SEIU Local 1000 controversy continues as Board moves to limit President’s powers

 

by C.M. Lewis

The piece has been updated to include comment from SEIU Local 1000 President Richard Louis Brown. 8/30

Embattled SEIU Local 1000 President Richard Louis Brown has been served with a letter demanding a special meeting of the Board of Directors to discuss proposals that would substantially limit the President’s powers.

Documents obtained by Strikewave show that District Labor Council 744 President William B. Hall served Brown with the petition last Friday, August 20th, and is in the process of organizing support from other members of the Board of Directors. Presidents of DLCs, Chairs of Bargaining Unit Negotiations Committees, and elected statewide executive officers serve on the Board of Directors. According to SEIU Local 1000’s Policy File, the President is required to schedule a meeting upon petition of a majority of Directors.

The amendments proposed for the meeting would add a Chair of the Board of Directors as an executive officer position, and transfer many of the President’s powers to the Board of Directors. They additionally clarify grounds for disciplinary proceedings against members and officers, strengthen the role of the Board of Directors in disciplinary proceedings, and clarify grounds under which DLC Presidents can lose their position.

The proposals are connected to the string of controversies in SEIU Local 1000, which has been rocked by highly publicized internal political conflicts. Opponents of Brown have accused him of using his platform as President to attack and silence critics, while Brown has levied accusations of racism and hypocrisy at many opponents.

When asked for comment, Brown criticized the call for a special meeting. “Some of the members of the Board are protecting the racist, sexist, and homophobic statements of Anna and Theresa Taylor. Their hatred for my election victory is on full display, and they are not respecting the will of the voters. This is a reflection of the hypocrisy when people say to respect the will of the voters, but when things don’t go their way they can’t respect it.”

If scheduled, the meeting would be the first meeting of the Board of Directors called to order since Brown took office. Brown’s attempt to hold a meeting on July 6th did not meet quorum, as many members of the Board of Directors left during an hour-and-a-half long introductory speech given by Brown. Brown blasted the failure to meet quorum in the union newsletter, characterizing it as a “walkout.”

A rank-and-file member spoken to by Strikewave on condition of anonymity due to state policies characterized the July 6th meeting as an embarrassment for all parties. “It’s just not acceptable behavior from the President, from the Board of Directors, from everybody that was involved in that meeting.” 

The failure to meet has not stopped Brown from acting. SEIU Local 1000 has controversially fought the State of California on vaccine mandates for state workers, and a rally is planned for August 27th in Sacramento protesting the closure of a correctional facility in Lassen County. He also recently held a livestream interview with the Director of Strategic Partnerships for Americans for Fair Treatment, an anti-worker front group connected to the Koch network, in which he attacked union rights such as “exclusive representation.”

State workers have taken to social media to express their disgust, with Facebook posts asking for information on dropping membership. Members expressed particular anger over the use of the union newsletter to publicize private criticism of Brown, expressing embarrassment and calling for the union to spend more time on member representation. 

So far, the international union has not commented on the controversies in Local 1000. With no sign of easing tensions and continuing controversy, it is uncertain whether SEIU—as well as other California labor unions—will keep their silence.

For some members, leadership controversies are critical for the future of the union, and faith in both the Board of Directors and Brown to resolve it is minimal. When interviewed in July, the anonymous member put it bluntly: if things continue as-is, the union, which has a membership rate of approximately 55%, may lose majority status.

“All I see is the union fighting with each other over petty, stupid squabbles,” said the member. “It’s going to die by a thousand cuts unless the people who have been entrusted by the membership realize that they have to tell the membership what they’re actually delivering, and communicate with the membership in a way that doesn’t involve bullying [or] lecturing people.”

Solutions may not come from above, but from below. According to a second member also spoken to in July on similar conditions, the solution to the seeming impasse isn’t with Brown or the Board of Directors: it’s with the rank-and-file. “The concerns under Brown are the same as the concerns under Yvonne [Walker],” according to the member. “Brown [and his] antics get so much publicity and people are so focused on him that it really is a detriment to organizing.” 

Although membership and decertification is still a concern, the member says that the solution is organizing, rather than focusing on internal political maneuvering. “That could be an issue down the line, but it’s also sort of like, well, the thing we should be doing is organizing our worksite [and] going back to the fundamentals.”

C.M. Lewis is an editor of Strikewave and a union activist in Pennsylvania.

 
Admin