Carnegie Director Ethel Whitty declined an invitation by CBC's Early Edition to be interviewed yesterday along with William "Bill" Simpson, the homeless man barred from Carnegie Board meetings two weeks after being elected to the Board. But Whitty turned up on the show this morning. Dag, a Vancouver blogger, commented on the DTES Enquirer, that Whitty conveniently waited until Bill Simpson and another Board member, Rachel Davis, were not in the CBC studio to "contradict" her.
When interviewed this morning, Whitty told a very different story than Simpson and Davis had told yesterday. Witty claimed that Simpson had been barred from Carnegie because an employee had laid a WorkSafe complaint against him.
But Whitty's story doesn't hold up.
There had been no mention whatsoever of a WorkSafe complaint in the official letter that Whitty delivered to Simpson notifying him that he was barred from Carnegie. The reason given in the June 2007 letter on City of Vancouver stationery was that Simpson operated a website which “features links” to the Downtown Eastside Enquirer blog.
Even Whitty’s boss at City Hall, Jacquie Forbes-Roberts who signed the official letter barring Simpson, doesn’t seem to be pushing a WorkSafe angle. Miro Cernetig spoke to Forbes-Roberts when writing his column on the Simpson case for the Dec. 24th Vancouver Sun and made no mention of any WorkSafe complaint. Forbes-Roberts did acknowledged, according to Cernetig, that she didn't know whether Simpson was a blogger.
The WorkSafe complaint Whitty referred to was an extension of harassment of bloggers at Carnegie Center. A Carnegie staff person made a WorkSafe application after being exposed on the DTES Enquirer for allegedly having sexual relationships with sometimes troubled clients, some of whom later attempted or committed suicide (for undetermined reasons). There are witnesses to the fact that this staff person, who was not actually named on the blog, was having sexual relationships with clients. [Since then one of her ex-boyfriends suspected of kissing and telling has been barred from Carnegie too -- even though he hadn't set foot in the place for two years!]
Whitty stated at a Carnegie Community Relations meeting at Carnegie last summer that City lawyers and WCB lawyers got together to work on the employee’s complaint that Simpson created an unsafe environment for her at Carnegie due to his involvement with the DTES Enquirer blog and Bill Simpson’s relationship to it. Whitty stated that when WCB decides that there is a safety issue at Carnegie, they instruct her to, “Make it safe”. Hence, the barring of Bill Simpson. The fact that Simpson wasn’t the blogger and that the content of the blog can be supported by witnesses apparently did not act as a deterrent in such decision-making.
A further indication that WorkSafe is a damage control strategy is that Carnegie management and staff had been barring Simpson for political reasons long before the WorkSafe complaint had been lodged. The WorkSafe complaint was lodged in response to a Feb./07 article about sexual misconduct on the DTES Enquirer. That article was published after Simpson had already been barred from the Carnegie Learning Center (not yet the entire Carnegie Center) in Jan./07. He was taken by Learning Center Co-ordinator, Lucy Alderson, to the office of Carnegie Head of Security, Skip, and told that was barred from the Learning Center (situated on the third floor of Carnegie Center) for blogging on the Downtown Eastside Enquirer.
Two years before that, in 2005, Simpson was barred from Carnegie for handing out election literature in the building. The literature criticized management. After being barred, Simpson stood outside Carnegie handing out his election literature. Assistant Manager,Dan Tetrault, then allowed him back into the building on the condition that he not hand it out inside the building.
Whitty has a record – caught on tape – of smearing both Bill Simpson and the DTES Enquirer. At both a public Carnegie Board meeting and a Community Relations meeting last summer, she made defamatory statements about the blog and Simpson, providing no examples to support her claims. Even when Simpson specifically asked her for such an example, after he read the letter she delivered to him in June 2007 barring him from Carnegie, she offered none.
"They have nothing," said Board member Grant Chancy at a Board meeting last summer.
Chancy, a former unionized worker who has the WorkSafe manual at home, announced at a Carnegie Community Relations meeting last summer that he saw nothing in Simpson’s conduct that would justify a WorkSafe complaint. Chancy said he had found “no threats” on the DTES Enquirer blog and “I’ve looked and I’ve looked and I’ve looked.”
A number of Carnegie members feel the same way,leading to grumbling that there should be a fraud investigation into this WCB claim. The claim, which presumably resulted in a payout, was based on a non-libelous blog that, as Board member Sophie Friegang stated before her resignation, is well within the boundaries of "free speech".
When Whitty first floated the WorkSafe reason for barring Simpson in the summer of 2006, Board member Rachel Davis called Gordon Harkness at WorkSafe to find out what was going on. What Harkness told her was surprising. Davis included it in a statement she left on CBC's Talkback line in response to Whitty's claims: "Mr.Harkness told me that there has been no assessment by WorkSafe of William Simpson whatsoever."
Davis pointed in her Talkback statement to the defamation involved in Whitty's suggestion that Simpson posed a safety risk:
"I think people are aware that WorkSafe only deals with cases of
violence or extreme verbal abuse, and nothing like that has
happened. So for [Whitty] to use the Worksafe name in an attempt to
legitimize this barring is really just a heartless blackening of
William’s reputation and that makes me really sad, because if they
will do this to him, a democratically elected board member, what
would they do to your average member who disagrees with their policy?
I find it frightening. And I know other members do too. I stand by my
statement:The Barring of William Simpson was a political act against
a whistleblower perpetrated by the City."
Whitty added in the CBC interview that she would like to meet with Simpson and come to a shared understanding of proper conduct in the Center. She is trying to save face. There is nothing improper about Simpson's conduct.
Showing posts with label WorkSafe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WorkSafe. Show all posts
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Thursday, October 11, 2007
CUPE's Back: Blocks Poor From Computers at Carnegie
CUPE came back. The inside CUPE 15 workers returned to work today at Carnegie Center in Vancouver. But they are not allowing the poor to return to work. CUPE members are blocking the poor from the public access computers inside Carnegie.
There are public access computers in Carnegie in the following locations: three in the basement Seniors Lounge, eight in the third floor computer room, 6 in the third floor Learning Center, and two in the Vancouver Public Libary branch on the first floor (although those inside the library branch are primarily for looking up titles of books and other library materials.) Of course the doors of the small Carnegie branch of the Vancouver Public Library remain locked since the VPL workers voted not to accept this week's contract offer by mediator, Brian Foley -- so nobody expected to get into the library to use those computers. But what about the computers elsewhere in the building? The poor who want to use them have been told to take a hike.
The poor have been told that the reason the computers in the building are off limits to them is that they are run by the Vancouver Public Library. Indeed, the VPL logo is on the desk tops on the screens of these computers.
Only three computers are accessible to the public in the Carnegie building. They are three of the six in the 3rd floor Learning Center. That's because those three are operated by the Vancouver Community Net, not the VPL.
So what are well-paid CUPE members who have returned to work going to be doing with their time. A primary job of Colleen Gorrie is to work to keep volunteers in the areas in the building where there are computers. The volunteers keep an eye on the computers and get people to sign-in before using them. So what is she doing now? Twiddling her thumbs?
Maybe she could use her free time to answer questions about the WCB/WorkSafe claim she made. She claimed that a blog about Carnegie was making her feel "unsafe". A man who doesn't even blog, Bill Simpson, got scapegoated and barred from the Carnegie Center as a result of this claim. (Carnegie Director Ethel Whitty revealed this reason after the barring, although the official written reason given to Simpson in a letter on City letterhead was that he "links" to the blog in question.) Now that Gorrie and some other CUPE members, like Assistant Director Dan Tetrault who delivered the barring letter to Simpson along with Whitty, will have time on their hands, it would be a perfect time to launch an investigation into the legitimacy of this WCB claim. As Carnegie Board member Grant Chancey, a pro-union guy, pointed out, there was nothing threatening whatsoever on the blog in question. "And I've looked and I've looked and I've looked." When it comes to this claim, the opinion of several bloggers is that WCB, CUPE, and a few individuals in the City legal department have some splainin' to do.
There are public access computers in Carnegie in the following locations: three in the basement Seniors Lounge, eight in the third floor computer room, 6 in the third floor Learning Center, and two in the Vancouver Public Libary branch on the first floor (although those inside the library branch are primarily for looking up titles of books and other library materials.) Of course the doors of the small Carnegie branch of the Vancouver Public Library remain locked since the VPL workers voted not to accept this week's contract offer by mediator, Brian Foley -- so nobody expected to get into the library to use those computers. But what about the computers elsewhere in the building? The poor who want to use them have been told to take a hike.
The poor have been told that the reason the computers in the building are off limits to them is that they are run by the Vancouver Public Library. Indeed, the VPL logo is on the desk tops on the screens of these computers.
Only three computers are accessible to the public in the Carnegie building. They are three of the six in the 3rd floor Learning Center. That's because those three are operated by the Vancouver Community Net, not the VPL.
So what are well-paid CUPE members who have returned to work going to be doing with their time. A primary job of Colleen Gorrie is to work to keep volunteers in the areas in the building where there are computers. The volunteers keep an eye on the computers and get people to sign-in before using them. So what is she doing now? Twiddling her thumbs?
Maybe she could use her free time to answer questions about the WCB/WorkSafe claim she made. She claimed that a blog about Carnegie was making her feel "unsafe". A man who doesn't even blog, Bill Simpson, got scapegoated and barred from the Carnegie Center as a result of this claim. (Carnegie Director Ethel Whitty revealed this reason after the barring, although the official written reason given to Simpson in a letter on City letterhead was that he "links" to the blog in question.) Now that Gorrie and some other CUPE members, like Assistant Director Dan Tetrault who delivered the barring letter to Simpson along with Whitty, will have time on their hands, it would be a perfect time to launch an investigation into the legitimacy of this WCB claim. As Carnegie Board member Grant Chancey, a pro-union guy, pointed out, there was nothing threatening whatsoever on the blog in question. "And I've looked and I've looked and I've looked." When it comes to this claim, the opinion of several bloggers is that WCB, CUPE, and a few individuals in the City legal department have some splainin' to do.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
CUPE Has A lot of Nerve Demanding Whistleblower Protection
CUPE BC President, Barry O'Neill, spoke to the media yesterday about the strike by civic workers in Vancouver. "[O]ur members are hurting out there," O'Neill said.
Paul Faoro, President of Local 15 which represents indoor workers, was with O'Neill at the press conference. Local 15 and the City of Vancouver have been able to agree on a wage increase of 17.5 over five years. But like Local 1004 (outside workers) and Local 391 (library workers), Local 15 hasn't been able to get the City to meet their demands for job security as well as protection for whistleblowers.
Protection for whistleblowers?
O'Neill has a lot of nerve. There is an unresolved complaint against him for allegedly being involved in the harassment of a whistleblower inside CUPE. A former secretary to two CUPE Presidents was blowing the whistle on unfair labour practices inside CUPE when a letter she had written to Barry O'Neill about the issue was turned over to police in Dec. 2002. She was then visited by VPD Constables Ng and Herrmann in what she alleges was an exercise in intimidation.
One of the issues raised by this secretary -- who had left CUPE with two glowing letters of reference -- was that she saw female co-workers fired after they spoke up about such issues as unfair workloads, verbal abuse, and the fact that CUPE had renegged on a promise of a pension. They had no job protection as these CUPE secretaries did not have the benefit of a union.
Earlier the same year, 2002, CUPE had muzzled a whistleblowing steamfitter and CUPE member working in Plant Operations at the University of British Columbia. The steamfitter persistently spoke up about alleged irregularities in WCB payments which he was briefly receiving, cheques which were processed through the employer and the union. Twice large cheques arrived at his door, for the amounts he had claimed he was owed. They came from the Back to Work office at UBC which was headed by a woman who was on the CUPE Local 116 Executive. But no explanations were given for these cheques. He didn't shut up. The Executive of CUPE Local 116 called the police on him, claiming that he had been threatening.
CUPE BC took an interest in the steamfitters case. They sent a lawyer to a meeting with him and the university. He had not brought a lawyer. The CUPE lawyer,whom he described as "tough", told him that he had to get a psychiatric assessment and take medication or he would lose his job. Guess who shut up about the WCB issue? But CUPE was accused of becoming involved in "political psychiatry".
Conclusion: Barry O'Neill has alot of nerve to demand that the City grant CUPE's membership with protection for the whistleblowers amongst them. But Local 15's Faoro, who is rumored to be angling for O'Neill's job when he retires, has alot of nerve too.
Local 15 was made aware in 2003 of the tactics from unfounded police complaints to political psychiatry that their dues to CUPE BC were supporting. What did Local 15 do to ensure that workers could speak up about workplace conditions without fear of harassment? Nothing. But Faoro had the term "fair" on his lips during this summer's CUPE strike, so the secretary wrote to him asking that he show some leadership and ensure that her grievance against CUPE was resolved.
Faoro ignored her.
"[I]t's time to actually end this dispute," Faoro told the Vancouver Sun yesterday. Which dispute would he be talking about? The one between his members and the City of course, not the whistleblowing secretary's dispute with CUPE.
"In order to show leadership, and try to resolve this dispute, we are prepared to take the lead....", Faoro also told the Sun. The whistleblowing secretary has yet to see these leadership qualities in Faoro.
Harassment of a whistleblower by CUPE is not restricted to the case of the secretary and the steamfitter. The Downtown Eastside Enquirer has obtained documentation supporting two other cases: the case of a whistleblower about the Vancouver School Board and that of whistleblower at the CUPE stronghold of Carnegie Center.
The Vancouver School Board Whistleblower: a CUPE member working inside the VSB involved herself in harassment tactics targeting this whistleblower
This situation occurred after several Vancouver residents had independently complained over the years to the Vancouver School Board about a verbally and at times physically abusive, and racist, teacher. Nothing was done. A woman wrote to the School Board in the fall of 2002 about the VSB's duplicity in the handling of such complaints, specifically their public assurances to the public that "bullying" complaints were taken seriously while in reality disregarding them and treating the complainants as the problem. She stated in the letter that she intended to draw public attention to this duplicity by campaigning in the School Board election, just two months away. In the same letter she made a freedom of information request for recent documents from the file pertaining to her complaint against this teacher.
The response this woman got was a visit from Car 87, in which a police constable and a psych nurse ride together. She believes that this was an attempt to undermine her credibility in the upcoming election campaign. When the woman read the psych report which cleared her but smeared her, the sole reason given for the visit was that she had made "freedom of information requests." The primary witness against this whistleblower was, guess who? A CUPE member. It was Georgina Kosich, the Labour Relations and Freedom of Information Assistant who processed foi requests at the VSB. Kosich was the only staff person who met with the psych nurse, Don Getz, when he arrived at the VSB in the police car, according to his report, (although he had briefly spoken to an in-house lawyer, new on the job, who directed him to Kosich.) More about Kosich: the targeted woman has letters she received from Kosich in response to her freedom of information requests encouraging her to feel free to contact her. The targeted woman's FOI requests had not been excessive; she had made two over the previous year. This case has been labelled "political psychiatry" by Downtown Eastside advocates.
The Carnegie Center Whistleblower: CUPE members were involved in getting an alleged whistleblower barred from Carnegie Center
The most recent case, of course, of the involvement of CUPE members in silencing a whistleblower is the notorious case of Bill Simpson, a homeless man who was barred from Carnegie Center because he was suspected of being associated with a blog. The blog was being used to blow the whistle on Carnegie Center staff [most of whom are CUPE members] and Director Ethel Whitty for not always giving taxpayers what they had paid for.
Roughly a year ago, bloggers began reporting to taxpayers when CUPE members [and one BCTF member] were locking patrons out of publicly-funded educational and computer services that were scheduled to be open. CUPE members interrogated volunteers at the Center in what took on the characteristics of a "witch hunt" for the blogger. In fact, one volunteer claims he was separately questioned by Rika Uto, Colleen Gorrie, and Carnegie Assistant Manager Dan Tetrault -- all CUPE members. The volunteer was also interrogated by two members of the BC Teachers Federation, Lucy Alderson and Betsy Alkenbrack, and Carnegie Director Ethel Whitty. This witch hunt resulted in Bill Simpson being led to the office of Skip, Carnegie Head of Security and a CUPE member with some seniority, and informed by Lucy Alderson that he was barred from the Carnegie Learning Centre.
But here's the thing about Skip: he showed a tendency to skip Simpson's rights. When Simpson asked him for something in writing so that he could appeal this barring from a public space, he recalls Skip saying, "Ah come on, give me a break, I'm new here." Skip never gave Simpson anything in writing, and neither did Alderson who was also asked.
Carnegie Board member, Rachel Davis, recently stated on Vancouver Co-operative Radio that every barring at Carnegie must be accompanied by an incident report. But security guards don't always produce one and when the do, she explained, they often won't allow the targeted individual to see it.
But efforts to stop legitimate whistleblowing at the Carnegie Center didn't end with this barring. They continued when bloggers alleged that a CUPE member in a social work role was repeatedly having sexual relations with male clients, many of whom were troubled. Two of these clients had successfully committed suicide and one made an unsuccessful attempt by jumping off a bridge and becoming a quadrapelegic -- although no direct link was claimed to exist between these tragedies and the supervisor's former sexual liasons with these men. The 'Sex in the City' supervisor was not named in the post at the request of sources who simply wanted her misconduct to stop.
Not only was the 'Sex in the City' supervisor never genuinely investigated but, with the support of CUPE, managed to wrangle a Workers Compensation judgement out of this situation. She took the position that bloggers at Carnegie were creating an unsafe work environment. Carnegie Board member, Grant Chancey, an outspoken CUPE supporter during the strike, wasn't buying this framing of blogging as a safety risk to a CUPE member. "This is not a WorkSafe issue", he said at a Community Relations Meeting at Carnegie, adding that he had seen no threats whatsoever on the blog posts "and I've looked and I've looked and I've looked."
The result of the WCB claim, according to Ethel Whitty, was that homeless Bill Simpson was once again barred -- this time from the entire building. He was no longer accused of blogging but simply of "featuring links" on his website to the blog criticizing CUPE members at Carnegie. Written notification of the barring was personally delivered to Simpson on June 21, 2007, after he was held at the front door of Carnegie by Trey, a security guard and CUPE member. Director Whitty and Assistant Director, Dan Tetrault, a CUPE member, came downstairs from their offices to deliver the letter. This was one of Tetrault's last acts on the job before going on strike to demand more money and of course whistleblower protection for himself and his CUPE dues-paying co-workers.
CUPE members from top to bottom at Carnegie involved themselves in this barring despite the fact that low income members of the Center had elected Simpson to the Board of Directors two weeks earlier. Did I mention that Simpson is not even allowed into the building to attend Board meetings? The henchmen at the front door, all CUPE members, will stop him.
In the case of the attempt to penalize whistleblowing on a blog, a characteristic tactic of CUPE leaders or members turned up -- the unfounded police complaint. Bill Simpson was contacted by police and so were others suspected of being associated with the whistleblowing blog. But a visit to an ex-boyfriend of the 'Sex in the City' supervisor and CUPE member was particularly telling. The police officer who appeared to be off duty told the ex-boyfriend that the Crown would not be laying charges as the blog content was true, but that he had come to register concerns about the blogging. Blatant intimidation. Blatant police state activity.
Carnegie Assistant Manager, Dan Tetrault, would have at the very least known about this police complaint. Did I mention that Tetrault is the guy with a high five figure salary out on the picket line asking for more money and whistleblowing protection for himself and his co-workers?
It's documented. CUPE leaders and members have a record of harassing whistleblowers by employing illegal tactics ranging from police complaints unsupported by actual evidence to political psychiatry similar to that employed in the People's Republic of China. And while doing nothing to address the suffering of whistleblowers whose reputations they have damaged, CUPE has the nerve to demand whistleblower protection for their members.
It's time to blow the whistle on CUPE.
Paul Faoro, President of Local 15 which represents indoor workers, was with O'Neill at the press conference. Local 15 and the City of Vancouver have been able to agree on a wage increase of 17.5 over five years. But like Local 1004 (outside workers) and Local 391 (library workers), Local 15 hasn't been able to get the City to meet their demands for job security as well as protection for whistleblowers.
Protection for whistleblowers?
O'Neill has a lot of nerve. There is an unresolved complaint against him for allegedly being involved in the harassment of a whistleblower inside CUPE. A former secretary to two CUPE Presidents was blowing the whistle on unfair labour practices inside CUPE when a letter she had written to Barry O'Neill about the issue was turned over to police in Dec. 2002. She was then visited by VPD Constables Ng and Herrmann in what she alleges was an exercise in intimidation.
One of the issues raised by this secretary -- who had left CUPE with two glowing letters of reference -- was that she saw female co-workers fired after they spoke up about such issues as unfair workloads, verbal abuse, and the fact that CUPE had renegged on a promise of a pension. They had no job protection as these CUPE secretaries did not have the benefit of a union.
Earlier the same year, 2002, CUPE had muzzled a whistleblowing steamfitter and CUPE member working in Plant Operations at the University of British Columbia. The steamfitter persistently spoke up about alleged irregularities in WCB payments which he was briefly receiving, cheques which were processed through the employer and the union. Twice large cheques arrived at his door, for the amounts he had claimed he was owed. They came from the Back to Work office at UBC which was headed by a woman who was on the CUPE Local 116 Executive. But no explanations were given for these cheques. He didn't shut up. The Executive of CUPE Local 116 called the police on him, claiming that he had been threatening.
CUPE BC took an interest in the steamfitters case. They sent a lawyer to a meeting with him and the university. He had not brought a lawyer. The CUPE lawyer,whom he described as "tough", told him that he had to get a psychiatric assessment and take medication or he would lose his job. Guess who shut up about the WCB issue? But CUPE was accused of becoming involved in "political psychiatry".
Conclusion: Barry O'Neill has alot of nerve to demand that the City grant CUPE's membership with protection for the whistleblowers amongst them. But Local 15's Faoro, who is rumored to be angling for O'Neill's job when he retires, has alot of nerve too.
Local 15 was made aware in 2003 of the tactics from unfounded police complaints to political psychiatry that their dues to CUPE BC were supporting. What did Local 15 do to ensure that workers could speak up about workplace conditions without fear of harassment? Nothing. But Faoro had the term "fair" on his lips during this summer's CUPE strike, so the secretary wrote to him asking that he show some leadership and ensure that her grievance against CUPE was resolved.
Faoro ignored her.
"[I]t's time to actually end this dispute," Faoro told the Vancouver Sun yesterday. Which dispute would he be talking about? The one between his members and the City of course, not the whistleblowing secretary's dispute with CUPE.
"In order to show leadership, and try to resolve this dispute, we are prepared to take the lead....", Faoro also told the Sun. The whistleblowing secretary has yet to see these leadership qualities in Faoro.
Harassment of a whistleblower by CUPE is not restricted to the case of the secretary and the steamfitter. The Downtown Eastside Enquirer has obtained documentation supporting two other cases: the case of a whistleblower about the Vancouver School Board and that of whistleblower at the CUPE stronghold of Carnegie Center.
The Vancouver School Board Whistleblower: a CUPE member working inside the VSB involved herself in harassment tactics targeting this whistleblower
This situation occurred after several Vancouver residents had independently complained over the years to the Vancouver School Board about a verbally and at times physically abusive, and racist, teacher. Nothing was done. A woman wrote to the School Board in the fall of 2002 about the VSB's duplicity in the handling of such complaints, specifically their public assurances to the public that "bullying" complaints were taken seriously while in reality disregarding them and treating the complainants as the problem. She stated in the letter that she intended to draw public attention to this duplicity by campaigning in the School Board election, just two months away. In the same letter she made a freedom of information request for recent documents from the file pertaining to her complaint against this teacher.
The response this woman got was a visit from Car 87, in which a police constable and a psych nurse ride together. She believes that this was an attempt to undermine her credibility in the upcoming election campaign. When the woman read the psych report which cleared her but smeared her, the sole reason given for the visit was that she had made "freedom of information requests." The primary witness against this whistleblower was, guess who? A CUPE member. It was Georgina Kosich, the Labour Relations and Freedom of Information Assistant who processed foi requests at the VSB. Kosich was the only staff person who met with the psych nurse, Don Getz, when he arrived at the VSB in the police car, according to his report, (although he had briefly spoken to an in-house lawyer, new on the job, who directed him to Kosich.) More about Kosich: the targeted woman has letters she received from Kosich in response to her freedom of information requests encouraging her to feel free to contact her. The targeted woman's FOI requests had not been excessive; she had made two over the previous year. This case has been labelled "political psychiatry" by Downtown Eastside advocates.
The Carnegie Center Whistleblower: CUPE members were involved in getting an alleged whistleblower barred from Carnegie Center
The most recent case, of course, of the involvement of CUPE members in silencing a whistleblower is the notorious case of Bill Simpson, a homeless man who was barred from Carnegie Center because he was suspected of being associated with a blog. The blog was being used to blow the whistle on Carnegie Center staff [most of whom are CUPE members] and Director Ethel Whitty for not always giving taxpayers what they had paid for.
Roughly a year ago, bloggers began reporting to taxpayers when CUPE members [and one BCTF member] were locking patrons out of publicly-funded educational and computer services that were scheduled to be open. CUPE members interrogated volunteers at the Center in what took on the characteristics of a "witch hunt" for the blogger. In fact, one volunteer claims he was separately questioned by Rika Uto, Colleen Gorrie, and Carnegie Assistant Manager Dan Tetrault -- all CUPE members. The volunteer was also interrogated by two members of the BC Teachers Federation, Lucy Alderson and Betsy Alkenbrack, and Carnegie Director Ethel Whitty. This witch hunt resulted in Bill Simpson being led to the office of Skip, Carnegie Head of Security and a CUPE member with some seniority, and informed by Lucy Alderson that he was barred from the Carnegie Learning Centre.
But here's the thing about Skip: he showed a tendency to skip Simpson's rights. When Simpson asked him for something in writing so that he could appeal this barring from a public space, he recalls Skip saying, "Ah come on, give me a break, I'm new here." Skip never gave Simpson anything in writing, and neither did Alderson who was also asked.
Carnegie Board member, Rachel Davis, recently stated on Vancouver Co-operative Radio that every barring at Carnegie must be accompanied by an incident report. But security guards don't always produce one and when the do, she explained, they often won't allow the targeted individual to see it.
But efforts to stop legitimate whistleblowing at the Carnegie Center didn't end with this barring. They continued when bloggers alleged that a CUPE member in a social work role was repeatedly having sexual relations with male clients, many of whom were troubled. Two of these clients had successfully committed suicide and one made an unsuccessful attempt by jumping off a bridge and becoming a quadrapelegic -- although no direct link was claimed to exist between these tragedies and the supervisor's former sexual liasons with these men. The 'Sex in the City' supervisor was not named in the post at the request of sources who simply wanted her misconduct to stop.
Not only was the 'Sex in the City' supervisor never genuinely investigated but, with the support of CUPE, managed to wrangle a Workers Compensation judgement out of this situation. She took the position that bloggers at Carnegie were creating an unsafe work environment. Carnegie Board member, Grant Chancey, an outspoken CUPE supporter during the strike, wasn't buying this framing of blogging as a safety risk to a CUPE member. "This is not a WorkSafe issue", he said at a Community Relations Meeting at Carnegie, adding that he had seen no threats whatsoever on the blog posts "and I've looked and I've looked and I've looked."
The result of the WCB claim, according to Ethel Whitty, was that homeless Bill Simpson was once again barred -- this time from the entire building. He was no longer accused of blogging but simply of "featuring links" on his website to the blog criticizing CUPE members at Carnegie. Written notification of the barring was personally delivered to Simpson on June 21, 2007, after he was held at the front door of Carnegie by Trey, a security guard and CUPE member. Director Whitty and Assistant Director, Dan Tetrault, a CUPE member, came downstairs from their offices to deliver the letter. This was one of Tetrault's last acts on the job before going on strike to demand more money and of course whistleblower protection for himself and his CUPE dues-paying co-workers.
CUPE members from top to bottom at Carnegie involved themselves in this barring despite the fact that low income members of the Center had elected Simpson to the Board of Directors two weeks earlier. Did I mention that Simpson is not even allowed into the building to attend Board meetings? The henchmen at the front door, all CUPE members, will stop him.
In the case of the attempt to penalize whistleblowing on a blog, a characteristic tactic of CUPE leaders or members turned up -- the unfounded police complaint. Bill Simpson was contacted by police and so were others suspected of being associated with the whistleblowing blog. But a visit to an ex-boyfriend of the 'Sex in the City' supervisor and CUPE member was particularly telling. The police officer who appeared to be off duty told the ex-boyfriend that the Crown would not be laying charges as the blog content was true, but that he had come to register concerns about the blogging. Blatant intimidation. Blatant police state activity.
Carnegie Assistant Manager, Dan Tetrault, would have at the very least known about this police complaint. Did I mention that Tetrault is the guy with a high five figure salary out on the picket line asking for more money and whistleblowing protection for himself and his co-workers?
It's documented. CUPE leaders and members have a record of harassing whistleblowers by employing illegal tactics ranging from police complaints unsupported by actual evidence to political psychiatry similar to that employed in the People's Republic of China. And while doing nothing to address the suffering of whistleblowers whose reputations they have damaged, CUPE has the nerve to demand whistleblower protection for their members.
It's time to blow the whistle on CUPE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)