| |
Dear
Tony:
Since
your letter was publicly posted around the property,
I accept your challenge and present the following facts.
Jack
Gains states in ACRE's Spring 2004 newsletter “as ACRE members
you have undoubtedly come in contact with the scribbled
graffiti and stickers that have defaced Metro-North equipment…”
Paul Holland states in his letter titled “Crap in the Cabs,
I'm just curious how you folks feel about all the anti-union
b.s. graffiti in our train cabs”. Now you state “much more
honorable than the graffiti defacing our cabs and making
all of us look unprofessional”. Tony where was any concern
shown for Metro-North equipment or professionalism during
the campaign for ACRE when train cabs were full of anti
BLE and UTU graffiti? After the formation of ACRE, ACRE
decals appear all over MTA property, in train cabs and on
lockers. Why haven't you spoken up and notified the ACRE
membership not to deface Metro-North property with ACRE
decals. Are you or any other ACRE officers going to see
to it that they are all removed? As a matter of fact the
ACRE organization not only endorses graffiti but also promotes
it. Let's talk about the rocks that were spray painted “GO
ACRE” along the right of way on the New Haven line heading
east towards Stamford. ACRE was so proud of this that pictures
of this graffiti were posted on the home page of their web
site. What ACRE officers really imply is that as long as
the graffiti is going ACRE's way, ACRE officers have no
problem and turn a blind eye. Only when the graffiti turns
to anti-ACRE messages, does it become a problem and now
must be stopped and removed.
Tony
you state “Because we are no longer flushing our money down
what has become the UTU cesspool we have built up a surplus
of more that $90,000 in just over 4 years. During my 11
years as your General Chairman, your committee has worked
with the yearly budget that it provides to you for review
and passage. This budgeting has enabled us to create a surplus
while not having to raise dues for the past 11 years”. If
ACRE has only been on the property since March of 2000,
which is 4 ½ years, why must you take credit for
years of service back in the UTU cesspool? Why do you and
other ACRE officers constantly promote bitterness towards
our former Internationals, but when the need arises you
go back and claim credit for what was done under your leadership
and under the guidance of our former Internationals? This
is like being married for 7 years and then getting divorced.
Later you get remarried and are together with your new spouse
for 4 years. Now you are out with your new spouse and someone
asks you, how long have you been married? Are you going
to say for 4 years and 7 years before that to someone else?
Would you constantly remind your new spouse with what happened
from your previous marriage? Don't you think ACRE members
are tired of reading and hearing about your biased opinions
about our former Internationals? Is the reason for your
constant badgering because you and most other ACRE officers
have been banned from these Internationals? It is time to
move on. ACRE members left the protection of our former
Internationals. It is time for the ACRE and its officers
to stand on their own.
As
General Chairman of the UTU for 7 years, didn't Local 77
operate with a dues surplus or is the concept of a dues
surplus something new under ACRE Local 1? Let's review some
membership numbers since you mention that there has been
no dues increase in 11 years. When you became General Chairman
of Local 77 you had approximately 650 members. When ACRE
was voted in you had approximately 730 members. Now you
have approximately 805 members. ACRE Local 1 dues is currently
$68.50 / month per member. So you had 80 more members when
you left Local 77 than when you started. This means that
you had an additional $65,760.00 ($68.50 X 80 members =$5,480
/ month X 12 months =$65,760 / year) member dues coming
in under Local 77. Under ACRE Local 1 you have an additional
$61,650.00 ($68.50 X 75 members =$5,137.50.00 / month X
12 months =$61,650.00) member dues coming in since the formation
of ACRE. So is it safe to say that the reason for not having
a dues increase in the past 11 years is really due to the
increase in Conductor membership. Currently ACRE Local 1
brings in an additional $127,410.00 ($65,760.00 + $61,650.00)
in dues per year more than Local 77 did 11 years ago. Over
the course of 4 ½ years this amount could be as large
as $573,345.00, and you only have $90,000.00 to show, where
does all of the money go?
What
if ACRE members had to pay your full-time union release
salary and benefits that you receive from MTA M-N, how much,
if any, of a dues surplus would be left over? A $90,000.00
surplus in 4 ½ years averages out to $20,000.00 per
year. Estimate you receive about $100,000.00 from the MTA
M-N for your union release position per year. This means
that if ACRE Local 1 paid this $100,000.00 out of their
budget they would operate with a loss of $80,000.00 per
year. ACRE Local 1 without receiving this full-time union
release subsidy from MTA M-N for the past four years would
actually be in the red for $320,000.00. What does MTA M-N
receive back from you and Local 1 for their financial salary
contribution to ACRE? The details speak loudly and clearly
in ACRE's historic 2002 contract agreement with MTA M-N.
By the way, what ever happened to the dues reduction that
was promised to the membership during the campaign for ACRE?
ACRE members are still waiting for it to take effect. Another
point to consider. You and Peter Cannito, President of M-N
Railroad make roughly the same amount of money. He is responsible
for over 5,000 employees and oversees a budget in excess
of 438 million dollars. You are responsible for around 800
employees and oversee a budget of 650 thousand dollars.
Tony
aren't you a product of the UTU cesspool? Without the dedication,
efforts and hard work of UTU officers over the years, do
you honestly believe that rail labor, as a whole and this
ACRE membership along with their families would be enjoying
the standard of living they have today? Where did all of
the contracts and work agreements that Local 1 members currently
work under come from? Did ACRE negotiate them or were they
inherited from the UTU? All that ACRE officers can do is
modify what is already in place.
Even
ACRE's claim of their historic pension agreement was accomplished
through the efforts of Mike Canino, General Chairman of
the UTU on The Long Island Railroad. ACRE just piggybacked
on to the agreement he negotiated with the MTA. All ACRE
officers had to do was step up to the plate and sign. How
did ACRE do? It took an established pension plan that had
no givebacks, no work rule changes, no medical co-payments
for anyone, with day one sick time at 100% and turned it
into a MTA giveback windfall. Without Mike Canino, ACRE
would never had received any type of pension agreement on
Gary “D's” watch. Especially since the membership walked
away from a pension deal in 1999. The only one to consider
this ACRE pension deal historic, besides ACRE officers,
is the MTA. They will now try to force it and it's many
givebacks on its entire unionized work force.
Tony
you state, “now under ACRE we are the most open, cost effective
and democratic union in the country”. Do you have any proof
what so ever from any other creditable source besides ACRE
officers' opinions supporting this claim? Do you have any
studies or interviews to share with us? Is the changing
of ACRE's Constitution without the knowledge, consent or
approval from the membership, an example of ACRE's open,
democratic union? I have a file cabinet full of unanswered
certified letters that were sent to various ACRE officers
seeking protection and enforcement of my ACRE rights and
privileges. Letters were sent to Jim Fahey, Executive Director
of ACRE, Jack Gaines, Legislative Director of ACRE, Mike
Doyle, General Chairman of Local 9 and Joe Lindenberg, Secretary
/Treasurer of Local 9. Why won't ACRE officers release information
that is guaranteed through the ACRE Constitution and Local
Division By-laws and divulge the facts to ACRE members?
Lets
compare ACRE's expenses to their dues receipts. The following
figures were taken from the LM2 reports ACRE filed with
the Department of Labor in 2003. The Executive Board listed
$342,750.00 in dues receipts and $330,549.00 in expenses
creating a dues surplus of $12,201.00. The Executives Boards
operating ratio is 96.44%. 96.44% of the money the Executive
Board receives goes to cover its expenses. ACRE Local 1
lists dues receipts totaling $657,081.00 and $637,600.00
in expenses creating a dues surplus of $19,481.00. Local
1's operating ratio is 97.03%. 97.03% of the money Local
1 receives goes to cover its expenses. Local 9 lists $318,781.00
in dues receipts and $ 335,975.00 in expenses creating a
negative dues balance of $17,194.00. Local 9's operating
ratio is 105.40%. Local 9 spends 5 ½ % more money
on expenses then it receives in dues. This must be the reason
why Local 9 books have never been audited by a Certified
Public Accountant. This by the way is a direct violation
of the ACRE Constitution. ACRE Local 9 claims the trustees
audit their books. The trustees for ACRE Local 9 have never
signed the certification page of the LM2 reports that have
been filed with the Department of Labor for the past four
years. Why doesn't Carmine M. Disanto, the CPA who does
the yearly audits of ACRE's Executive Board and Local 1
review and sign off on Local 9's books? Why hasn't Jim Fahey,
Executive Director of ACRE enforce the ACRE Constitution
and have ACRE Local 9 books audited by a CPA for the past
four years? Would Carmine support and back up your claim
with a letter to the ACRE membership concerning ACRE being
the most cost effective union in the country?
Local
1 union meetings are held on Wednesday mornings. What is
the percentage of ACRE members that can attend union meetings
on Wednesday mornings? If it mirrors the numbers from Local
9, this would mean approximately 15% of the membership could
possibility attend a union meeting. If member union attendance
mirrors that of ACRE Local 9 then approximately 3% show
up. This would calculate out to about 24 members attending
union meetings. So 24 members out of about 800 actually
get to decide what goes on. How many Local 1 members voted
on their budget this year? When ACRE goes for a dues increase,
will a ballot be sent out to the entire membership for a
vote or just the 3% who are able to show up at the union
meeting?
The
following statement appears on the ACRE web site in the
member's only section “the administrator (Paul Holland)
reserves the right to eliminate any postings
deemed inappropriate. Is this ACRE's definition of an open
union? Why must ACRE officers spend a lot of time dealing
with rumors? If everything were out in the open, would there
be any rumors to deal with or worry about?
Tony
you state “…nor have I received any sort of compensation
that has not been made a matter of public record and presented
to the membership. I challenge anyone to come up with even
a shred of evidence to the contrary”. Tony please release
the complete (salary and benefit) details of your negotiated
agreement with MTA M-N for your full-time union release
position that has never been made a matter of public record
nor released to the ACRE membership. Why did the ACRE membership
not have a say or given the chance to compensate you before
you went to the MTA M-N to negotiate this deal for yourself?
I have sent certified letters to Mike Doyle, General Chairman
of ACRE Local 9 and Peter Cannito, President of M-N seeking
the release and complete details of this negotiated agreement.
To date, both have ignored my certified letters. Why must
ACRE and the MTA M-N keep the details of this agreement
in the dark and out of the sight of public record and from
the ACRE membership? Will you be true to your word and bring
copies of this negotiated agreement with you to the October
6th union meeting and release it to the ACRE membership?
Or will you go down the road of those before you and keep
it hidden in the shadows. The ACRE membership would still
not know about this privately negotiated agreement if it
were not for the need of ACRE General Chairman responding
to an unsigned letter. Why was it that the ACRE membership
“being the most open and democratic union in the country”
never had a say or got to vote on how ACRE officers are
compensated and by whom? Would you care to put your negotiated
salary arrangement with MTA M-N up for a vote by secret
ballot before the ACRE membership? If you had felt this
way with nothing to fear, ACRE officers would never have
negotiated this deal behind the memberships back in the
first place. Tony please explain what happened to you right
after the UTU removed you from office during the campaign
for ACRE. Didn't M-N place you on training duties? Then
after the formation of ACRE you were placed on a full-time
union release position? I would say that these events just
worked out to be very convenient for you.
Tony
you state “I am sick and tired of apologizing for negotiations
that have put all of you into a pension system that other
employees around the country can only dream of”. I do not
care what other employees around the country dream about.
I only concern myself with what happens here at M-N and
in my own backyard. Let's compare ACRE's pension deal to
other pension deals here in New York. ACRE members, according
to the ratification package sent out by ACRE officers, “…employees
shall commence participation in a new defined benefit program
within the MTA Defined Benefit Plan (“New Program”) and
such program shall have the same terms and conditions
as those applicable to non-represented employees of Metro-North
in the Defined Benefit Plan except as follows” .
Then 3 items are listed. So we are lead to believe that
we have the same exact plan as M-N management. Let us compare
the costs of these plans for both sets of M-N employees
for receiving supposedly the same exact pension plan that
goes back to 1983. I would say that M-N had just as many
management employees if not more who wanted to go back 1983
as ACRE did. Management employees had the Vanguard from
1988 to 1994. ACRE members had the Vanguard from 1988 till
2004. Management only gave up 7 years of Vanguard money
while ACRE members gave up 16 years worth of Vanguard money.
Management co-pays for their medical. Newly hired ACRE employees
co-pay for their medical. Management does not make any salary
contributions towards this pension plan. ACRE members pay
3% of their salaries towards this pension plan. ACRE employees
gave up a choice holiday, switched two other holidays and
switched life insurance policies to help fund this plan.
Same exact plan but two totally distinctly different costs
for M-N employees.
How
does this historic ACRE deal compare against any of the
pension agreements on the LIRR? They just signed for a similar
deal and their post 1988 employees gave up their Vanguard.
They only pay 3% of their salaries for ten years, incurred
no work rule changes, no co-payments for their medical for
current or future employees, and received day one sick time
at 100% of their rate. Is anyone or any union on the LIRR
interested in this historic ACRE negotiated deal?
Have
any of the other unions on MTA M-N property publicly endorsed
or rushed into see “Gary D” to sign onto this ACRE deal?
No. As a matter of fact the M-N coalition of unions rejected
this ACRE deal. In January they stated “…we want to make
it perfectly clear that the tentative ACRE agreement does
not establish a pattern on the property. It is our position
that the potential consequences for all present and future
employees are disastrous. The medical give-back in particular
will have profound negative effects on all current and future
generations of railroad employees. In addition the concession
of the Life Insurance will have adverse consequences for
our members. Furthermore if this agreement is ratified,
our members will fall further behind their counterparts
at the LIRR and the other commuter railroads. Collectively
we will resist the tentative ACRE agreement in form and
content to the greatest degree possible”. I would say that
was quite an endorsement. It seems the only ones crowing
about this ACRE pension deal are ACRE officers and the MTA.
ACRE lowered the bar and made this deal so rich in givebacks
that the MTA will use this ACRE deal as a wedge and try
to force it upon all of their other unionized workers. All
of the other unions on M-N property and across the country
remain silent and are in a complete utter state of disbelief.
Yes ACRE officers should be proud of their negotiated deal.
The
ACRE organization under the leadership of Tony Bottalico
and Mike Doyle will always be remembered for firsts on MTA
M-N property. Under your leadership M-N employees for the
first time ever in their contract history took a zero percent
wage increase and for the very first time ever employees
now co-pay for health and welfare benefits. ACRE's very
first contract on MTA M-N property where they could have
set themselves apart and made a name for themselves. Without
any International backing, and standing on their own for
the very first time against seasoned MTA negotiators, ACRE
officers folded like a deck of cards and not only give away
the house but mortgaged away not only the futures of it's
new hires, but the futures of all unionized employees under
the MTA umbrella. For only five years worth of service credits
(going from 1988 back to 1983) a new giveback pattern for
contract negotiations has evolved. The cost to the ACRE
membership for these five years worth of service credits
was never documented or justified. How many ACRE members
will truly and fully benefit from these additional five
years? How many current and future ACRE members will receive
absolutely no direct benefit for these five years but will
be stuck paying for them throughout their entire railroad
careers? What benefits are left over from the 1999 contract?
None, you gave them all back to the MTA in 2002. In essence,
this historic ACRE contract actually cost ACRE members 8
years (4 from 1999 and this current agreement) worth of
contract enhancements.
Tony
you state “I would also like to offer a bit of advice for
all the junior members who have their entire careers ahead
of them. Creating financial disincentives will discourage
members from taking union positions”. Isn't this exactly
what ACRE officers have accomplished with their pension
deal? ACRE created financial disincentives for new hires
and has created a distinct division among ACRE members.
New hires already come in at 70%; on top of this they now
must pay 3% of their salary towards this pension and co-pay
18% of the cost of their medical including all future adjustments
for their entire railroad careers. How about the senior
guys running out of the door today, what did they pay? Absolutely
nothing.
How
do current ACRE members feel about the new hires “well they
knew exactly what they were getting into when they came
here. No one is forcing them to take this job. They can
go work somewhere else. They would be lucky to have this
job”. Now, all of a sudden, to become an ACRE officer the
membership needs to create financial incentives to bring
in the right people? You continue with “if you want to make
sure the best people are available and representing your
interests make sure the job has some rewards and personal
satisfactions”. Two ACRE General Chairman receive dual salaries,
one from MTA M-N and another from the ACRE. Two ACRE officers
hold down multiple positions between the Executive Board
and the Locals, which they also receive dual salaries for.
All ACRE officers receive a salary from the union complete
with expenses. ACRE officers come and go as they please,
mark off union business as they please, get their vacations
as they please, have their holiday schedules changed as
they please and take special duty positions as they please.
One would believe ACRE officers already receive some pretty
good rewards and financial incentives.
Currently
Local 1 spends 51.11% of their memberships dues on ACRE
officer's salaries. If the Conductors had to include your
estimated MTA M-N full-time union release salary, this figure
would increase to 66.33%. Currently Local 9 spends 50.73%
of their membership dues on officer's salaries. If the Engineers
had to pay Mike's estimated MTA M-N full-time union salary,
this figure would increase to 82.10%. How many more incentives
can this ACRE membership afford? How many more incentives
do ACRE officers need and want?
As
far as personal satisfaction goes, I did not know that you
could buy it. I always thought that it came from within
a person for accomplishing ones job. In the past union members
ran for office to make a difference. They wanted to advance
their cause and insure a safe and effective work environment,
to maintain or increase the standard of living for their
members and to leave the railroad a better place for future
generations of railroad workers. Pay and perks were never
a consideration when they ran for office. Most were happy
if they just got their expenses back. Like everything else
under ACRE, attitudes, philosophies, conceptions and work
agreements have changed. It used to be, what could I do
for the union and the membership, to make this a better
place. Under ACRE, it has now become, how much can I get
out of the union and the membership to make my life better.
ACRE officers should follow the same advice the membership
has for new hires. You know what the job entails, what it
pays and its perks when you ran for office. If you do not
like the job and the responsibilities that come with the
job, then do not run for office. Currently if any ACRE officer
is unhappy with their job, then they should immediately
resign their position. To my knowledge, no ACRE officer
has ever resigned from office. I guess the ACRE pay and
perks outweigh the toll from the membership.
If
you have a problem with any of these facts or you would
like me to dig out some more facts concerning ACRE, please
let me know. It will be interesting to see if this letter
makes it onto the ACRE web site.
Sincerely,
Jim
Ekberg
ACRE
Member
CC:
www.mtacre.com
|
