IBEW 1245 mourns for the passing of Mike Silva long time union activist

Posted: November 3, 2011 IBEW 1245 website
Ken Rawles 

MIKE SILVA: STEADFAST IN THE CAUSE

OF GIVING LOCAL 1245 RETIREES A VOICE

Mike Silva speaks at a summit of retiree club leaders in 2006 to discuss retiree medical benefits.

Mike Silva, the PG&E retiree who held the Local 1245 Retirees Club together almost single-handedly for many years, died Oct. 30.
Silva, who retired around 1994, stepped up to take leadership of the East Bay Chapter of the Retirees Club when some of the union’s aging founders were still among its members, including Don Hardie and Tom Riley. At the time there was only one other chapter—in San Jose—and the club’s long-term viability at times seemed in doubt.
But Silva wouldn’t let the idea die. He believed that retirees had an important role to play in the life of the union, and he clearly felt that retirees had a responsibility to stand up for their rights in public life.
There were times when the chapter could barely muster a quorum, but Brother Silva soldiered ahead, serving not only as president of the East Bay Chapter but recorder as well. He e-mailed out the minutes of the meeting like clockwork every month, making sure Local 1245 remained aware that retirees were engaged in the life of the union.

Mike Silva began playing a leadership role in the Retirees Club in the 1990s...and he never gave up.

When retirees in other areas began to stir at the beginning of the new century, Silva brought his experience and passion to the task of helping other chapters get started.
“I remember meeting Mike years ago when he was serving as the president of the East Bay Chapter, which at that time was meeting at union headquarters when it was still located in Walnut Creek,” said Ken Rawles.
When the union moved its headquarters to Vacaville, the East Bay Chapter of the Retirees Club relocated to Dublin. But Silva sensed an opportunity for the club to grow.
“Mike believed it was important for the club to have a chapter in Vacaville because it was the union’s headquarters and because we needed to give retirees in the Vacaville and Sacramento area a chance to get involved,” said Rawles. “He thought it should become the main chapter.”
Even as he continued to lead the East Bay Chapter, Silva joined Rawles in going to Vacaville to encourage the new chapter during its infancy. Silva also joined Rawles for meetings in Santa Rose to start a North Bay Chapter, and both men also drove to Merced at the inaugural meeting of the chapter there, offering their experience and support.
When retirees from all the chapters held special meetings at union headquarters in response to an alarming rise in health care premiums, Silva was welcomed as something of an elder statesman. When he spoke, people listened.

Mike Silva, right, and Ken Rawles trade information during a retiree meeting in Vacaville. Silva and Rawles helped launch the Vacaville chapter, and also helped start chapters in Santa Rosa and Merced.

In one of many articles he wrote for the Utility Reporter, Silva had this to say on the role of the union in the life of retirees:
“The union is the only place you can have a say on how to improve the quality of life for PG&E retirees. The retiree clubs are the only voice you have to the negotiating committees. So if you want your voice heard, if you'd like to help solve retirees problems, attend our established meetings or grab a few of the retirees that you know in your area or from PSEA functions and establish your own meeting and local chapter.”
“Mike was always there when the retirees’ voices needed to be heard,” said Rawles.
Larry Darby, a former Local 1245 Advisory Council member and now a Retiree Club member, called Silva “one great person, a heck of a very good friend and a great chairperson for the East Bay Retirees Club.”
Local 1245 salutes our brother, Mike Silva, for his steadfastness in the cause of giving retirees a voice.
Please call the Joachim Parish in Hayward at (510) 783-2766 to confirm, but to the best of our knowledge the following will be the schedule of services for Mike:
Viewing: Monday, Nov. 7, 4 PM
Funeral: Tuesday, Nov. 8, at noon.
The location will be Joachim Parish, 21250 Hesperian Blvd., Hayward, CA.

2011 IBEW Local 1245

FRIDAY ALERT Alliance for Retired Americans

02/25/2011 this is copied from FRIDAY ALERT ALLIANCE for RETIRED AMERICANS
blog   http://ara.typepad.com/     Ken Rawles


Nevadans rally in support of Wisconsin's public workers

Post by Rita Weisshaar



There was a great showing of union solidarity in Carson City!



There were probably 300-400 people at the President's Day rally. They came from a wide variety of unions in Nevada who came out to support the state workers in Wisconsin.



Vicki Borst, pictured at right picketing NV Energy last summer, is a NV Energy retiree and activist with the IBEW Local 1245 Retirees Club. She came out on February 21st to rally and support public workers in Wisconsin.



“I think it’s an awesome show of unity and solidarity in Wisconsin, and I see the same thing going on here today,” Borst said in a channel 8 TV report.



All four of the local TV stations, including the FOX network, covered the rally.



Nevada AFL-CIO chief Danny Thompson was the MC for the rally and several from the state workers, teamsters, teachers and other unions spoke on the importance of collective bargaining and the importance of the services state workers provide.



A few members of the legislature came out and stood with us in support of the state workers and collective bargaining. Senator Horsford furnished pizza to the people in the crowd saying he would rather give than take away from the state workers.



There was a great deal of enthusiasm in the crowd and it was reflected by the people in passing cards who honked their horns in support. There were a few anti-union protesters but they were outnumbered probably 20 to 1.



There was a good showing of Local 1245 retirees at the rally - about a dozen. One of them, Jim Walker, brought his young son. There were lots of families at the rally because of the Presidents Day holiday. It will create a memory for them they'll never forget.



It was a great day!



Rita Weisshaar is a retired NV Energy employee and IBEW Local 1245 shop steward. She is also an organizer for the union.

Attacks on Unions Hurt us all from a registered republican

This is from CONCORD MONITOR   Ken Rawles
Attacks on unions hurt us all


By Anonymous

Created 02/25/2011 - 00:00

Letter

Derek Martel, Concord

As a registered Republican I thought the GOP stood for less intrusion in our lives. The attacks on organized labor are a direct affront to such a belief.



Everyone has a choice where they work, private or public, union or non-union. If you accept a position with a business that has a collective bargaining agreement, then you should embrace the democracy associated with that job. Non-union shops have had to keep up with wages and benefits packages common in union shops, negotiated in a collective bargaining setting, to attract quality employees.



Consider weekend days off, paid vacations, paid sick leave, deferred benefit programs like a 457B or 403B, retirement plans, etc. If you enjoy these benefits, remember to thank organized labor. Working against your union co-workers is shameful at best. Pay your fair share and accept your responsibility as a member of an organization working tirelessly for you and your family.



The attacks on organized labor are detrimental to us all. Where is the voice of the middle class? Demonizing unions will not fix the budget problems New Hampshire taxpayers face. The bills in the State House attempting to weaken labor will ultimately affect the wages and benefits all workers enjoy or strive to procure, union shop or not.



The rhetoric spewing from these so-called Republicans will only make our state worse. A responsible government is needed in these challenging times. I hope those of you waiting to see such a body will speak up soon.



DEREK MARTEL



Concord



•CONCORD (NH)

Sacramento Capitol Rally for Wisconsin workers

On Feb 22nd I arrived at the Sacramento State Capitol steps with my IBEW 1245 brothers to join the organized efforts by our other union workers & organizations including CARA ( California Alliance for Retired Americans) which I am a vice president and board member for IBEW Ninth District . I hear that there was close to 2500 of us gathered together to show our support for our brothers and sisters in Wisconsin , and across the country who are facing losing their collective bargaining rights.
 Every union had signs made to reflect their talking points for  standing together on this fight against union breaking by a new  "Tea Party "  governor. We need to make our stand together to defeat his cause for union breaking.
 There were several speakers there including Art Polaski  . There were songs and chanting for our cause. One of the speakers even reminded us that Adolf Hitler stated that He would break the unions in old Germany!  It looks like this fight will take time , but in the end it will show our strength working as one!
 Let Us defeat the union breaking in the USA   In unity  Ken Rawles IBEW 1245 retiree

Republican strategy to split us up

Written By, Robert Reich.Fmr. Secretary of Labor


The Republican strategy is to split the vast middle and working class -- pitting

unionized workers against non-unionized, public-sector workers against

non-public, older workers within sight of Medicare and Social Security against

younger workers who don't believe these programs will be there for them, and the

poor against the working middle class.



By splitting working America along these lines, Republicans want Americans to

believe that we can no longer afford to do what we need to do as a nation. They

hope to deflect attention from the increasing share of total income and wealth

going to the richest 1 percent while the jobs and wages of everyone else

languish.



Republicans would rather no one notice their campaign to shrink the pie even

further with additional tax cuts for the rich -- making the Bush tax cuts

permanent, further reducing the estate tax, and allowing the wealthy to shift

ever more of their income into capital gains taxed at 15 percent.



The strategy has three parts.



The Battle Over the Federal Budget



The first is being played out in the budget battle in Washington. As they raise

the alarm over deficit spending and simultaneously squeeze popular middle-class

programs, Republicans want the majority of the American public to view it all as

a giant zero-sum game among average Americans that some will have to lose.



The president has already fallen into the trap by calling for budget cuts in

programs the poor and working class depend on -- assistance with home heating,

community services, college loans, and the like.



In the coming showdown over Medicare and Social Security, House budget chair

Paul Ryan will push a voucher system for Medicare and a partly-privatized plan

for Social Security -- both designed to attract younger middle-class voters.



The Assault on Public Employees



The second part of the Republican strategy is being played out on the state

level where public employees are being blamed for state budget crises. Unions

didn't cause these budget crises -- state revenues dropped because of the Great

Recession -- but Republicans view them as opportunities to gut public employee

unions, starting with teachers.



Wisconsin's Republican governor Scott Walker and his GOP legislature are seeking

to end almost all union rights for teachers. Ohio's Republican governor John

Kasich is pushing a similar plan in Ohio through a Republican-dominated

legislature. New Jersey's Republican governor Chris Christie is attempting the

same, telling a conservative conference Wednesday, "I'm attacking the leadership

of the union because they're greedy, and they're selfish and they're

self-interested."



The demonizing of public employees is not only based on the lie that they've

caused these budget crises, but it's also premised on a second lie: that public

employees earn more than private-sector workers. They don't, when you take

account of their education. In fact over the last fifteen years the pay of

public-sector workers, including teachers, has dropped relative to

private-sector employees with the same level of education -- even including

health and retirement benefits. Moreover, most public employees don't have

generous pensions. After a career with annual pay averaging less than $45,000,

the typical newly-retired public employee receives a pension of $19,000 a year.



Bargaining rights for public employees haven't caused state deficits to explode.

Some states that deny their employees bargaining rights, such as Nevada, North

Carolina, and Arizona, are running big deficits of over 30 percent of spending.

Many states that give employees bargaining rights -- Massachusetts, New Mexico,

and Montana -- have small deficits of less than 10 percent.



Republicans would rather go after teachers and other public employees than have

us look at the pay of Wall Street traders, private-equity managers, and heads of

hedge funds -- many of whom wouldn't have their jobs today were it not for the

giant taxpayer-supported bailout, and most of whose lending and investing

practices were the proximate cause of the Great Depression to begin with.



Last year, America's top thirteen hedge-fund managers earned an average of $1

billion each. One of them took home $5 billion. Much of their income is taxed as

capital gains -- at 15 percent -- due to a tax loophole that Republican members

of Congress have steadfastly guarded.



If the earnings of those thirteen hedge-fund managers were taxed as ordinary

income, the revenues generated would pay the salaries and benefits of 300,000

teachers. Who is more valuable to our society -- thirteen hedge-fund managers or

300,000 teachers? Let's make the question even simpler. Who is more valuable:

One hedge fund manager or one teacher?



The Distortion of the Constitution



The third part of the Republican strategy is being played out in the Supreme

Court. It has politicized the Court more than at any time in recent memory.



Last year a majority of the justices determined that corporations have a right

under the First Amendment to provide unlimited amounts of money to political

candidates. Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission is among the

most patently political and legally grotesque decisions of our highest court --

ranking right up there with Bush vs. Gore and Dred Scott.



Among those who voted in the affirmative were Clarence Thomas and Antonin

Scalia. Both have become active strategists in the Republican party.



A month ago, for example, Antonin Scalia met in a closed-door session with

Michele Bachmann's Tea Party caucus -- something no justice concerned about

maintaining the appearance of impartiality would ever have done.



Both Thomas and Scalia have participated in political retreats organized and

hosted by multi-billionaire financier Charles Koch, a major contributor to the

Tea Party and other conservative organizations, and a crusader for ending all

limits on money in politics. (Not incidentally, Thomas's wife is the founder of

Liberty Central, a Tea Party organization that has been receiving unlimited

corporate contributions due to the Citizens United decision. On his obligatory

financial disclosure filings, Thomas has repeatedly failed to list her sources

of income over the last twenty years, nor even to include his own four-day

retreats courtesy of Charles Koch.)



Some time this year or next, the Supreme Court will be asked to consider whether

the nation's new health care law is constitutional. Watch your wallets.



The Strategy as a Whole



These three aspects of the Republican strategy -- a federal budget battle to

shrink government, focused on programs the vast middle class depends on; state

efforts to undermine public employees, whom the middle class depends on; and a

Supreme Court dedicated to bending the Constitution to enlarge and entrench the

political power of the wealthy -- fit perfectly together.



They pit average working Americans against one another, distract attention from

the almost unprecedented concentration of wealth and power at the top, and

conceal Republican plans to further enlarge and entrench that wealth and power.



What is the Democratic strategy to counter this and reclaim America for the rest

of us?

Robert Reich.Fmr. Secretary of Labor; Professor at Berkeley; Author, Aftershock:

'The Next Economy and America's Future

Doug Williams
this copied from the IBEW groups email   Ken Rawles

30,000 Protest to defend Union Rights over Wisconsin Governor's plan

Posted: February 17, 2011


This is copied from the IBEW 1245 website   Ken Rawles


WISCONSIN PROTESTS SWELL TO 30,000 AS PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS FIGHT TO DEFEND UNION RIGHTS



Super Bowl Champs Throw Support to Protesters









Super Bowl Champs come out in support of public workers as massive protests continue in Wisconsin.

After day-long protests yesterday (Feb. 16) drew as many as 30,000 people in Madison, hundreds of Wisconsin workers, students and allies camped out last night in the Capitol Rotunda as a hearing on Gov. Scott Walker’s budget bill that eliminates collective bargaining rights for nearly all of the state’s public service workers went past midnight.



The state Senate is set to vote on the bill today. It was approved last night by the Joint Finance Committee on a straight party line vote with all Republicans backing the attack on worker’s rights. Today thousands workers and their supporters from around the state enter the third day of a massive protest against Walker’s plan.



In a statement, the Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers said:



As a publicly owned team we wouldn’t have been able to win the Super Bowl without the support of our fans. … They are the teachers, nurses and child care workers who take care of us and our families. But now in an unprecedented political attack Governor Walker is trying to take away their right to have a voice and bargain at work.



The right to negotiate wages and benefits is a fundamental underpinning of our middle class. When workers join together it serves as a check on corporate power and helps ALL workers by raising community standards. Wisconsin’s long standing tradition of allowing public sector workers to have a voice on the job has worked for the state since the 1930s. It has created greater consistency in the relationship between labor and management and a shared approach to public work.



These public workers are Wisconsin’s champions every single day and we urge the Governor and the State Legislature to not take away their rights.



Meanwhile in Ohio, where Gov. John Kasich is mirroring Walker’s assault on workers with similar legislation to strip collective bargaining rights from teachers, EMTs and other public workers, thousands of workers will rally against the bill in Columbus today.



Last night in Madison as the crowds stayed far into the night outside the Capitol too, Democratic state Rep. Cory Mason said:



This is the most anti-worker legislation in Wisconsin history. We are here tonight to tell Gov. Walker that this proposal has gone too far. Brothers and sisters, this is the fight of our generation. This is the moment to transcend party politics and do what is right by the hard working people who voted you in office.

The Wisconsin battle has drawn national attention and President Obama weighed in yesterday saying Walker’s plan looked less like an attempt to fix the state’s budget deficit but rather “it seems like more of an assault on unions.”



I think it’s very important for us to understand that public employees, they’re our neighbors, they’re our friends. These are folks who are teachers and they’re firefighters and they’re social workers and they’re police officers. They make a lot of sacrifices and make a big contribution. And I think it’s important not to vilify them or to suggest that somehow all these budget problems are due to public employees.



Also Secretary of Education Arne Duncan urged Walker to work with the unions not “antagonize” them. He said he plans to call Walker today.



Wisconsin workers are also receiving support for religious leaders. Milwaukee Archbishop Jerome E. Listecki on Wednesday said in a letter to lawmakers there is a ”moral obligation each of us has to respect the legitimate rights of workers.”



Walker has longed claimed his attack on workers is strictly a budget matter and has falsely blamed workers and their unions for state’s economic problems. Listecki wrote that it is a “mistake to marginalize or dismiss unions as impediments to economic growth.”



As Pope John Paul II wrote in 1981 “a union remains a constructive force of social order and solidarity. And it is impossible to ignore it.”



In a statement issued yesterday—Stop Attacking Workers— Interfaith Worker Justice (IWJ) said:



Our religious traditions insist that workers, as human beings with inherent dignity, have the right to form associations to improve their conditions at work. Statements issued by a wide array of … faith bodies support the right of workers to organize and bargain with their employers over wages, benefits, and a voice on the job.



Rabbi Renée Bauer, Director of the Interfaith Coalition for Worker Justice of South Central Wisconsin, said Walker’s bill “is an affront to the human dignity of public sector workers.”



As a religious leader I recognize this as a moral crisis. Jewish tradition makes protecting the weak from exploitation by the mighty, treating laborers fairly and recognizing their rights to organize a religious obligation.



My tradition is not alone in this call. All religions believe in justice. Now is the time for all of us to live out our faith by raising our voices to protect the rights of workers in Wisconsin and throughout the country.







Posted February 16, 2011



EGYPT IN WISCONSIN?

UNION MEMBERS ERUPT IN MASSIVE PROTEST AFTER GOVERNOR CALLS FOR AN END TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING











Thousands came out in Wisconsin to protest the governor's proposal to terminate their right to collective bargaining, causing some to compare the protest to the uprising in Egypt.

More than 15,000 people, including public employees, union activists and community supporters, jammed into the Capitol Square in Madison, Wis., on Feb. 15 to protest Gov. Scott Walker’s plan to strip away state workers’ rights and decimate family-supporting middle-class jobs. Some 3,000 massed inside the Capitol building where a hearing on the bill was under way.



Many of those at the rally camped overnight and continued their vigil on Feb. 16.



Walker has called for taking away the right of public employees to engage in collective bargaining.



The crowd not only filled the capitol grounds, but also the streets surrounding the capital and the “stay off the grass” capital lawn, according to one eye-witness..



Union firefighters, even though they are exempt from the union-busting proposal, came in force to show their solidarity with fellow public employees. One firefighter explained that when there is an emergency, they are there; and when a building is burning, they go in.



Accordingly, the firefighters led the demonstration into the capitol building itself.





Public workers and their allies held other protests around Wisconsin. Some 1,000 people gathered outside Walker’s suburban Milwaukee home carrying signs that read, “Stop the Attack on Workers’ Rights.”



AFSCME President Gerald McEntee told the cheering crowd in Madison:



"For 75 years, we’ve fought to make our voices heard, and we’re not going to be silenced today. We’re not going to let this happen, We won’t let him break the back of the middle class of Wisconsinites. We are strong. We are united."



Walker vows he will not negotiate any changes to his plan and if the state legislature doesn’t pass it, he will force massive layoffs, crippling state services and costing thousands of jobs.



Many of the signs compared Walker’s actions to ousted Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak’s iron rule of Egypt, including “Hosni Walker,” “Don’t Dictate, Negotiate,” and “Dictators Will Fall.” (Check out Washington Post columnist Harold Myerson’s “Wisconsin Pharaoh Tries to Silence Unions” here.)



Mike Oliver, a retired member of the Communications Workers of America (CWA [3]), told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:



"I am here to support my fellow union members. I am all for the governor balancing the budget, but not on the backs of state workers."



Wisconsin was the first state in the nation to grant public employees collective bargaining rights. Wisconsin AFL-CIO President Phil Neuenfeldt says Walker is “using the Trojan horse of a budget bill” to change the long-standing state workers’ rights policy. He also says the Walker’s plan will hit at the private sector as well:



"This is an attack not just on unions, but the entire middle class. Because as we fare around wages and benefits, so do those workers who are not represented."



Along with eliminating collective bargaining rights, Walker’s budget plan also calls for big pay and benefit cuts for state workers. A report by the Institute for Wisconsin’s Future released Feb. 14 estimates the cuts in take-home pay will cost the state $1.1 billion in reduced economic activity annually and cost some 9.000 private sector jobs.

Widows Tax Lingers

+PROMISES, PROMISES: 'Widows' tax' lingers




• This article is copied from the internet AP on 2-09-11    Ken Rawles

AP – Nichole Haycock, wearing both her and her late husband's wedding ring, shows a photograph of her late …

By KIMBERLY HEFLING, Associated Press Kimberly Hefling, Associated Press – 28 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Tens of thousands of the nation's war widows find it perplexing and downright disrespectful to their late military husbands: In order to fully collect on insurance their husbands bought for them when alive, they must marry another man.

And to qualify, the widows must remarry when they are 57 or older. Those who remarry earlier miss out, as do widows who never remarry.

At the heart of the issue is a government policy known as the "widows' tax." It says a military spouse whose loved one dies from a service-related cause can't collect both survivor's benefits and the full annuity benefits from insurance the couple bought from the Defense Department at retirement. Instead, the amount of the annuity payment is reduced by the amount of the monthly survivor benefit.

Time after time, members of Congress have promised to help the 55,000 affected widows, but laws passed to help them have only created a more complicated system that's left many of them confused and angry.

So what's remarriage got to do with it? Very little, as it turns out. The marriage condition was stuck into the law by Congress as it attempted to help the survivors retain certain benefits if they remarried late in life, as is the case with other similar federal annuities. Because Congress hasn't been able to come up with the money to help all the widows, relief has been limited to that group. The result is an all but incomprehensible mess.

"I've never even wanted to date, much less remarry," said Nichole Haycock, a mother of three teenagers in Lawton, Okla., whose 38-year-old military husband died in 2002. "I already married the love of my life. Why would you bring that as a factor?"

And there's yet another wrinkle that leaves even some of those who benefit from the system — women 57 and over who have found love a second time and remarried — not completely happy.

For war widows who were denied the full benefits of their military insurance, the government sought to help by giving them back the premiums their spouses had paid for the policies. But if a widow then remarries at age 57 or older, becoming eligible for the benefit, she can only get it by repaying the insurance premiums the government had refunded to her.

Freda Schroeppel Green, 74, whose late husband served in Vietnam and died of a service-connected disability after 30 years in the Air Force, said she was surprised after remarrying last year to receive a bill from the government to repay more than $41,000 in insurance premiums. Those premiums had been refunded to her after his 2003 death because at that time she wasn't able to receive the full benefit of the annuity.

"It doesn't make any sense to me," said Green, of Brooksville, Fla. "Why did they send the premiums that he paid and now they want it back?"

It also doesn't make sense to Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., and 10 other senators who last week filed legislation to help the widows.

"This has always been an issue of the military doing the right thing and living up to its promises," Nelson said in a statement. "These policies were bought by servicemen and women to make sure their loved ones would be taken care of following their deaths. Not only is it a promise the government hasn't kept, but now it's sending bills to survivors. That's just outrageous."

Among the widows, Green and the approximately 700 who have remarried after age 57 are considered the lucky ones because at least they no longer have one benefit subtracted from the other.

Other surviving spouses — most of whom lose about $1,000 a month because of the current setup — have fought for years on Capitol Hill.

The Gold Star Wives of America Inc., a congressionally chartered group of military widows, supports legislation backed by the senators and Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., that would eliminate the offset and not require widows to pay back premiums previously refunded. They argue the survivors have spent years living without the benefit of the annuity and it is cheaper for the government to forgo the premiums than manually calculate what's owed.

The main hurdle to eliminating the benefit offset is cash. It would cost the government an estimated $6.7 billion over a decade to allow the widows to collect both benefits in full.

The Defense Department has long said there was never an expectation that both programs would be provided at the same time. Clifford Stanley, the defense undersecretary for personnel, told Congress last year that eliminating the offset would create inequities in its benefits programs.

The widows disagree. Most of the affected survivors' spouses paid on average 6.5 percent of their retirement pay — or about $100 a month or more — for the annuity. The service members died thinking their spouses would benefit from it, the widows say, just as if they had bought a private life insurance policy. The idea that insurance benefits would be reduced if the husband died from a service-related cause and the widow was receiving survivor benefits was never explained to them, they say.

"Nobody could see the train wrecking," said Vivianne Wersel, chair of government relations at Gold Star Wives, whose husband died in 2005 days after returning from a second tour in Iraq. "They had no idea. It wasn't until a death they realized they weren't getting what their husbands thought they'd be getting."

For the past several years, a measure to eliminate the offset has passed in the Senate only to be dropped when House and Senate negotiators got together in private to hash out defense spending.

Instead, Congress in recent years has given the surviving spouses small legislative victories that in retrospect only seem to have created new inequities, said Steve Strobridge, a retired Air Force colonel who is director of government relations at the Military Officers Association of America.

One of those victories was the 57-and-older remarriage rule, which at first the Defense Department did not recognize. Three of the widows later successfully sued, and in 2009 the Defense Department issued new guidance saying those surviving spouses 57 and older who remarry wouldn't be subjected to the offset.

At the time of the court ruling in the widows' favor, even the federal appellate judge who sided with them questioned what Congress was thinking in only helping such a small subset of the widows. Noting that the service member paid for one benefit with premiums and the other with his life, Judge George W. Miller wrote, "Perhaps it was recognition that the political process is the art of the possible, and that prudence counseled against making the perfect the enemy of the good."

Another small win on Capitol Hill gave the widows affected by the offset a taxable $50 a month starting in 2010. Instead of making the widows happy, however, many felt Congress was acknowledging that they'd been wronged but wasn't ponying up the money to fix the problem properly.

"What am I supposed to do with this except for put it in my gas tank and drive down to your office to complain?" said Suzanne Gerstner, 43, of Brandon, Fla., a mother of three whose husband died in 2005 of cancer linked to his 20 years of Air Force service. "Every little bit helps. Don't get me wrong, but that's kind of insulting."

Wilson, who chairs a House subcommittee with control over military personnel issues, said that for many of the survivors, eliminating the offset would mean the difference between scraping by and having a middle-class lifestyle. GOP House members have vowed to slash government spending, but Wilson said that even in tight times taking care of survivors is important. He supports a gradual phase-in to eliminate the current setup.

"It truly is a basis of priority," he said. "Are we going to show our appreciation for surviving spouses and children ... or spend money otherwise?"

Art Pulaski Time to help Gov. Brown stay true to His call

Posted: February 1, 2011


this is copied from IBEW 1245 website Ken Rawles



TIME TO HELP GOV. BROWN STAY TRUE TO HIS CALL FOR "LOYALTY TO COMMUNITY"











Art Pulaski is leader of the California Labor Federation

By Art Pulaski

As I listened to Jerry Brown’s inauguration speech on Jan. 3, something he said struck a chord. “A Philosophy of Loyalty,” he called it. “Loyalty to the community that is larger than our individual needs.”



This is a concept that unionists share. It’s one of the fundamentals of our movement. But it’s a value under attack. Tune in to talk radio and you’ll hear a bombastic host inciting his audience against government. In the corporate world, the enduring loyalty is not to community but to executive compensation.



Ideologues like Grover Norquist have also joined in the debate on California’s future, not by calling for unity, but by threatening legislators who would even consider allowing voters a say on whether revenue is part of the fix for our budget crisis.



After seven years of Schwarzenegger, it brings relief and hope to have a new governor who shares our loyalty to community and our values for a middle class.



But even with the best of intentions, Brown’s already had to make some difficult choices that threaten to undermine his vision. The governor has proposed deep, devastating cuts to programs our communities depend upon. In his Jan. 10 budget proposal, Brown offered $1 billion in cuts to higher education. He slashed health and welfare programs that are a lifeline for the most vulnerable. The cuts to in-home care for the elderly and disabled are troubling.



Gov. Brown inherited a mess with few good options. But he has signaled a willingness to consider all of them, including a special election to extend revenue increases, and our long-demanded elimination of some corporate tax giveaways, such as enterprise zones.



We hope that the governor won’t stop there to bring more revenue into our cash-strapped state.



Multi-national corporations are effectively thumbing their noses at us, avoiding paying their fair share.



Start with the oil companies. We are the only oil-producing state without taxes on extraction. Even anti-tax darling Sarah Palin instituted a 25% oil extraction fee in Alaska. The $1 billion per year that we’d generate would restore services for the vulnerable, keep cops and firefighters on the street and help fund higher education.



And it’s time to ask the richest 1%, who just got another big break through the extension of the Bush tax cuts, to pay their fair share.



Remember, Governor Ronald Reagan himself raised taxes for the rich by adding the 8, 9, 10 and 11% brackets to state income tax, increased the corporate tax from 5% to 9%, and reduced some tax giveaways to the oil companies.



The world-renowned infrastructure of freeways, universities, public schools and aqueducts built by Gov. Brown the elder has fallen into disrepair after years of neglect. Hundreds of thousands of jobs will be created by building the California infrastructure of the future, which includes high-speed rail. Jerry Brown must apply both the same political will to move these projects forward and the creative skill to fund them. Putting those workers in jobs will create yet more revenues to help put the state back on track.



And finally, let the governor use his bully pulpit to thwart misguided attacks on public employees started by Schwarzenegger and his corporate friends. Public servants did not cause the fiscal crisis, and scapegoating them does nothing to help rebuild our economy. Stripping retirement security from teachers, firefighters and other public workers would simply further weaken our state.



The root of California’s budget disaster is the greed and arrogance of those on Wall Street who fueled the economic collapse. And ring-wing conservatives are exploiting the budget crisis to vilify public employees, prevailing wages and decent pensions. California’s new leaders must overcome the temptation to join in these scurrilous attacks, and rather bring all Californians together to stand against the forces that seek to tear down our middle class.



The California labor movement was instrumental in Brown’s election. But our next task is even more daunting than defeating an egomaniacal billionaire like Meg Whitman. Gov. Brown will live up to his call for us to put individual interests aside in the name of a stronger state for all. But he needs our help to do it.



We will support the governor’s efforts to bring us together, and to create the revenue to lead the state from the abyss.



As we begin the conversation about how to renew California’s promise, loyalty to community is a good start. But it’ll take more than loyalty to move our state forward. It will take action. And, as always, the California Labor movement will fight for the values we share.

Alliance for Retired Americans Friday Alert Jan. 21, 2011

Friday, January 21, 2011


2011 State of the Union edition of the Friday Alert







Dear Alliance Activist, here is your 2011 State of the Union edition of the Friday Alert

Alliance Members on Guard as State of the Union Address Approaches

On Tuesday, January 25th, the President’s annual State of the Union Address will air nationally. When delivering his speech, President Obama may address critical retiree issues such as Social Security and Medicare. In the past, the President has supported the Alliance position on Social Security: no benefit cuts, no raising of the retirement age, no cuts in the COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) and no privatization. Because this speech is so important, Alliance members will be hosting 38 State of the Union watch parties in 17 states. Go to http://bit.ly/eGhWjH for complete State of the Union information, and to find a party near you! If you are interested in hosting a watch party of your own, it is not too late. Please click on http://bit.ly/ezVRam for a handy toolkit, and contactaraorganizing@retiredamericans.org to let us know of your plans.



On Thursday, thirty state Alliance Presidents wrote a letter to President Obama, delivering the message directly that he has “the opportunity to renew the nation’s commitment to the Social Security program during the State of the Union Address,” and urging him to reject false claims that Social Security increases the federal budget deficit. To see the letter, go to http://bit.ly/dK1pBa. “Social Security did not create our nation’s fiscal problems, nor should it be used to fix them,” summarized Edward F. Coyle, Executive Director of the Alliance. “The current debt situation should not be a political cover for attacking Social Security.”



House Moves to Replace Health Care Law

On Wednesday, House Republicans took a first major step toward repealing health care reform. The repeal bill - H.R. 2 - passed 245 to 189, with unanimous GOP support, along with that of three Democrats. The three House Democrats who voted in favor of the repeal were Reps. Mike Ross (AR), Mike McIntyre (NC), and Dan Boren (OK). All three also voted against health care reform last year. However, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D-NV) has vowed the legislation will go nowhere in the Senate, and President Obama has said he would veto it if it comes to his desk. A tally of the Wednesday vote is available athttp://bit.ly/e4DXWb.



Alliance members sent more than 1,200 letters to their U.S. Representatives prior to the vote, making a strong case against the repeal. “Alliance members always come through when key votes are imminent,” said Barbara J. Easterling, President of the Alliance. “Thank you to everyone who sent a letter saying that they don’t want health reformrepealed. Health care will be at least a year-long fight…Wednesday’s vote was just the beginning. The best way to save the reform law is to make sure people know how it helps them. Far too few currently do, and that is fueling the repeal movement.”



On Thursday, the House adopted H.Res. 9, a resolution instructing four committees to report legislation to the House that would replace the health care law with proposed changes to existing law within each committee’s jurisdiction. The vote was 253-175, with a tally available at http://bit.ly/gwxJeQ. Fourteen Democrats joined Republicans in supporting the resolution. The vote begins a GOP-led process to take apart the health care reform lawpiece by piece.



On Tuesday, the Democratic staff of the House Energy and Commerce Committee released a report on how efforts to repeal health care reform would negatively affect each congressional district. Included in the report is an interactive map with links to eachmember of Congress and information on how many people fall into the doughnut hole, how many are receiving early retiree coverage help, and other health care facts. To view the link, go to http://bit.ly/frChYr.



New Hospital Regulations Put Visitation in Patients’ Hands

An initiative that began with a directive from President Obama has culminated in the new Hospital Visitation Regulations, which went into effect on Tuesday of this week. The new regulations ensure that all hospitals that participate in Medicare and Medicaid respect patients’ rights to designate visitors. Additionally, the regulation removes restrictions on bedside visitors and requires hospitals to make their visitation policy available, in writing, to all patients. “Anyone who has been hospitalized or has visited a loved one in the hospital knows the anxiety that it can bring,” said Ruben Burks, Secretary-Treasurer of the Alliance. “This change in regulation helps to alleviate some of the stress that patients may experience, and will benefit all Americans.”



Trumka Stresses Social Security in Speech About Protecting the Middle Class

In a speech on Wednesday morning, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka criticized the billionaire business titans who are part of “a coordinated effort to block the path to the middle class with an attack on workers’ rights.” He specifically called out Lloyd Blankfein, the Goldman Sachs CEO who has made almost $100 million from cashing in stock options since 1999. Trumka warned politicians not to cut social programs during this time of economic hardship, stating, “Outside the looking glass, Americans won’t forgive their leaders for cutting Social Security or Medicare.” He stated that in order for the nation to move forward, “We should act like the wealthy, compassionate, imaginative country we are — not try to turn ourselves into a third-rate, impoverished has-been.”



Member Profile Highlights the Danger of Raising the Retirement Age

A recent article by Diana Jean Schemo entitled “Ball and Chain: the Human Cost of Raising the Retirement Age” highlights the perils of working later in life. The article spotlights California Alliance (CARA) leader Hene Kelly, who taught for 40 years in Chicago, Oakland and San Francisco. Check it out here: http://bit.ly/g4V6wU.



Alliance Mourns Death of Missouri’s Bob Kortkamp

Bob Kortkamp, the founder of the Missouri Alliance, a co-founder and board member of the national Alliance, and a regional board member, died on Thursday. A retired Machinist, Kortkamp served as the Missouri Alliance’s first president and organized retirees in opposingSocial Security privatization. Described by one activist as a “civic icon,” Kortkamp was a long-serving Secretary-Treasurer of the St. Louis Labor Council and was a leader on a number of local and state issues. “We are deeply saddened by the loss of Bob,” said Mr. Coyle. “He will be missed, but he leaves behind a legacy of accomplishments.” Further information will be available next week.

Copied from ARA Friday Alert   Ken Rawles

Posted: January 16, 2011 copied from IBEW 1245 web site






SURVEY SHOWS NEVADANS WANT TO REIN IN NV ENERGY.

SUPPORT FOUND FOR:



Creating Citizen Utility Board

Requiring shareholder approval for executive salaries

Creating public utility agency for delivering electricity and gas service







A telephone survey of 1,000 likely Nevada voters conducted in early December showed that 82% of respondents support a plan to form a citizen utility board to advocate for consumers before the NV Public Utilities Commission. Just 10% of respondents oppose this plan.



The results were published Jan. 16 by Nevada journalist Andrew Barbano in his award-winning Barbwire column and in the Sparks Tribune.



The professionally-conducted survey, requested by IBEW Local 1245, also found strong support for two other proposals – a plan to require shareholder approval of top executive compensation at NV Energy and a plan to create a public utility agency for electricity and gas services similar to those that provide water in Reno and Las Vegas.



The proposal to require shareholder approval was supported by 63% of respondents, with 21% in opposition. The proposal to create a publicly owned utility was supported by 54% of respondents with just 18% opposed.



The telephone survey was conducted in tandem with an online survey. The online survey results mirror the findings of the telephone survey. In total, 846 Nevada residents responded to the online survey. 86% of these respondents indicated support for the citizen utility board, 74% for the shareholder approval of executive compensation and 65% for a publically owned utility.



An earlier phase of survey research, conducted in October 2010, found deep dissatisfaction with NV Energy among Nevada consumers. The survey data indicate the company would not be a credible opponent to any of these plans. This first phase of polling found that 75% of respondents are very concerned that NV Energy customers pay the highest residential utility rates of any Mountain state.



That survey also found that 64% of respondents said they had a great deal of concern about NV Energy CEO Michael Yackira earning $4.5 million.





Phase III of the research, according to the union, will be a series of professional-conducted focus groups throughout the state to test voter support for these three measures.



The focus groups will guage the extent of voter anxiety about increasing rates, cuts in customer service and broken promises to both current employees and retirees. The in-depth focus groups will also seek to explore the reasons behind the strong support for these three potential initiatives.



To date the data indicate that Nevada voters are so concerned with the corporate misconduct of NV Energy that they will embrace an initiative solution that gives consumers more protection from rising rates and diminishing service.text text text text e