May 18
A reportback of the last picket at Chicago-Lake Liquors and a short story about sexual harassment of cashiers and how we can stick together and fight against it. Like the first Broken Bottle, we’re using this for outreach to liquor store workers across the Twin Cities metro area.
May 16
by John O’Reilly
Over a month after the retaliatory firings of five works shocked South Minneapolis, a noted progressive community within the Twin Cities, workers at Chicago-Lake Liquors continue their fight for justice at work by taking it right to their bosses. Throughout April, workers and their supporters in the IWW have kept the story of the fired workers alive in South Minneapolis, holding two large informational pickets outside the store and flyering to customers every weekend night. While management refuses to speak with the fired workers, the Labor Board continues to investigate the firings and the IWW continues to heighten the pressure against the company.
On April 1st, five IWW organizers at the highest-volume liquor retailer in Minnesota were fired after the majority of their coworkers delivered a petition to management asking for a higher wages and to raise the wage cap for the store, which sits at $10.50 an hour, below Minneapolis’ living wage of $12.19. The five IWW members, whose union affiliation was at the time not known by management, were fired in an attempt to scare the rest of their coworkers into silence. So far the attempt has backfired, as IWW supporters continued presence outside the store has only solidified the idea that the union has Chicago-Lake workers’ backs and is not going away. The fired IWW workers continue to demand an end to union-busting at Chicago Lake, their immediate rehiring, and a raise for all workers there.
The union decided to up the militancy of the struggle on Saturday, May 4th, when nearly 50 working class Minnesotans and IWW members picketed out the two main entrances to Chicago-Lake, stopping cars at the driveways and asking them to turn around and shop elsewhere that day. Minnesota’s blue laws prohibit liquor sales on Sundays, so Saturday is the biggest day for liquor retailers, and May 4th came a day before the Southside’s annual Mayday Parade and Cinco de Mayo, both big days for drinking. IWW members turned away upwards of 90% of shoppers while they picketed, making what should have been an extremely busy Saturday into a quiet afternoon inside the store and testifying to the consciousness of the Minneapolis working class. Cars honked in support and union supporters cheered as customer after customer pulled a U-turn and drove away to buy their booze elsewhere. Despite management’s threats and security personnel’s attempt to arrest IWW members, union workers stayed strong and held the line for the duration of the picket, asserting their rights and their power. The picket was scary enough for John Wolf, Chicago-Lake’s owner, who has become basically invisible since the fight began, to emerge and skulk around the store.
While the fight for fair wages and union rights at Chicago-Lake is just beginning, IWW members vow that it’s a fight they’ll see to the finish. Escalation work continues on multiple levels and readers of the Industrial Worker should stay tuned for what comes next. Organizers have announced another picket of the store on May 24th and continue to inform customers of the situation outside the store daily. As the chant which has become a favorite on Chicago-Lake picket lines goes: “If we don’t get no justice, you don’t get no Natty Ice!”
This is a slightly altered version of an article which will appear in the next Industrial Worker
From SCCU
On Thursday, May 2 the Sisters’ Camelot managing collective posted a long public statement on the internet addressing the current standoff between them and our striking union of canvass workers. Their statement is full of inaccurate information. Below are the most egregious inaccuracies, each with a concise explanation of the truth.
1. Sisters’ Camelot: “We operate as an egalitarian democracy where no one member has a larger voice than any other, and all participate equally in the decision-making process. Anyone in the in the community – including the canvassers – can become a member of our collective and therefore have a full voice in its operations.”
THE TRUTH: The collective has refused to allow some canvassers to join the collective when they showed interest. Other canvassers have decided the collective has been hostile towards them and the canvass in general. Many canvassers who have tried addressing canvass-related grievances through the collective process equate it to banging their head against a brick wall. Some canvassers are unable to attend Monday morning meetings because of obligations as parents, students, and workers at other jobs. The 6 collective members have hiring and firing power over us and the collective process has failed to address the grievances of canvassers, so we unionized to bring balance to the power dynamic in our workplace. Telling us to use the collective process is classic boss speak for telling workers they should go through pre-existing channels instead of unionizing.
2. SC: “After the group gave a list of demands (some, but not all, being reasonable), they gave the collective one hour to meet their demands. If not, they declared they would strike.”
THE TRUTH: In our first meeting with the managing collective after unionization, we (the union) carefully went through our demands and allowed them an hour to ask any clarifying questions about them. They chose to only ask a couple questions, using about 5 minutes worth of their allotted hour. Then we gave the collective another hour to discuss in private and expected negotiation to begin after that. We stated very clearly that we did not expect negotiations to finish that day; we just wanted them to move forward in good faith. We stated that we did not expect to get all of our demands; that many of them were flexible, and as long as negotiations went ahead in good faith we would not strike. The managing collective simply refused to negotiate with our union.
3. SC: “The canvassers’ overall approach and now “non-negotiable” demands are a direct attack on our consensus decision making process and the way in which Sisters’ Camelot functions. Their demands would force Sisters’ Camelot to become the kind of hierarchical structure that we have worked against for so long.”
THE TRUTH: It is true that we made a package-deal offer in an attempt to end the strike which included only 8 of our original 18 demands, but made them non-negotiable in the package deal. They refused. After receiving criticism for making the package-deal non-negotiable, we sent them a letter, email, and Facebook message asking for a counter-offer. As of yet, we have not received one.
Furthermore, our demands would actually make Sisters’ Camelot less hierarchical. They include abolishing the role of bosses within the organization, putting hiring and firing power over canvass workers in the hands of a committee composed of canvassers and collective members, decentralizing the role of the canvass director, and placing a rotating union representative on the collective.
Lastly, the outcome of negotiation between the canvass union and the collective and how the resulting compromises would affect Sisters’ Camelot is pure speculation since management has refused to ever negotiate with the union.
4. SC: “the tactics used by the canvass and the Twin Cities IWW are unacceptable at best and at worst endanger the well-being of not only the organization but also the safety of collective members, volunteers, and supporters. They have posted pictures, names, and phone numbers of collective members and community members they perceive as accomplices in our refusal to be bullied by their collective busting tactics including the cell phone number of someone the canvassers knew was hiding from a past domestic abuser.”
THE TRUTH: The tactics used in this campaign have been less aggressive than in typical union drives. Diverse escalation is standard practice for any striking union who wants to pressure the bosses to recognize the worker’s right to unionize by negotiating with the union. For instance, when a for-profit corporation refuses to negotiate with their workers’ union and fires a union member it is common to phone blast bosses &assisting union-busters, often in the first week of a strike. Out of respect for the personal relationships between some canvassers and collective members, we held off on these standard escalation steps for weeks. In truth, this so-called “aggressive tactic” has been used by supporters of the managing collective against bosses in past campaigns without moral objection. We recognize that this situation is unique because of personal ties that some members of the radical community have with collective members.
Some of us did not agree with making the union-busters website but did not block it out of feelings of desperation from economic violence perpetrated against us by bosses who have refused to recognize our union, forcing us to endure being on strike for a long period of time. Many of us feel the union-busters website was a mistake, and of course many mistakes have been made during this very hard and complicated campaign but that does not mean that we should not have the basic right as workers to organize a union.
Also the claim that we endangered a person who is hiding from a past domestic abuser and we knew it is completely unfair. The collective member they are talking about publicly read the statement firing a union member in front of dozens of people and has been quoted in the press, making herself a public figure in this struggle already. No canvassers were aware that any collective member was hiding from a past domestic abuser and as soon as this situation was mentioned to us, we removed the collective member’s telephone number from everything.
5. SC: “The IWW and canvassers have misrepresented the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to serve their purpose, ignoring those provisions that do not support their apparent goal of fundamentally altering a democratic institution in a completely undemocratic way.”
THE TRUTH: Although Sisters’ Camelot’s collective process was originally created to encourage workplace democracy, 6 people having power over 14 other workers who feel the collective process has failed them is not democracy. The workers decided the collective process failed to give them democratic input, so they unionized. The unionization was meant to increase workplace democracy, but not to affect the collective’s control over any aspect of Sisters’ Camelot other than the working conditions of the unionized canvassers.
6. SC: “Sisters’ Camelot is trying to retain its democratic structure and has therefore decided to legally respond rather than roll over to the canvassers’ non-negotiable demands.”
THE TRUTH: Our demands are negotiable. The management refuses to negotiate with the union and find out what compromises could be made. As stated above, we asked them for a counter-offer and have not yet received one.
7. SC: “The situation as a whole is one we would prefer not to fight before the NLRB or a court, but the canvassers’ choice to pursue this form of categorically inappropriate manner of government intervention has effectively tied our hands.”
THE TRUTH: This claim asserts that it is inappropriate to use the NLRB process to protect a worker’s rights when they think they have been illegally fired for union activity. The collective fired a union worker while on strike and made it clear in public statements that they will not rehire the worker without government intervention. Many people have died for the few basic workers rights that are protected by the NLRA, and asserting those rights through the process of the NLRB was clearly the fired worker’s last choice in self defense. This charge with the NLRB was not filed immediately, but two weeks after the firing. After it was filed, the union made it clear that we did not want to turn this into a protracted legal battle, and that the preferred outcome was for the collective to rehire the union worker so we could retract the Unfair Labor Practice. Even now, the collective could choose to settle out of court.
8. SC: “Contrary to what the canvassers have stated, the NLRB has not decided anything. Rather, an investigator in the NLRB’s Minneapolis regional office made an initial determination that Sisters’ Camelot may be an employer engaged in interstate commerce. We believe that initial determination is wrong. The investigator does not have the power or authority to speak for the NLRB or to make any legal determinations, that job is left to a judge who reviews all of the evidence and makes a decision. Often the judge concludes the investigator’s initial determination is wrong.”
THE TRUTH: The NLRB investigator made a decision (or determination) that the job and workplace meet the criteria for the workers to be protected by national labor law, and therefore that the firing of a union member on strike is retaliatory and illegal. The NLRB does not make these decisions lightly and without thorough investigation. The NLRB also does not make these decisions unless they feel a judge will back it up with a court-order, but the NLRB always seeks to find a settlement agreement with the employer. In most cases the employer settles out of court, but when they do not a court order is sought by the NLRB. The NLRB’s decisions are rarely overturned. (Also, they contradict themselves: above they claim that “the NLRB has not decided anything,” but below they state, “We are contesting the decision of the NLRB’s Minneapolis regional office.”)
9. SC: “evidence demonstrates that Sisters’ Camelot is not an employer and is not engaged in interstate commerce. We are confident that a judge reviewing the evidence in light of the law will agree with us. We are contesting the decision of the NLRB’s Minneapolis regional office because we do not feel its decision is consistent with the law or the values of Sisters’ Camelot. Settlement no longer makes any legal or financial sense if the organization is going to survive in its current democratic state.”
THE TRUTH: Sisters’ Camelot and their well-known union-busting lawyer are looking for an obscure legal loophole to argue that the workers are not protected by basic labor law and do not have the right to unionize. If Sisters’ Camelot’s management actually believes the workers should not be protected by basic labor law and should not have the right to unionize– what does that mean for the values of Sisters’ Camelot and whether or not they actually care about workplace democracy?
10. WHAT SISTERS’ CAMELOT IS SCARED TO TALK ABOUT:
Sisters’ Camelot’s managing collective is working with a notorious right wing union-busting lawyer named John C Hauge. This lawyer is working for free (pro-bono).
In the past John C Hauge has:
-silenced victims of sexual harassment,
-prevented a boss from paying compensation to the family of a worker who died on the job,
-decertified unions,
-and taken pensions away from union workers.
His website brags about helping employers keep workplaces union-free. This lawyer has his own right-wing agenda and obviously does not care about the values of Sisters’ Camelot. The collective is choosing to work with this right-wing lawyer instead of respecting worker’s basic right to organize a union.
This Wednesday morning Sisters’ Camelot, a non-profit mobile food shelf engaged in a two-month-long strike of its canvass workers, rejected a settlement offer from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), opting instead to fight the union in court. In order to do so, they have hired a right-wing, professional “union-avoidance” attorney, John C. Hauge from FordHarrison, a nation-wide anti-labor law firm, shocking the striking canvassers of the progressive organization. Concerned that Hauge is seeking to set precedent against independent contractors’ rights, the canvassers are seeking support from other unions and organizations.
The settlement offer included immediately rehiring fired union member ShugE Mississippi, paying his back wages, and posting a public apology at the Sisters’ Camelot office. Since the Sisters’ Camelot collective declined this offer, the NLRB will take Sisters’ Camelot to court to seek a binding order from a judge enforcing their decision. Fewer than 15% of unfair labor practice filings reach this stage, with the vast majority of employers negotiating prior to being brought before a judge.
The anti-union attorney the collective has hired, John C. Hauge, has a long history of fighting workers attempting to win better conditions on the job, and advertises on his FordHarrison profile his ability to help businesses “avoid union incursion.” In the past several years, he has represented employers against multiple unions, such as SEIU, UNITE HERE, and others. In addition to this, he has represented multiple firms fighting charges of sexual harassment and discrimination by female employees, and touts on the same online profile that he has “represented an employer in OSHA administrative action involving an employee fatality, with client completely exonerated of any liability.”
“It’s beyond comprehension that Sisters’ Camelot’s managing collective would be less willing to sit down and work with us, their employees, than to work with someone who makes a living fighting against workers trying to better their work conditions, against female workers battling sexual harassment, even against a family seeking damages for a worker who died on the job,” Said Maria Wessserle, a striking canvasser. “The settlement offer is entirely reasonable. It seems like they’d rather work with someone whose career is based on advancing exploitation, sexism, and racism than admit their mistake. It’s like the principles of the organization have been thrown out the window.”
In an April 22nd facebook post, the managing collective asserted that Hauge was working with them pro-bono, while one from April 20th, most likely written by Hauge, asserted that the National Labor Relations Act does not apply to the canvassers, as, “we believe the evidence demonstrates that Sisters’ Camelot is not an employer – the canvass is made up of independent contractors.”
“While we can’t know for sure, we have to imagine Hauge is offering his services for free in this case for ideological reasons,” said Bobby Becker, a member of the canvasser’s union, “He could just want to put one more notch on his belt, or worse yet, set precedent against the ability of independent contractors to organize under the NLRA.” Such a precedent could affect millions of workers across the country.
While the union is confident that the labor board will find in their favor and rule that the canvassers’ independent contractor status is due to misclassification, the stakes of a loss are such that they are calling on any and all labor unions, workers’ centers, or other groups invested in worker’s rights to demand that Sisters’ Camelot’s managing collective abandon this potentially disastrous course, end their relationship with Hauge, and negotiate to end the 2-month-long strike.
The campaign at Sisters Camelot represents a new step for Food and Retail Workers United, an organizing committee of the Industrial Workers of the World labor union. Gaining prominence in recent years for organizing Starbucks and Jimmy Johns workers, the IWW is a global union founded over a century ago for all working people.
MINNEAPOLIS– After an investigation into the incident, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has decided that IWW Sisters Camelot Canvass Union (SCCU) member ShugE Mississippi was illegally fired by Sisters’ Camelot. The NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) is a government agency in charge of investigating charges of federal labor law violations, enforcing such laws, and following through with related penalties. After making this decision, the NLRB offered the Sisters’ Camelot managing collective one last chance to accept a settlement agreement before setting a court-date to seek a court order.
The settlement offered by the NLRB includes the immediate rehiring of ShugE Mississippi, paying back wages, and posting a public apology at Sisters’ Camelot. The managing collective has until Tuesday, April 23 to accept this offer. If this settlement offer is not accepted, the NLRB will set a court date and seek a binding order from a judge. If this case is brought before a judge it will significantly increase the legal expenditure for Sisters’ Camelot, as it would be responsible for associated attorney’s fees. Further, Sisters’ Camelot would be obligated to pay even more back wages as more time passes– a likely possibility as judges typically respect decisions made by the NLRB.
In the interest of giving the Sisters’ Camelot managing collective space to think through this decision, the SCCU asks individuals who were planning a nonviolent sit-in demonstration at Monday’s collective meeting to cancel any such plans. The public is always welcome to attend Sisters’ Camelot’s collective meetings, and any individual who wants to observe or engage in respectful dialogue on Monday should feel free to do so. However, the union is explicitly canceling plans of civil disobedience or disruption of and kind, and asks that people please respect that decision so the collective can have healthy discussion about this very important decision.
“This is exciting and encouraging to hear. Once this issue is fixed then we will be one step closer to ending this strike through negotiation with our entire union represented at the bargaining table,” stated Alex Forsey, one of the striking IWW Sisters’ Camelot Canvass Union members.
The campaign at Sisters Camelot represents a new step for Food and Retail Workers United, an organizing committee of the Industrial Workers of the World labor union. Gaining prominence in recent years for organizing Starbucks and Jimmy Johns workers, the IWW is a global union founded over a century ago for all working people.
On April 1st, 5 workers were fired at Chicago-Lake Liquors, Minnesota’s highest volume liquor store, for asking for better wages. Two days prior, they presented a petition signed by co-workers to management asking for a $1 raise in the starting wage from $8 an hour to $9 an hour, an across the board $1 raise, and a raise in the starting wage from $10.50 an hour to $13.
The five fired workers, Joe Giwoyna, Davis Ritsema, Max Specktor, Arella Vargas, and Hallie Wallace went public as members of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) and Food & Retail Workers United, an organizing committee of the IWW.
They have filed Unfair Labor Practices (ULPs) with the National Labor Relations Board and have been doing actions at Chicago Lake Liquors demanding they be rehired, that their wage demands be met, and that their bosses stop union busting.
Right now, they need your support and solidarity. Until their bosses rehire them or the Labor Board reinstates them, these workers are out of work. They need funds to meet their basic needs They also need funds to continue to organize to put pressure on their boss. Please donate what you can and spread the word.
Solidarity Forever!
Apr 14
MINNEAPOLIS– The labor dispute at Sisters’ Camelot took a new turn this week, as serious negligence and illegal activity by the Sisters’ Camelot managing collective was uncovered by the IWW Sisters’ Camelot Canvass Union. On April 10 two canvass union members conducted a routine search on the Minnesota Secretary of State and Attorney General’s websites to access publicly available legal documents. To their surprise, Sisters’ Camelot was not listed on either website, and they placed a call to both departments inquiring why. What they discovered was shocking: Sisters’ Camelot is not listed on these websites because it is not considered a legitimate organization by the state of Minnesota.
Due to the collective’s failure to submit annual filings, the MN Secretary of State dissolved Sisters’ Camelot’s existence as a nonprofit corporation in 2005, and the MN Attorney General’s office revoked Sisters’ Camelot’s ability to legally solicit funds in December 2011. The canvass workers realized the sensitive nature of this information and sought legal advice from a nonprofit attorney on April 12. They were informed that every solicitation of funds made by Sisters’ Camelot since December 2011 was illegal and could carry a fine of up to $25,000 per violation. In that time period, tens of thousands of illegal solicitations were made by unknowing canvassers.
The Attorney General intervened in Sisters’ Camelot twice before: in 2002, the organization was audited and placed on probation for one year; in 2010, it was suspended from soliciting funds for negligence in their annual filing. This latest conflict with the Attorney General is not only the third strike, but is significantly more serious because it has been unaddressed for over a year and carries the possibility of exorbitant fines. Canvassers fear that this will lead to the shutting down of Sisters’ Camelot.
“It has become abundantly clear that the collective has mismanaged Sisters’ Camelot to the point of endangering the organization’s very existence, putting the vital food distribution service at risk,” said Alex Forsey, striking IWW canvasser.
But this is only the beginning of the collective’s mismanagement of the organization. Since October 2012 the collective has withheld rightfully owed pay from the canvassers by concealing donations made online. This violates contractual obligations, which state that canvassers earn a percentage of funds raised from all donors they solicited, regardless of how those donors choose to give. The managing collective has also thus far failed to issue W-9 tax forms to canvassers, making it nearly impossible for them to file their 2012 taxes. Law requires W-9 tax forms to be issued by January 31.
“I am outraged by the shocking negligence and wage theft perpetrated by the collective,” said Tiffany Wicklund, IWW canvasser. “I work very hard at Sisters’ Camelot and deserve all of my income. Further, the services provided by Sisters’ Camelot help keep me and my family food secure, and the collective is endangering that service.”
Finally, the current board of directors did not constitute itself legally. The board of directors is required by law to meet annually to elect a new board (or re-elect itself) and grant power to the executive director, or in this case the collective. The last legally legitimate board of directors went years without this required meeting. In response, this managing collective spontaneously elected some of its own members as the new board of directors; but they failed to notify the previous board, as legally required. Therefore, the power exercised by the current board and managing collective may be found by the Attorney General to be illegitimate.
In light of all this, the IWW Sisters’ Camelot Canvass Union is calling for the immediate resignation of the collective in order to save the organization and its mission. “We feel it is time the managing collective is finally held accountable for what we have discovered to be years of negligence, mismanagement, and lawbreaking. Their actions have put an incredible organization at risk,” said former collective member and current IWW canvasser Bobby Becker.
The canvassers feel an ideal outcome would be for the Attorney General to grant power to the last legal board, who can elect a new board to rectify the current legal impasse and ensure the continuance of Sisters’ Camelot’s mission to “feed the hungry and inspire the world.”
“We are exposing this information and calling for the collective’s resignation so that new, caring, and responsible community members can step forward and be elected as a new board of directors to run Sisters’ Camelot through a time of rebuilding,” said IWW canvasser Maria Wesserle.
“I cannot believe that this situation with the Attorney General has been hanging over our heads this whole time, without our knowing.” said Shuge Mississippi, IWW canvasser. “If nothing else, I am glad that our union drive has uncovered this information, so that we have a chance of saving Sisters’ Camelot.”
The campaign at Sisters Camelot represents a new step for Food and Retail Workers United, an organizing committee of the Industrial Workers of the World labor union. Gaining prominence in recent years for organizing Starbucks and Jimmy Johns workers, the IWW is a global union founded over a century ago for all working people.
Thanks to Steve Onderick.
MEET AT NW CORNER OF POWEDERHORN PARK (32nd Ave & 10th St) at 7:45PM
On the week of April 1st, five workers at Chicago-Lake Liquors were fired for respectfully asking management for raises. This is wrong and illegal. All workers have a right to come together to improve their job conditions, and these firings are a clear attack on their rights and dignity.
On April 6th, the five fired workers announced their membership with Food and Retail Workers United (FRWU), an organizing committee of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) labor union.
Join us for the second picket of Chicago-Lake, demanding that management
-Rehire the 5 fired workers
-Pay a living wage to all employees
-Stop union busting
Short video of last week’s picket and interview with one of the fired organizers
http://youtu.be/37N73QAcQr8
City Pages article on the situation
http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2013/04/chicago_lake_liquors_employees_petition_for_raises_five_fired_two_days_later.php
Press release from last week
http://tcorganizer.com/2013/04/06/iww-liquor-store-workers-fired-for-union-activity/
Facebook event: http://www.facebook.com/events/219183161539506/
The I.W.W. Sisters’ Camelot Canvass Union has been on strike now for 39 days, since management refused to recognize their right to unionize and negotiate with the worker’s union. Last week the striking worker’s union offered management a package deal in hopes of ending the strike and returning to work. In this deal all issues related to pay were taken off the table, leaving only the bare minimum terms needed by the workers to have enough workplace democracy to end the strike. This offer included 8 of the original 18 terms of unionization intended to be worked out at the negotiating table.
Since the canvassers at Sisters Camelot went public as a union, the management has simply refused to attempt any negotiation to recognize the workers right to be unionized, and even illegally fired a union member in retaliation. This last deal was an attempt by the canvass union to offer the management the easiest possible deal for them to accept so canvassers can return to work and continue discussion about the issues they took off the table at a later time.
The management of Sisters’ Camelot flatly refused the offer at their meeting on Monday, April 8, making it clear that they are unwilling to recognize their workers’ most basic right to organize into a union.
“This deal was the easiest thing we could possibly offer them to end the strike. It’s clear now that the management simply has no interest in having unionized workers. This makes it clear that the management of Sisters’ Camelot is anti-union and against workplace democracy,” said Bobby Becker, one of the striking union members, in response to the news.
Dave Senn, a member of management stated, “I am not anxious to end the strike,” showing disregard for the workers basic right to unionize.
“With this offer we made an attempt to compromise. We made a statement that we are willing to end this strike if the management simply recognizes our union and concedes just to basic issues of workplace democracy. We asked for no raises, no vacation or sick pay, and no influence in anything in Sisters’ Camelot other than basic democratic control over our own working conditions. By saying no to this offer the managing collective is spitting in the face of the values of anti-authoritarianism, respect for autonomy, and democratic equality that Sister’ Camelot has always espoused as their core values. The managing collective is exactly what they were crated by the board to prevent. Eric Gooden, Clay Hansen, David Senn, Lisabeth Foster-Bayless, Aaron “Muskrat” Barck, & Clive North have done wrong by the community, hijacked Sisters’ Camelot, and need to be held accountable,” said shugE Mississippi, striking worker and founding member of the Sisters’ Camelot managing collective.
The union’s stance is now the same as it has been during this entire strike: the managing collective can rehire the fired worker and negotiate with the union at any time, which would bring us closer to ending this strike
The campaign at Sisters’ Camelot represents a new step for Food and Retail Workers United, an organizing committee of the Industrial Workers of the World labor union. Gaining prominence in recent years for organizing Starbucks and Jimmy Johns workers, the IWW is a global union founded over a century ago for all working people.
Below is an exact copy of the recent offer from the IWW Sisters Camelot Canvass Union, which the management has refused:
We have a proposal to end this strike. In this proposal we have already set aside everything that we are willing to concede as negotiable. Everything left is our terms of unionization. This means we are not open to a counter-proposal.
You can choose to agree to this proposal and end the strike at any time starting now. If you choose to reject this proposal or not agree to it by the end of April 8, then not only will the NLRB investigation into an illegal firing continue– but we will file more filings of Unfair Labor Practices for the NLRB to investigate. This means investigation into every time a national labor law was broken since we went public as a union– which includes every time a collective member asked a union member about our demands, any surveillance of us that was conducted, and every time the collective offered us any type of concession instead of sitting down to negotiate with the union.
When you agree to this proposal, then we will retract the NLRB
investigation into the illegal firing (unless the NLRB has already made their ruling– which could happen at any time from now on), we will not file any further ULP’s with the NLRB, we will end the strike, we will return to work and we will declare this a victory for all of Sisters’ Camelot. We will also agree to go back, and talk to the community members we contacted during the strike and tell them that the strike is over because negotiations succeeded with good faith effort on both sides.
For this all to happen you must rehire the fired worker and agree to all of the following non-negotiable terms for our unionization.
The terms of our unionization are:
1. Union Representative on the collective.
Rotating, everyone in union will take turns. Can only vote or block on canvass related issues.
2. Co-Canvass Coordinators, Field Managers, & canvassers do not need to join the collective to do their jobs.
The accountability aspect between the canvass operation and collective will shift to the union representative on the collective.
3. Democratic election of 2 Co-Canvass Coordinators.
Terms will last 3 months. All card-carrying members of the IWW Sisters Camelot Canvassers Union in good standing, who have worked 15 shifts or more during the prior 3 month term have voting rights. The collective will be allowed to cast a ballot in this election.
4. Decentralization of office tasks & Canvass Coordination pay.
The Co-Canvass Coordinators are responsible for getting tasks done to run the canvass that do not get done by other members of the canvass. Ultimately anyone who wants to should be trained up to have the ability to complete any and all of the individual takes necessary to run the canvass, if needed to. As a democratically run union of Sisters’ Camelot canvassers we will itemize these tasks and decide how much of the Canvass Coordination pay is alloted for each task. Canvass Coordination budget (all of these tasks including Co-Canvass Coordinator and Field Manager pay) will be the same as previous Canvass Director pay was before unionization.
5. Hiring & Firing Committee & closed union shop.
All new hires must join the union upon meeting criteria for having a vote at our 3-month elections. Hiring and firing committee will consist of 3 elected union members (elected at the same 3-month election). One additional member of this committee will be appointed by the collective.
This committee will operate by consensus. This committee will be in charge of all interviews, hiring, firing, and disciplinary actions
regarding canvassers. Any firing will not be final until a secret ballot of all Canvasser Union Members upholds it by a majority vote. This committee will also be in charge of actively seeking out and recruiting quality new canvassers.
We will always strive to be open to people who want to canvass less frequent than required for union membership. Ultimately the hiring & firing committee reserves the right to deny such people who abuse our openness.
6. Professional van maintenance.
We will always strive to use an internal mechanic to keep the van in working order, but the Co-Canvass Coordinators will have the final say when the van is needed to be fixed by outside professionals.
7. Co-Canvass Coordinators have final say in who runs individual canvass shifts.
8. Medical bills are paid by Sisters’ Camelot for all on-the-job injuries.
Theme: Linen by The Theme Foundry
