– Re: Security
In Reply To
To answer your question:The night Davenport was assaulted I left the meeting by then and he has already weighed in on the subject of security guards.
As for the constitutions: It's difficult to know how it went in the meeting. I think if the e board was more interested in helping the membership take our union back from the UBC supervisors and less interested in falling into line with them against the will of the membership, we would've already had the books. The fact that Gausman didn't object to the minutes means little. Maybe he didn't hear them or maybe he was thinking he would address it in his report. The worst thing he did was to not object. Granted,that was a mistake.
As for the transition meeting: I was asked to be on the transition committee and I turned it down after the initial meeting because, as an elected trustee I owed it to the people from my local to make a stand against the UBC supervisors who lied to us, dissolved our local, gave back our raise, invented a bullshit local, raided other trades, used our money like their own atm, put themselves on the board of trustees to our pension fund,talked about selling our real estate and much more. I have done more as an outspoken member than I could've as a "transition team member" and I can hold my head up and say "fuck them".
Can you tell me if this transition committee exists? Has it ever existed? Are you on this committee? What have you been able to accomplish from the inside?It sounded like bullshit from Spencer and Ballantyne then and now.
I wasn't offered an eboard position so I can't answer for those who were.
John Guererra- I"ll answer any questions you have to the best of my knowledge. I have some too. Can you tell us anything about the misleading statements regarding the security firm? Lawrence told the membership we were bound by contract with the school for whatever the number was. Capurso told Gausman the same. Now we know it wasn't true. Who else knew?