i was represented by a weak ... union. i didn't know quite how bad it was, because i was the one who took care of bizness at my job. the union had a screwy election, that they had to redo. i told the president that i was going to run for vp. he asked me to run for the eboard instead, but he would put me on his ticket.
We have a saying around my house... "There's little better than having a great union, but there's nothing worse than having a
union."
on the eboard, i learned a bit more about how screwy they were. union officers felt they needed to get me off the eboard, so they offered me a job. they hired me, saying i had to resign from the eboard. next up, they gave me the biggst property they had, The Westin Hotel. folks there were pro union, but had gotten screwed big time in the last negotiations. (they were setting me up to fail, so they could get rid of me.)
when the full scope of their incompetence became clear, i went into overdrive. i started studying, asked my sister for help and fired the union's atty from working on any of my houses. he told me that i couldn't do that, because he deliberately re-wrote contract language so that only he could interpret it. i told him that i would rather lose a few cases than be connected to his slimy ....
I was quite young when mom was union stewarding, but I remember many 2am calls to the house... "how much money will it take to shut you up?" "None." *phone slam* (next night) "How about a promotion?" "No." *phone slam* (next night) "We can take care of your kids, you've got two disabled kids..." "You're not really going to bring my kids into this, are you? I didn't think so." *phone slam*
As you found out, dealing with that kind of BS is a huge part of what separates a good rep from a bad one... they *will* try to buy you, they *will* screw with you and give you the run around, and if you cave, or you don't realize what they're up to, you've just made the union useless. The (mass production) bakery where my folks were working at the time did an interesting thing... they paid for labor law and negotiation classes at Michigan State for all their stewards. I think they probably regretted that... don't give my mother free and open access to all she needs to know in one place unless you want her to know it and use it!
i worked like a banshee from hell. i was able to get more than a dozen letters of understanding during that contract period, that improved working conditions. the HR guy who kicked the union's .... in '93 (who used to refer to me as "the fat guy") was terminated in '95 because i became his his worst nightmare. i won a huge seniority issue for the room attendants and kitchen staff, that we honestly should have lost due to the union conceding the past practice before. i don't concede.
i use the "zipper clause" in the contract, that the union thought worked against them, and used it against the hotel. i began a steady stream of NLRB charges that got the GM fired even before the HR guy, the HR guy getting fired was a peace offering to me.
next, congress past FMLA. i became an expert on it, thanks to Joe Breslin of the Lumberjack's Trust in Oregon. Starwood Corporation tried going head to head with me, but eventually conceded, they simply declared that "if Sambuca says it's FMLA, it's FMLA." with the heavy work and wear and tear on the women in the housekeeping department, FMLA was like winning the lottery.
Absolutely it was. Mom is like that with labor law, I'm like that with the ADA and the Rehab Act of '74 and all the rest - we both get people sent to us all the time asking for the nitty gritty. I'm probably one of the only people in the world who's actually read the entire Affordable Care Act. But it affects me and the people I know (exactly how would take another marathon post to explain), so boning up on it was more than worth my time.
in 1996, the Westin's atty sent word to me that the hotel was dumbfounded by my bargaining committee. i sat their best employees across the table from them and our proposals were all intended to make the hotel work better and be fairer to the employees. we got a good contract, but not good enough for me. in 1999, the most vocal room attendant,Keh (God love her) declared that they just got the best contract that they ever had. i got back everything they lost in '93 (that i hadn't fixed yet), some stuff they lost in the 80s and some stuff they never had before.
i had gotten rid of the worst reps (a few good ones had quit) and the sec treasurer. i got elected as vp in '95. we almost saved the prez, but he fell prey to his "adviser" and ran a really crappy sec treasurer. after negotiations in 1999, i took down the prez, sec treasurer and that advisor. the IU wanted me gone, perhaps worried i'd go after them as well. they paid me well, when they canned me though! (it sucked to be out of the fight, i must admit.)
You would get along great with Mom.
That's pretty much how her bargaining career went too. When she took a year off to deal with the day to day of having two gimpy kids (therapy and doctor appointments every day for a while there), they elected Dad in her place. She was puzzled by that for years - "Why would they have done that, your father didn't give a crap." Finally, a few years ago, I told her, "Mom... dad's both a very *smart* guy, and a very *quiet* guy. They assumed he'd be asking you for advice."
He didn't... and if any of the guys at work had known him *well*, they would have seen that coming too, lol. (My father does not ask *anyone* for advice *ever*. He called to ask for medical advice once and I nearly dropped the phone in shock. Same goes for when he called to ask how to charge the Ego. That doubled the number of times he's asked for my *input*, let alone *advice*, in my entire lifetime.) Anyway, he gave away the whole store. This was well before FMLA, but mom had negotiated almost identical provisions to what FMLA eventually put into place - under Dad, those went, as did the shop having to pay overtime if they called in an entire shift to run one dough, and and and. I won't go so far as to say that was a factor in the divorce some 13 years later, but I know my mother *never* forgave him.... almost 20 years of hard work as a union steward and Dad flushed it down the toilet in one session. It wasn't intentional sabotage or anything like that... Dad is just not a good one for conflict, so I can picture how it went - "How about this?" "Yeah, okay, whatever, sounds fine."
it seems the that the way the disabled are treated is, in fact, a violation of the ADA. it is a "reasonable accommodation" to let some folks take a lighter course schedule. PERIOD! to not make that concession, violates the ADA. you can show hardship from it.
The biggest problem with the ADA is that it was never meant to be final legislation - even former Sen Tony Coelho and Sen. Kennedy, who wrote it, said that. It was meant to be foot-in-the-door legislation to pave the way for something more concrete, and as such, it's pretty mealy-mouthed. If I say to a business owner, "hey man, you're the only store that carries X for 50 miles, and I need X, so you need to put in a ramp," and he says "how about I just bring X to you and we conduct this transaction outside?"... technically, he can argue that's a "reasonable" accommodation. It's not reasonable to *me*, and if I took it to court, a *judge* would not find it reasonable, since there are federal funds available to put a ramp on your place of business and all I'm asking for is a ramp.... but there's the rub. At the end of the day, to get that ramp in, I'd have to have the time, energy, and money and/or representation to take it to court.
That's the gap between the text of the law and the actual day to day of being able to enforce it, and it's all down to that weasel word "reasonable." That was my school's excuse too, "hey, crawl up the stairs, there, you've been reasonably accommodated!" Of course it's not, but what was I going to do, take it to court? (Why yes, I was. Unfortunately, life intervened. Long story.) But there was certainly no way to *quickly* rebut "crawl up the stairs," and even if I had sued, if you have enough money you can just settle everything out of court... which is what that school does. I'd like to think I wouldn't have taken a settlement, but as a working class kid who just wanted to go to school for god's sake, if they'd offered me $10 mill (their going rate) to go away? God, that's enough money to make sure my sister would be okay for her whole life, buy my mom a nice house, buy my dad another Harley, pump up both of their retirement funds, go to school, and still have enough to stick plenty in *my* retirement fund. It would have been sorely, sorely tempting to say the least.
Another classic example of the gap between the language of the law and how it's actually used is when I went to a movie theater with some friends one day. I was visiting in Boston, and older cities tend to be less accessible just because the *buildings* are older, so I called first. "I use a wheelchair, are you accessible?" "Yep, come on down!" "Okay, so there are no stairs at all to get to any of the theaters? None of them have stairs? And no stairs to get to bathrooms? Are there *any* stairs in *any* publicly accessible areas of your building?" "Nope! We're accessible." (I always ask more than once and in a few different ways, because a lot of places are what we jokingly call "pretend accessible", i.e. totally accessible, oh except for the stairs to get in, or the stairs to get to the can, or...)
So we get to the place, buy the tickets, go in, no one says a word... but we can't seem to find the particular theater the movie we bought tickets for is playing in.
"Oh, it's upstairs. I'm sorry, there's no elevator."
"Well... that's a problem for me. I did call before I came."
"I know, but I didn't know you wanted to see *that* movie."
"I did ask if *any* of the theaters had stairs... but okay, these things happen. Can you refund our tickets please?"
"No, all sales are final, but you can see (completely different movie), that's on the ground level."
"... I don't want to see (completely different movie). I paid to see X movie, and if I can't see X movie, then I would like my money back."
"Well, you could crawl up the stairs..."
My friends: "OH GOD, JUST GIVE US THE REFUND!"
(they know that phrase is like a red flag to a bull at this stage, and were afraid I'd cause a scene... me, cause a scene? Naaah.
)
Anyway, the point is, from the movie theater's perspective, hey, we're not *barring* you from the place, you can just see a *different* movie! No one said you can't come in! We welcome all comers!
From my perspective, of course, the situation is entirely different.
And that's why the ADA is a broken law, and it was broken from the moment it was written. If a business doesn't feel like complying, or doesn't understand the spirit of the law, there are zero consequences a disabled person *happens* to notice and then *happens* to have the resources (not just money, but time and energy, which are at much higher premiums for most of us) to sue. No one's doublechecking for compliance, explaining why compliance is important, or reminding businesses that compliance benefits them financially. After all, if I can get in, I can spend money, but that ramp isn't *mine* - if I can get in, so can the mom with the stroller, the employee who broke his ankle, and the rich old guy whose knees aren't quite up to stairs anymore.
if the "goal" it to get folks off of ssi/ssdi, then it is a wicked failure. the quicker folks can complete their degrees enables them to join the workforce, so...what's wrong with that picture?
Indeed. I'm glad you can see it. I spend so much time arguing with people who can't see that (in the process of trying to fix it) that sometimes I start to wonder if I'm the one who's crazy.
with your brains, talent and charisma, nothing can stop you. watch some Dr Who, and change the way you are viewing the problem. sometimes you greatest obstacles can be used in your favor.
Too right. And thanks for the compliment! One of the things I've been trying to do in my "off time" is train up some younger gimps in advocacy. A big reason that the Disability Rights Movement has stalled so many times is because since the 60s, we've been trying to do it like the Civil Rights Movement - find one or two charismatic leaders and rally around them. The problem with that is, we're all disabled... we die. A lot. And since we're not Time Lords, one leader will often spend 20 or 30 years trying to *get to* the point where people know them and are paying attention... and then they get sick and die. Or at best, they just don't have the energy to keep going with advocacy, because their aide that helps them out of bed in the morning quit, or because the VA is jerking them around, or because their chair finally died and now it's going to take 6 months to get a new one, etc. In other words, the very problems we're trying to solve can also keep us from being *able* to advocate.
I think the solution is instead of having *one* Justin Dart or *one* Harriet McBryde Johnson, we need to have *lots* of them at the same time.. and I think the best way to do that is to teach very young disabled people (teens and very early twenties, at the oldest) how to be advocates and activists. That way *when* one of them has to step away for a while (because it will be a when), the whole movement doesn't fall apart and have to start all over again.
Not to get all political (too late, I'm sure), but I'm working toward trying to get Teddy Kennedy Jrs ear. Not to have him lead anything (though disability activism is his thing), but to pitch him the above problem and solution. There's only one of *me*, too, after all, so the more people I can get to understand that the key is to train *many* leaders and not to wait on one, the better.
I'm not waiting on a Kennedy to do this though. I'm already *doing* it... it's just that a Kennedy would be a great signal booster, so I've got the one with the vested interest who's already a disability rights lawyer on my radar.
sorry to rant, buddy. just make sure you know know that you are a total joy to have around here! you've got brains, talent, passion, wit and charm. so it's not like you don't have any ammo! i haven't met too many folks that could face you in a showdown! they wouldn't have enough tools, dude. (they'd be "handicapped" compared to you. not a fair fight, by any means. i'd like to see that!)
No worries, I didn't take it as a rant, and I appreciate the ego boost and the moral support. It's always a good thing to have more people in your corner.
btw, how's TDay dinner coming?
Coming along good. Pumpkin bread is done (I'll be making more before Thursday, that was just a dry run to tweak the recipe), cranberry sauce is done (that'll keep fine in the freezer for a couple days), pie crusts are done (same), most of the mise en place done. Herb butter is almost done, taking a break now so I don't end up not able to move my fingers tomorrow (So. Much. Mincing!). I'll probably go ahead and throw the brine together tonight just so I don't have to mess around with it later.
When I get home from spirometry on tuesday (after a nap), I'll do the pies and the apple john, more pumpkin bread, and probably get the stuffing started. Drop the bird in the drink wednesday-ish... it's thawing at the moment, but it should be ready to go by then. That'll just leave the champ and finishing off the turkey for the big day. I'll probably pick some kale out of the garden and do some kind of wilted kale with parmesan thing too.
So yeah, it's on schedule. Are you?
