March 31, 2003

Union 705 of the Teamsters Likes Its Contract with Oak Park but not Management Behavior
reported by William C. Kunz

Have you ever been fired for no apparent reason? Have you ever been niggled for not being a “team player” or for the “presentation” you bring to the office or the work site?  Have you worked in places where professionalism is a euphemism for a top down pecking order utilized as a tool to control you?  After being fired have you gone to the Unemployment Compensation office and received benefits because the office found there were not facts to justify your discharge?  I’ve been visited by all of the above and apparently this small-minded pettiness is normal in the Oak Park Village Hall.

 With the April 1 election rapidly approaching, unions and the impact they may have on certain candidates have become an issue in and of themselves.  It seems Teamsters Local Union 705 is contributing money and mailings to the Citizens Alliance slate of trustee candidates as the slate has addressed the labor management schism in Oak Park.  After reading the local press my curiosity was aroused as to just what these union workers did to raise the ire of management in the Village Hall.

 I contacted Local 705 spokesman Paul Waterhouse who was quoted on the circumstances in the Wednesday Journal.  I found:

 No member was disciplined for absenteeism, tardiness, drug or alcohol abuse or other serious offenses.  Some facts to consider are,
 

A) All three previously discharged Public Works employees were awarded Unemployment Compensation by an Illinois Government Appeals Officer because Village of Oak Park officials claiming that the men were “discharged for cause” did not provide any facts to justify the firings.  The union has filed for arbitration on all three cases and expects to prevail.

B) Among the current charges that the union objects to are that an employee was insubordinate for wearing an “unauthorized hat”.  On another occasion, he was charged illegally meeting his Union Rep without permission – even though the Rep was on Village premises to meet with Operations Manager Tony Special on an unrelated matter.   The Rep saw the employee on his way out of the meeting and they exchanged greetings – meeting for a minute or so.  Tony Special was at the pre disciplinary hearing and did not deny the fact.  This apparently constitutes insubordination and job abandonment.

C) Another employee was accused of being insubordinate because he came back to the Public Works yard 10 minutes early.  He is a 20 year employee with no history of discipline who came back early to use the washroom before his port-work cleaning of equipment.

Mr. Waterhouse tells me that 705 is happy with the current contract but annoyed by management actions.  The Union Coalition for Fairness in Oak Park interviewed all the candidates running for Village Trustee but with the exception of the CA candidates found “their solutions were unformed and lacking in specifics”.  Candidates of the administration supported OPEN Party failed to even acknowledge that there is a problem, solidifying their position as the prosaic, business as usual party.

 No matter what your opinions of unions is no one wants to see someone get shafted out of a job even during the best of economic times.  When the economy tanks, as this one has for a myriad of reasons, managers normally make labor cuts to maintain a profit margin.  The Village of Oak Park is a municipality where profits don’t enter into the equation.  Making workers subordinate or fearful to be happy just to have a job  is a repugnant practice that unions contest.  As far as unions contributing to campaigns or endorsing candidates I don’t understand the indignation.  Has there been any sense of outrage with the Taxman developments and the impact its had on elections, candidates and sitting trustees; or for that matter the WhiteCo Tower boondoggle?  For whatever reason a voice for common workers is being heard through the Citizens Alliance party and for that they have my support.