Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/09/2008 - 6:21pm.
Of course there was an election in 2006, after Roselli was first appointed President when uhw was formed for the interim period. Roselli then had the advantage of running as the incumbent. The same thing is happening in the new public locals. Why is it ok for uhw and so horribly undemocratic for other locals that have an appointed leader, like Roselli was, at some point in their life?
The answer is the same reason why Roselli and uhw participated in all the other decisions and practices they are now criticizing for years. They were fine with all of it until their turf was threatened. I can understand being upset about losing members to another local. Just be honest about your motivations. But you've probably figured out that whether homecare workers are in one seiu local vs another is not nearly as interesting to the
"don't organize, criticize" crowd at labor notes than an epic battle over democracy.
Of course there was an election in 2006, after Roselli was first appointed President when uhw was formed for the interim period. Roselli then had the advantage of running as the incumbent. The same thing is happening in the new public locals. Why is it ok for uhw and so horribly undemocratic for other locals that have an appointed leader, like Roselli was, at some point in their life?
The answer is the same reason why Roselli and uhw participated in all the other decisions and practices they are now criticizing for years. They were fine with all of it until their turf was threatened. I can understand being upset about losing members to another local. Just be honest about your motivations. But you've probably figured out that whether homecare workers are in one seiu local vs another is not nearly as interesting to the
"don't organize, criticize" crowd at labor notes than an epic battle over democracy.