Home   Uninsured   Racism    Medicare    Medicaid/Medi-Cal    Mental Health    Healthcare Reform    War    Economics    All Articles   Search

2003-12-23 -- Two important articles on healthcare workers under attack


Service Employees Local 660, Los Angeles County Workers Beat Back
$400-$1900 per year Increases in Health Insurance Premiums.  SEIU 660
was at the forfront in campaign to raise $168 million additional
revenue for health department, saving 3 hospitals.  Corporate share of
taxes has dropped from 40% to 10% since WWII. Workers refused to pay
more.  We in San Francisco need to start our own campaign against the
cuts the City is sure to demand in a few months.


Health Care Workers in British Columbia Face Privatization, Sweetheart
Contract. Workers in Canada, particularly British Columbia, are under
intense attack as business and government work together to privatize
public services, particularly health care.




 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Labor Notes, January, 2004

Service Employees Local 660, Los Angeles County Workers Beat Back
$400-$1900 per year Increases in Health Insurance Premiums.

       January 2004

Members of Service Employees Local 660 beat back management's demand
to force workers to pay increases in health insurance premiums, after
hundreds of worksite protests throughout Los Angeles County and
massive rallies in the streets and at the offices of the County Board
of Supervisors.

SEIU Local 660 represents 50,000 Los Angeles County workers in
hundreds of classifications, including nurses, clerks, librarians,
welfare workers, social workers, road workers, court employees, and
many others.

With a state budget deficit earlier this year of $48 billion, there
was so little money coming to Los Angeles County from the state that
the County's Department of Health Services alone had a deficit of over
$700 million, and was threatening to close hospitals and other health
facilities.

DRAWING THE LINE

Late last year Local 660 spearheaded a campaign that brought $168
million into the County's health system and saved three hospitals from
closing. That laid the groundwork for this year's contract
negotiations.

Saying "we've done our part, now you stand by us," Local 660 members
told County Supervisors that they were "drawing the line" and would
not pay any of the double-digit health insurance increases that the
insurance companies were demanding from the county, nor any increase
in the co-pays that the County was demanding.

The health insurance increases would have amounted to between $400 and
$1,900 per member a year, depending on the type of coverage they had.

Furthermore, the County came to the bargaining table this year saying
that there would be no money for raises because of the deficit in the
County budget.

Over 25,000 Local 660 members had gone on strike three years ago over
County foot-dragging during contract negotiations, crippling
government agencies throughout the entire county, and that memory was
fresh in everyone's mind.

Local 660 members also distributed a leaflet showing that taxes paid
by corporations had dropped from 40 percent during World War II to
less than 10 percent today, to explain why there was such a huge
deficit in government budgets. The leaflet also urged support for
bills in the state legislature to close tax loopholes on corporations
and raise the top income tax bracket on the very wealthy.

Health Care for All-California, a state-wide health care reform
organization which Local 660 supports, urged support for a bill in the
state legislature that would set up a non-profit, single-payer health
care system in California and save billions of dollars in health care
costs.

Local 660 also worked in coalition with seven other unions that are
negotiating with the County, including firefighters and sheriffs - the
sheriffs are so frustrated with their bargaining that they've been
having "Blue Flu" days for months.

A joint rally of many thousands of workers from all eight unions in
October, with many workers taking the day off work to attend, sent a
message that things could potentially get worse. Despite the tough
economic situation, the County Board of Supervisors realized they had
a full plate of problems on their hands, and that they had to defuse
the situation.

On November 11, after nearly 24 hours of straight bargaining, and
threats of more job actions, the County settled with Local 660.

There would be no health insurance increases passed on to the workers,
no increase in the current $5 co-pay, and a 5 percent pay increase
over the life of a new three-year agreement, with one caveat: if the
County's financial situation deteriorates to an emergency crisis
level-nearing bankruptcy-then the county may redirect some or all of
the 5 percent pay increase to help save the county government.

While this last part is distasteful to many, it was felt by most that
this was the best that could be achieved under the circumstances. The
most important thing was that workers defeated management's drive to
push increased health care costs onto their shoulders, and that they
struggled to create more unity and promote more progressive solutions.

 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Labor Notes, January 2004


Health Care Workers in British Columbia Face Privatization, Sweetheart
Contract

by Kaj Hasselriis


Health care workers on Canada's west coast are getting a taste of
"sweetheart contracts" that favor multinational corporations over
workers' rights, and the Canadian labor movement is divided on how to
respond.

Last year, the far-right provincial government in British Columbia
rammed through legislation gutting the contract protections enjoyed by
hospital and nursing home workers-including successor rights (rights
that guarantee that jobs will remain union jobs)-so that they could
privatize thousands of health care jobs.

The change affected food service workers, housekeepers, laundry
workers, and security guards at hospitals and nursing homes across the
province, most of whom are represented by the Hospital Employees'
Union, a wing of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), Canada
's largest union. Most of these workers are women, and many of them
are immigrants and workers of color.

SWEETHEART DEALS

The government's actions set off a feeding frenzy by huge corporations
like Sodexho and Aramark, anxious to profit from the privatization of
the public health care system by renegotiating labor conditions and
paying low wages. CUPE's traditionally strong opposition to such moves
has meant that these companies perceive the union as a roadblock.

This time around-even before the contracts were officially awarded-the
corporations signed a deal with a rival union: the Industrial, Wood
and Allied Workers of Canada (IWA).

Under the deal, the workers would be re-hired by a special company set
up by the IWA. The union would receive payments from the companies for
each worker and the workers would see provisions of their
CUPE-negotiated contract slashed.

For most of the workers affected, this meant a crippling pay cut (from
$18 Cdn an hour to $9) and the elimination of most, if not all,
benefits.

Says Mavis Hearn Blake, a housekeeper: "I'm shocked that IWA Local
3567, the union that has signed these deals with multinational
companies in health care, says it's okay for women workers to take a
wage drop from $17 an hour to $10.25 an hour. Where is the fairness in
that?"

Another housekeeper, Shahida Bains, says she exchanged these words
with a recruiter at an IWA job fair: "When I came to Canada 30 years
ago from Uganda I was making $8 per hour. She told me I am lucky to
have a job. "

'I'm shocked that IWA Local 3567, the union that has signed these
deals with multinational companies, says it's okay for women workers
to take a wage drop from $17 an hour to $10.25 an hour. Where is the
fairness in that?'

CUPE is mobilizing opposition to the deal, and they're getting a lot
of help from allies in the Canadian labor movement. The Federations of
Labor in five Canadian provinces-British Columbia, Ontario, Alberta,
New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island-have called on unions to shun
"sweetheart contracts" that promote privatization and undermine health
care delivery and wages.

VIOLATION

An impartial umpire appointed by the Canadian Labour Congress, Canada'
s largest labor federation, recently ruled that HEU/CUPE has an
established work relationship with British Columbia's health care
workers, and that the IWA's "voluntary recognition agreements" violate
the CLC constitution.

But not everyone in Canada's labor movement is supporting CUPE as
strongly.

CUPE's call for sanctions has not been supported by the private sector
unions-many of which are in merger talks with the IWA. CLC President
Ken Georgetti says the two unions should work out their own
differences.

During an emotional debate at last fall's CUPE national convention,
delegates demanded that something be done to stop the IWA and force
the CLC into action.

Brenda Jordison, a nursing home worker for 24 years, said, "I knew
that we had a struggle with our employer and I knew that we had one
with the government, but I never in my wildest imagination thought I
would be in a fight with a labor union, the IWA, a member of the CLC."

At CUPE's convention, Paul Moist was elected national president. So
far, this issue has dominated his first term, as he tries to convince
Canada's labor movement to take decisive action against the
privatization plans. "We can't have a union getting in bed with the
boss and forcing low wages on desperate people," he says.

Kaj Hasselriis is a former staff person for CUPE's communications
department, currently working as a journalist in Winnipeg.