main website and submit an application. You get a lot of great benefits for savings on car rentals, Ford purchase program, education incentives, life insurance and a lot more.

In response to the Internet meeting; good idea but the goal of the meetings is to educate, answer questions and get cards signed. We can also govern who attends the meeting. That would not be practical with an online meeting. That in mind, we will implement a feedback/FAQ section on deputies IUPA website that will allow questions to be asked and answers posted. The questions and answers raised during the meetings will be posted soon. I encourage those who have questions to attend the meeting tonight. The agency cannot do anything to you. Keep in mind if you sign or signed a card, your information is confidential and you are protected under statute 447 as being involved in union activity and any retaliation will be dealt with accordingly.



I ask; will they be represented too? Do their concerns matter? Do they get to vote? Is their rank at retirement and issue regarding a retiree’s representation?

I have read the IUPA Web Page and was impressed. I poked at their servers and found they are very well equipped to accommodate almost anything requested of them. (Please don’t ask me to define” poke” those who know me, know what I do.) Trust me… IUPA has very good and highly sufficient server capacity.

I have a productive suggestion. While I was wearing green, I would not appear at an advertised “Union Meeting”. We have become an Internet savvy society. I would like to suggest an Internet Meeting. I am sure there are a lot of questions and answers that can be quickly addressed without the feeling of risk of speaking out.

I have done this with gamming sites and it can be easily done for a matter as serious as this. Questions can be asked ahead of time so the union representatives can answer those questions after the initial introduction. At the beginning only the Union can speak or type. After that questions or statements could follow in an organized way. Everyone gets a number upon registering and then asked their question or passed when their turn came.

Everyone has some serious issues. We all have a lot of “Skin” in this decision. Everyone the Union potentially could represent; can be given a “Log On” to the chat to prevent “idiots” from disrupting the discussion / presentation. The Union’s use of this method would also be helpful in the future with other agencies.

As I said when I joined this site, “I will never do an anonymous post” and this post makes me a bit nervous because I’m under attack by the Administration’s civilians now (and it hurts). There is a very large number of Retiree’s. Does our retirement Rank matter to join? If our votes count too; we should be included. (BTW, my rank was very low)

A third meeting could be done without the fear of personally appearing at a location.

Just my suggestions, feel free to attack the suggestion, but please don’t attack me. I’m just trying to help.

Interesting suggestion. I would hope that something like this could be accommodated. If you can log into your bank account, with various codes and password(s), why not the union site. Once your approved as being a member or perhaps a retired member, then, you could vote and vote once, programs are used to make sure you vote only once. Then, the pressure would be off.

IUPA is a joke, they sit under the umbrella of the AFL/CIO which is a big Democrats backing union.

FHP had IUPA a few years ago and IUPA did nothing for FHP.

Well I take that back IUPA gave up the FHP Step Pay Plan.

IUPA is a joke, they sit under the umbrella of the AFL/CIO which is a big Democrats backing union.

FHP had IUPA a few years ago and IUPA did nothing for FHP.

Well I take that back IUPA gave up the FHP Step Pay Plan.

iupa got them their largest raises since being part of a union. You need to get some facts before you bash. Iupa is coming and they will do a much better job than other unions that are out there locally.

IUPA is a joke, they sit under the umbrella of the AFL/CIO which is a big Democrats backing union.

FHP had IUPA a few years ago and IUPA did nothing for FHP.

Well I take that back IUPA gave up the FHP Step Pay Plan.

PBA gave up the step plan not IUPA.

[IUPA comrade]

IUPA is a joke, they sit under the umbrella of the AFL/CIO which is a big Democrats backing union.

FHP had IUPA a few years ago and IUPA did nothing for FHP.

Well I take that back IUPA gave up the FHP Step Pay Plan.

PBA gave up the step plan not IUPA.

For those who want facts, this is posted on LEOaffairs and is available on the Internet and through IUPA.
http://forums.leoaffairs.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=80543

FHP Trooper on IUPA
by Be Informed on 11/19/08 20:12:24

My name is Neil Mariotti and I have been a trooper with FHP since 1985. I started in Orange County and since 1987 I’ve been in the Palatka district of Troop G. When IUPA-FL Local 6000 was the collective bargaining unit for State Law Enforcement I was the FHP Board Member for FHP. I now serve as the Chairman of IUPA-FL Local 6000. I’ve been asked by IUPA to answer some questions about IUPA and its history as the SLEO bargaining unit.

To understand how bad things were before 2000, you have to have an understanding of our working conditions back then. Back then we worked a 28 day, 160 work period. ANY overtime that was earned in that period could be and was often off-set against ANY leave taken during that period. Even sick leave. When overtime was offered (ISLE) we had to work all of the 160 hours during the period! Any time off, even a sick day or family sick day meant you did not get your time and a half rate of pay if you work OT, just your flat pay rate. A good deal for the state, to say the least! Our holiday hours were another story. Think you earned that Christmas holiday? Maybe, unless you took ANY type of leave during that period. You called in sick? Well, don’t worry, we’ll use your Christmas holiday! That is just a few of the examples I can think of. IUPA change that through a new contract. We also used to be able to “bank” our holiday or as it’s called now our special comp. time. Come retirement time you could sell it back. Not under PBA. They negotiated that benefit away in the ‘90’s and sought nothing in return. IUPA took that case all the way to the Supreme Court in FL. to attempt to re-gain that benefit, but the Court ruled in favor of the state. Now we have a 240 cap on how much special comp. time we can bank thanks to the PBA.

IUPA’s biggest accomplishment has been in the area of the contract. Since 2000, IUPA held management to the Federal Fair Labor and Standards Act, they got rid of the 28 period. We now work a 40 hour work week. Now, you can plan your OT on just 5 work days, not 20! They made management adhere to the collective bargaining agreement! They were quick to file grievances and made management adhere to agreements.

On the subject of pay. .

In 2000 we received and 8% across the board pay increase in addition to a 3% retirement benefit buyback. In 2001, 2002 and 2003, we received cost of living adjustments. In 2004 we received a 5% across the board pay increase when everyone else in state government got a one-time $1,000.00 bonus! In 2006 we got a 3.6% cost of living increase.


IUPA sponsored and passed a patrol car insurance bill. It used to be if you hit a deer and totaled your car during off-duty employment, YOU could be held responsible for any monetary damages! Now, it’s covered! I know of a few troopers who “bought the car”! Now they don’t have that to worry about.


Ask yourself this, what unit is my management in favor of me electing? Ours was in favor of PBA even though by law members not in the collective bargaining are not supposed to show any favoritism to any unit. Did FHP management show support for PBA? You bet they did! Did that influence the vote of younger troopers who were not familiar with PBA? You figure it out.

In 2006 PBA challenged IUPA for control of the bargaining unit. In order to get votes they used then Col. Christopher Knight to push for troopers to vote for then in blatant disregard for Florida law. He would use any gathering of troopers in Tallahassee or in the field to “encourage” them to vote for PBA. PBA also promised that if voted in they would push for a separate bargaining unit for FHP. The Colonel and PBA said that if it came through, all our pay problems would be solved since the other agencies would no longer be “dragging us down.” They then promised that after the separate unit was established we would be able to vote on who we wanted to represent us. Well, the units passed and guess what? PBA wrote the bill so THEY would be our bargaining agent for the next three years. So much for us being able to decide. Col. Knight later resigned in disgrace when it was discovered he made up documents during an FDLE investigation in the firing of a trooper.

Keeping PBA would be like sentencing yourself to more of the same. Investigate and learn.

Neil Mariotti
Chairman, IUPA Local 6000 AFL-CIO
Be Informed

[IUPA comrade]

I know the sergeants that are "still on the fence" about the union got to be feeling pretty sore with the fence posts sticking you, so here is some more information for you to think about.
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll...16%2F811140333

Article published November 14, 2008
BGSU, police union OK contract
Pact gives officers 12% raise over 3 years, other personnel 9%
By MEGHAN GILBERT
BLADE STAFF WRITER

BOWLING GREEN - A deal has been struck between Bowling Green State University and the union representing its police officers.
Officers will get a raise of about 12 percent over the course of the new three-year contract; dispatchers and records personnel will get about a 9 percent raise.
The agreement includes a "me- too clause," so that if other hourly employees get a raise, the 23 members of the police union would get the same.
"Any time you can reach a successful conclusion to labor negotiations, it's a benefit for both the union and the administration, and we've been able to do that," BGSU police Chief James Wiegand said.
Jeremy Davies, president of Local 103 of the International Union of Police Associations, said there was some apprehension about the contract because of some mistrust with the university administration, but that it was a good compromise.
"In these economic times where people are losing their jobs, it's not bad," Mr. Davies said.
The union approved the agreement in a close vote late last week, Officer Davies said.

It will be retroactive to April 27, when the previous three-year contract expired.
Last month, the university's board of trustees voted down a fact-finding report that recommended a 19 percent pay increase for the union membership.
The union long has contended that BGSU officers are among the lowest-paid university officers in the state.
The university counters that when looking at starting salaries for the officers, BGSU is competitive.
"It was a real bone of contention and always is with this population and we have to agree to disagree," said Rebecca Ferguson, the university's assistant vice president for human resources.
An entry-level officer who was paid $18.43 an hour under the previous contract would be paid $20.93 in 2010, according to the university.
A dispatcher previously paid $14.53 would get a raise to $15.61 at the end of the new contract.
Chief Wiegand said the aspects of the contract not tied to money went well and led to a "nice package and strong contract."
Previously, officers' schedules rotated every 28 days, meaning that for one month an officer would work days, followed by a month on midnights, then a month on afternoons.
Now there is a bidding by seniority process for those shifts and the officer would have that schedule year-round.
That is something the union requested, Officer Davies said, because it's hard to completely flop one's schedule on such a regular basis.
There also is a set work schedule of four days on and two days off.
"They can look at the calendar and know exactly what their days off are so they can plan vacations, graduations, and other things well in advance," Chief Wiegand said.
The new agreement also includes language that if an officer is involved in a situation in which he uses his weapon, he has the opportunity to receive counseling and other services without using personal or sick time.
Contact Meghan Gilbert at:
mgilbert@theblade.com
or 419-724-6134.

[IUPA comrade]

From PERC http://perc.myflorida.com/news/PERC_...-_Mar_2010.pdf

International Union of Police Associations, AFL-CIO v. Sheriff of St. Lucie County v. Coastal Florida Police Benevolent Association, Inc., Case No. EL-2009-049; Election 1/20 – 1/21/10; IUPA won; Certification 1718 issued 2/9/10.

International Union of Police Associations, AFL-CIO v. Broward County Sheriff’s Office v. Florida State Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police, Inc., Case No. EL-2010-002; Election 3/3 – 3/4/10; IUPA won; Certification 1719 issued 3/22/10.

International Union of Police Associations, AFL-CIO v. Sheriff of Putnam County, Case No. EL-2010-001; Election 3/4 - 3/25/10; IUPA won; Certification 1720 issued 4/12/10.

Sheriff Mike Scott appointed Charlie Ferrante as his Chief Deputy, why, because he stated, on several occasions, that he wanted a Chief Deputy just like Dave Wilson, who he thought was "the best Chief Deputy that Lee County ever had". He wanted a relationship that Dave and then Sheriff Frank Wanicka had. Little did he know, that Dave and Frank literally hated each other, constantly arguing, in public and could be heard yelling at each other behind close doors. Some relationship. Sheriff Scott said that Charlie would be his lightening rod, keeping him (as Sheriff) void of hatred by the troops. When challenged as to why he was making Scott Ciresi a Major, his response was that if anyone had a problem with Ciresi making Major, then, they must have a problem with him being Sheriff. Charlie was going to get rid of those who oppose Mike, and so the cleaning began and continued after Mike was sworn in.

If anyone believes that Mike never knew what Charlie was doing while he was Chief Deputy, then, this would make Mike one of the blindest Sheriffs in Lee County history, or, he knew exactly what was going on. Given what Mike had said about Charlie's responsibilities, I chose he knew what was exactly going on.

This brings us to Mike's actions, promotions that weren't in the budget, numerous raises without being in the budget and development of positions/ranks, also not in the budget.

If a union had been in place, there would be a much different picture of LCSO compared to what is now in place. If a union fails a second time, then look out there will be no stopping Mike or his staff from squashing those who they feel are not for him. This is not a scare tactic, just plain fact, for if he would through his Chief Deputy to the wolves, who did his biding, he will not hesitate at anyone else.