I do have a couple of questions and more than a few comments. It was to my understanding that the changed portion of the language was discovered (’95?) when the Alaskans (local 200) of the ILWU were having trouble with their health and welfare coverage. McWilliams sent Raminsky to Alaska where a vote was taken with the employer on whether the Alaskans were entitled to benefits (which included the pensioners). Raminsky, under McWilliams directive, voted with the employer(s). Can you prove otherwise? Those (as I was told at the time by more then a few longies) working in distressed ports and the pensioners lost their medical benefits (do they have them today?). Things started to go down hill from there because it was soon discovered that the language had been changed in our UCL (usual and customary language) document also. There was even a march in Portland (with pickets) against the employers that cover Alaska also. McWilliams declared that it was an illegal act on behalf of Bukoskey and fellows and ordered it to stop with the employers cheering in the background. When this happened I couldn’t help but wonder what really was going on.
I was in a heated argument at my locals Union meeting (at the time) over this very subject. I have seen documents from the 50’s that state in no uncertain terms that we have health benefits for “life”. I have never seen, nor has anyone ever to my knowledge produced anything to the contrary. I am in no way saying that all of this is McWilliams fault. There is enough to go around for everyone in this. McWilliams also sided with the employers in their petition to the Feds to change the fiduciary requirements of the employers in maintaining our pension. The ramifications of that have yet to be fully appreciated. What is your take on those facts? I say facts because I looked them up (the changes with the Pension Guarantee) at the Feds web-site.
As for your charges against Richard Olson, I must admit that my view is very prejudicial in this. I have known Ole for many years and have never found a more honest man. And I am not just saying that, I mean I have never known Ole to lie about ANYTHING, PERIOD. I can’t say that about myself or anyone else that I have met in this lifetime. Not to say that I agree with him on everything or side he has as anyone that reads this regularly knows, he has been, at times, very vicious to me. But, I know that his computer hard drives were stolen, the keys to his office changed, his Union credit cards revoked all when he was a duly elected officer of the ILWU Longshore Division. His trusteeship(s) were illegally taken from him by McWilliams (at the same time frame that the pension requirements were done when McWilliams appointed himself to Ole’s charges!) not to mention that they refused to pay his wages or his MEDICAL bills! All on McWilliams orders! Some fucking Union huh? I don’t profess to know all of the dynamics that happened during this period of time but I believe Olson. McWilliams, Austin, and Raminsky beat him down and Ortiz, Palacios, et. al. applied the coup de grace.
Please do not construe this as a message of support for Spinosa, McEllrath or Ortiz. It is not. In this election I wish I had the choice of voting against someone instead of for someone. I do not like the way things have gone under McWilliams’ stewardship but at the same time I believe with the election of Spinosa the only part of the ILWU that will get any attention is LA/LB. The rest of the ILWU will have to make do with table scraps. So I am caught between who I won’t and can’t vote for. . . . . . . . . . But the rumor mill has it that the Hawaiians are supporting Spinosa as long as he doesn’t support Hoshijo, hence the campaign literature Vote for Spinosa, McEllrath, and Furtado. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
All of this back-stabbing and lies about who did what and to whom remind me of a Shakespeare line from Romeo and Juliet: “A pox on both of your houses”. . . . . . . . . .
Tim 35181
