Back in 1998-99 Mike "Kaz" proposed that there be difference between the benefits from the district differ between the teachers the union and support staff union. He as president of the De Pere teachers union at the time.
I also wrote Mike back in 2002, when I was concerned that the lack of support staff union meetings and the support from above, the UNE office that he was the president of at the time.
He wrote back explaining that while the what was written in the contact that was differing in practice wasn't as "simple issue," and that the "deviation was a critical issue to the district in maintaining its open door, community-based school system."
I of course am referring to a practice where on non-school days they (who ever they are) expected someone (not specified anywhere) to adjust their normally scheduled work hours to accommodate whatever was going on in the evening at the school (in lieu of offering it as overtime).
This of course was seen by others (myself included, and later the new business manager, Sue Buchholz) as a conflict of the fair labor standards act, as a device to evade overtime.
From then till 2011, there were a number of other bad union experiences.
Many years netted less than 1 union meeting held. And we never had that annual financial disclosure that our bylaws said was to be a yearly thing.
So when Scott Walker came along with Act 10 , in 2011 most members really saw no benefit to what they had been paying for.
In the years preceding this there were a number efforts from the membership to get the union to shape up and fly right. Petitions were circulated just so membership meetings were held. I suggested we go through, revise and understand our own bylaws. There was a membership movement to replace some of the long time officers, like Sue Smits (treasurer). While she was replaced, only a short time later she was re-powered when another officer stepped down mid-term and then the president (Janice Counihan) appointed Sue to fill the vacancy for the remainder of the term.
Overall the thing on a local level was run like a good old boys club, and the lack of support from above spelled its ultimate demise.
Toward the end that good old boys club stuff was obvious to everyone. Basically local officers were in it, for the paid trips (and drinks/lodging) to meetings in Madison, etc.. Yet there was never a general membership meeting following those trips to share what they learned at the meeting etc. So members nothing productive was coming from those. I proposed rather take any money that would have been spent on such foolishness and contribute that to the scholarship fund that the teachers union had. I also encourage we work closer with the teachers union. Something that I saw happen in the Denmark District towards the bitter end, and in the grand scheme of thing makes sense. That or I suggested we find a regional union that better reflected us, like AFSCME.
$448 dollars a year in union dues to WEAC wasn't work that we were getting out of it. And should something really stupid come from the new governor, I would fight tooth and nail against any type of forced rejoining without the ability for the local to set their own dues policy. Ultimately I'd be totally against dealing with the old uniserv officer, Sue Britz ever again. I am all for trying another union, but it has to be totally controlled by the membership.
