CCFT Council of Reps Rejects Dues Increase

Posted: March 8, 2013 in Uncategorized

At its February 28 meeting, the Council of Reps voted down a proposal to put a union dues’ increase on this semester’s ballot.  The proposal was originally declared as passing.  Mark Tomes, Secretary-Treasurer, corrected his error with an email to council on March 3, saying, although it was close, the proposal actually failed.  Tomes went on to say that the Council could take up the matter again this semester.  Or, the Executive Board, “can discuss the proposal at its next meeting.”

Whattt?  So, if Tomes and the EB didn’t get what it wanted the first time, they’re going to do it again, hoping the attendance at Council that day will change the outcome?  Pressuring attendance by “supportive” reps?  Or, failing that, the EB could just do it without the Council.  Council members, what do you think about that?

And, with regard to the preposterous notion of a dues increase, I, for one, have no desire to pay one more penny to an organization that appears to have failed in its duty of fair representation.  A union’s two main purposes are very simple: bargaining and grievances.  WWL sincerely asks someone to enlighten us about one substantive thing this union has done in negotiations to improve our working life.  And, grievances?  CCFT has sent abused faculty to the courts instead of to their union.  Faculty have lost their jobs because of the union’s lack of representation.  And, now it wants more of our money?  This union has taken one of the most exciting, involved, award-winning locals and turned it into a laughing-stock and one of the lowest paid in the state in a short 4 1/2 years.

But, we do say kudos to those reps who stood their ground and said “no” to even putting the measure on the ballot.  Please let us know who you are; we’d like to thank you.  And, please stand firm.

Watch for a special report, coming soon.  Thanks for your time.

  1. Mark Tomes says:

    Actually, most of the comments regarding why members voted No on the motion was that they wanted more information on what other locals charged, what stipends were being paid by CCFT, etc. The discussion was preliminary. It was the Council members themselves who asked to have this info brought back to the Council for more discussion.


    Mark Tomes

    LD Specialist

    CCFT Seccretary-Treasurer

    Cuesta College

  2. arthurshere says:

    Yes…thank you indeed to those reps who stood their ground against such a ridiculous, and GREEDY proposition. I rejoined the union recently so I could vote in the election…HA! What was I thinking!? ):/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s