In the end, it is all his fault. He extended the Council term by one year so that instead of a municipal election this fall, we have to deal with these jokers for another year.
At least if he gave citizens the right of recall.
For that reason alone, no one should vote Liberal!
DYSFUNCTIONAL COUNCIL
The grandstanding of the Councillor formerly known as Councillor Budget and the attacks on him by his colleagues further confirm that the members of this Council cannot tolerate each other and explain why nothing significant can ever be done.
I can hardly wait for the Councillor's retaliatory move on his Wardmate, Councillor Dilkens who had this to say about Brister's insensitive move re outsourcing:
- “I would say there was disregard and lack of sensitivity to the timing of the discussion,” said Coun. Drew Dilkens. “To do that on the first day back, seems more grandstanding — especially since we reviewed that recently...”
Dilkens said council voted unanimously in March during budget deliberations to retain the service after being presented with a report that showed minimal cost savings.
“We have the number and report,” Dilkens said. “It was unanimous on council it didn’t make sense financially.”
Oooo going after Brister where it hurts most---his supposed expertise, finances!
WHY WAS IT IN CAMERA
- "In a closed meeting about a month before municipal workers began a 101-day strike, city council unanimously rejected outsourcing garbage collection after a report concluded it would lead to minimal savings...
City treasurer Onorio Colucci said Tuesday that the report remains an in-camera matter and its findings, unless directed by council, will remain confidential.
"Council looked at a number of issues related to service areas, including waste disposal," Colucci said. "But because it's in-camera I cannot say anything more."
Why was this done if we were going through a Services Delivery review? I wonder what section of the Municipal Act applied to allow it to be in camera. On a quick reading of the Act, I could not find one.
WHAT DID MINI-GORD KNOW
We learned this in the Star as I wrote above:
- "In a closed meeting about a month before municipal workers began a 101-day strike, city council unanimously rejected outsourcing garbage collection after a report concluded it would lead to minimal savings."
I have a question....why didn't mini-Gord report this in his column when he allowed Councillor Brister to mouth off.
Did he know about it and not think it was important? If so , a serious error in judgment I believe.
Did he know about it and chose not to report it? If so, shocking in my opinion.
Did he not know about it because Councillor Brister did not tell him about it? I will let mini-Gord figure out what he should do if that is the case.
I do know that Marty Beneteau needs to do another Guest Column about this to explain to his remaining subscribers why this happened!
MANAGEMENT RETIREMENTS
Lots of rumours about managers retiring after the strike or looking for new jobs.
One persn told me that he expected a number of supervisors to go because they do not want to face what they believe will be the ire of the workers.
Is any of it true? Only time will tell.
JUNIOR LOSES A FRIEND
So much drama.
Eh-Channel claims:
- "Ken Lewenza Jr., has come out swinging against Mayor Eddie Francis and his handling of the 15-week labour dispute.
It's a deteriorating relationship between one-time allies at City Hall."
Oh please. Don't make me laugh. Where was Junior during the strike?
Will he now testify under oath as Councillor Postma must after her BLOG that the City negotiated in bad faith during the strike and that Eddie prevented the negotiating team for at least 7 weeks from bargaining?
- "I strongly believe that for the past 7 weeks council has not given our negotiating team the tools to truly negotiate. We have set parameters for them but have not given them the autonomy required to get a contract. In essence they have been negotiating with themselves."
He has no choice now but to do so if he is true to himself and to tell us more including why he called a meeting with CUPE while the Mayor was away.
Some cynical people, which of course I am not one, might think that Junior wants to show that there is a rift for 2 reasons:
1) If he intends to run for the NDP federally or even to run municipally again, he needs to show he is pro-Union or he is done. His near-silence during the strike was remarkable. Accordingly, now that everything is over, when it does not matter any more, he can show how pro-Union he is.
Oh darn, he might have trouble doing so because so much was held in camera.
What gives this whole thing away to me though is the following. The reporter said:
- "The Mayor refused to comment on the [Lewenza] accusations today other than to say that Lewenza's voting record was well-documented during the strike in a number of recorded votes"
Since when does Eddie not launch a vicious counter-attack against anyone who dares say anything negative about him, from pesky environmentalists to Councillors. This time, hardly anything. That speaks volumes in itself.
Also it was reported that Lewenza was going to hold a number of public meetings to explain his position. Should be interesting to hear what he says!
2) How can CAW invite CUPE to join their Union if everyone thinks that the Mayor and the Lewenzas are buddies? So we had the Senior "FO" and now the Junior "rift."
Who can now doubt that the CAW would stand up to the Mayor. Uh-huh.
CUPE CHANGES
To be blunt about it, as I have BLOGGED before, CUPE ran a poor strike. They had no strategy it seemed other than to annoy the public and failed to figure out how to get public support behind them as the strike got underway. It was not that Eddie was so smart--he had 4 years to plan this--but that CUPE was that dumb.
Whether this was the fault of local leadership or the fault or lack of support of CUPE Ontario/Canada I do not know.
But Union members must! They need to demand answers about how this debacle happened and to find out from their Union what active steps are being taken now.
Depending on how the OLRB claim is being handled and how quickly and aggressively it is being dealt with could help workers in any number of ways.
CUPE leadership had plenty of opportunities to turn the strike around but failed to capitalize on them until it was too late. CUPE members must make sure their tactics now have been thought through and that their advantageous position is not being blown again.
FISKING BENETEAU'S INSENSITIVITY
So much for the Star Editorial
- "Back to work
Time to move forward
After 101 days on the picket line, striking CUPE members are getting ready to head back to work. But with their return come the questions: Where do we go from here? Will it be business as usual after a long and protracted work stoppage that virtually polarized the city? Can it ever be the same...
But it's important that both sides concentrate on the bottom line right now: Making sure that the City of Windsor runs as smoothly and efficiently as possible, and restoring municipal services in a timely and cost-effective manner...
it's time for us to move on; time to embrace a spirit of goodwill and co-operation."
Well Marty did a real number on moving forward. I would fisk his column but frankly, between him and mini-Gord, I have no intention of wasting my time.
My oh my...the Star must have lost more subscribers than I thought. Or is Marty worried that angry readers will do the same to his advertisers that some CUPE members are threatening to do with CFIB members---stop buying from them!
That there was a need for the column was interesting in the first place. Mind you, one of his reporters hammered the Star Editorialists and Columnists so something had to be done. It had to be written for the simple reason that:
- "The union response was to slam The Star, which Ryan in a speech to union members called "that rag of a newspaper." His assertion that "there's absolutely no impartiality whatsoever" failed to make the distinction between opinion writers and news reporters, people paid to check their points of view at the door. And in doing so he paddled his 1,800 members out on to an island."
Beneteau's job was to try and demonstrate that the Star acted properly!
I wish that a Journalism Prof at the U of W could help resolve this issue objectively. He/she would have his/her class do an analysis of how the Star covered the story including the number of negative news stories, anti-CUPE photos, unsubstantiated allegations of CUPE wrong-doing and so on. The results would be interesting. Oh and the positive stories right near the end that finally explained what CUPE was fighting for, when it was too late, don't count.
You see, the strike was the failure since it was all because of CUPE's jumbled message according to Marty. I agree that CUPE screwed up as I wrote above. But to pretend that the Star had little to do with it is mind-boggling!
Here are a few remarks from Marty that the union supporters who float conspiracy theories might be interested in. The use of language is fascinating too:
- "public backlash, which found voice not only in the traditional opinion-shapers like our columnists and cartoonist" At least he admitted that his columnists "shape" opinions but failed to acknowledge that new stories and photos do the same.
- "failed to make the distinction between opinion writers and news reporters, people paid to check their points of view at the door." That is playing the game that reporters just report facts (see above re the Journalist Prof) and fails to acknowledge the role of editing, positioning, selection of photographs, headlines and reporters knowing what must be written.
- "A strategy of demonizing the mayor and shooting the messenger ." Nice to know that Marty affirms finally the Star's role of being the messenger for City Hall. Who from City Hall talked to whom at the Star about what message was to be delivered would be interesting to know.
- "One held that on Francis's order, we were banning pro-CUPE posts." Nice straw-man. How about you yourself making that decision on your own (see below)
- "The reality is that any poster capable of keeping their thoughts marginally civil -- and keeping us from getting sued -- stands a good chance of getting published." Oh, now there were undisclosed criteria for being published online. Were some of the anti-CUPE diatribes civil, whether marginally or not? Even if a pro-CUPE comment was civil, that did not mean it would be published; it only had a "good chance" of being posted online.
- "One online commentator accused The Star of polarizing the community." Marty did not deny it but suggested that we look to the Toronto media where posters were nasty too.
- "Opinion makers who took a hard line against the city strike paid a price" Smearing again by suggesting by innuendo that CUPE members did it
- "I recall jogging with White and Buzz Hargrove on the Toronto waterfront" Jean and Jim's big mistake was not exercising with Marty
- "Next time, try learning the difference between news and opinion." People who publish in glass houses.
I heard about this but Marty made no mention of it in his column. He must have forgotten:
- June 29, 2009
THE ONTARIO PRESS COUNCIL
2 Carlton Street, Suite 1706,
Toronto, Ontario
M5B 1J3
Dear Sirs/Mesdames
We are legal counsel to the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Ontario Division (“CUPE Ontario”). The following is without prejudice to the rights and positions of our client (including the officers, employees, agents and members of CUPE Ontario).
The Windsor Star Misquotes Sid Ryan
In an article titled [name of article], appearing in The Windsor Star, on [date], the words spoken by Patrick (Sid) Ryan, Ontario President, Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) in a speech delivered in Windsor, Ontario on June 12, 2009 were materially misrepresented so as to change their meaning. The misrepresentation has the potential to adversely affect the current collective agreement negotiations between the City of Windsor and CUPE Locals 82 and 543 and to besmirch the reputation of Mr. Ryan and the Canadian Union of Public Employees and its officers, members, employees and local unions."
I have deliberately chosen NOT to give details or to BLOG the rest of the complaint since that is a matter between the Star, CUPE and the Press Council. Moreover, the Star may have a pefectly proper answer. I think the easy way out is for the Star to publish both the complaint and its answer now as well as the Press Council decision when it is made.
Hmmm, Marty thought Sid may not know the Star's phone number but it seems his lawyers knew the Press Council's address.
No comments:
Post a Comment