Because of the blogging I do, I've had the opportunity to be exposed to new technologies that lots of folks in Government haven't had the opportunity to do. It's a labor of love for me, clearly. Growing up in union probably had a hand in it all.

Anyway, I'd been feeling sort of like a tiny cog in the machine at work for several months, perhaps as much as a year. I'm sure lots of you know that feeling, where no one listens to anything you say, morale is low, everyone you know seems to be trying to jump ship and those staying seem to be resigned to the fact that this is as good as it gets.

All in all, it's been sad.

It was so sad and frustrating, I contacted the local and asked to be represented.

I am now a member of the union, but not yet represented by the local. But the local has already been so awesome, they've stepped in and helped a couple of times already with the boss. The shop steward used his leave to do it.

With everything that has happened to me over the last few months, I really was feeling like there was no hope. But the way the union has stepped up has made me feel like there's someone out there in my corner. And that feeling has been amazing.

So, when this opportunity came up to go on a temporary assignment to another government agency to work in something I've been doing with my labor blogging, well, let's just say that nothing summed it up best than this video



I got to meet all my new temporary co-workers and felt like I can contribute to something that will hold meaning for the agency I'm heading to as well as other government agencies. Now, I'm hoping I can do it. I'm a bit scared because folks have faith in me, and I'm absolutely terrified that I'm going to let them down. And yet, I'm beyond over the moon excited about getting to do this. Having these two competing emotions is really kind of cool.

Come Monday morning, I'll get to do the new job stuff. I'm so excited! I'm no longer a cog in the machine!

Read More...

USA9 is reporting that Prince George's county is replacing paid professional firefighters with
volunteer firefighters.

I'm all for Volunteer firefighters in areas where there usually isn't much of a choice, like the township I grew up in back in Ohio. Because of a variety of reasons, my township had a volunteer fire and rescue squad, but it was never staffed 100% of the time. There weren't enough volunteers for this nor housing or funding. Volunteers got called in when something happened. And these guys (all were men when I grew up) lived close to the fire hall. In rural areas, this doesn't sound like a bad idea, but in Prince Georges county?

9NEWS NOW made it from the Calverton Fire Station to an ambulance call on nearby Evans Trail in about 90-seconds after Willie Smith's niece called 911. PGFD Chief Spokesman Mark Brady confirms it took about 8-minutes for the closest ambulance to arrive on the scene. It was staffed by volunteers from Branchville about 4-miles away.

8 minutes doesn't sound too bad to me for emergency response time, but in PG county, it doesn't actually sound that good. I lived only 3 miles from the fire hall in rural Ohio. And this was on the edge of the township. PG should be able to do better than rural Ohio. Again, from USA9 (local CBS news).

With limited money available to pay out overtime, Prince George's County says it can't staff fire stations with paid firefighters the way it used to. Brady says, "We are trying to make the best use of the resources we have".

Best use of resources?

County officials say that worked in at least four stations on Wednesday, but as 9NEWS NOW confirmed the Calverton Fire Station was left unstaffed throughout the day.

PG county should hire new firefighters and stop relying on Overtime. Maybe then, PG can staff the firehouses, 'cause it's not looking as if they're doing it now, "volunteers" or not.

Read More...

I went to the Doctor the other day. After the $30 copay, 3 new prescriptions and a Dr's request that I head to Radiology and for blood work for two new tests, I decided that maybe I needed to re-think health care.

I have good health insurance.

I pay way too much every two weeks, but there is just no choice for me and my family. I have to have insurance, even as inadequate as it is.

Today, as I sit typing, I'm thinking about the two phone calls from CVS for me to come by and pick up the new medications and I know I can't.

It feels a little odd saying this out loud, or in writing. No matter how I say it or in what venue, it makes me feel like a failure. You see, I can't afford the medication.

Can't afford it.

The 5 medications I am currently on costs more than $200 a month. I see a Dr. for a chronic condition, monthly. That's another $30. Each time I do see her, she gives me samples to help me make it through the month, but it doesn't.

The two new medications I have not picked up were based on the older medicines not working any longer. One new one is $76 for 20 pills. I need 2 a day. This new med, replaces a $20 medication. The other new one, I haven't even had the guts to look at yet. I dropped the prescription and just haven't gone back. I can't pick up the $76 one, what makes me think that the special order inhaler will be the same as the $30 copay for the old one. Clearly, I think it's going to look the same as those 20 pills, out of my price range.

I have insurance. I even have "good" insurance, but that sure seems relative from my current position. I still have to make the choice between paying the electric bill or getting the new medication. Kind of sucks, doesn't it?

With all the success I've had in my life, nothing really makes much difference at the end of the day when I can't breathe. And, I'm not alone according to CNN, I've got lots of company:

By one estimate, 25 million Americans can't afford to cover the gap between what their insurance covers and their medical bills demand.

25 million of us is an awful lot of Americans who have insurance coverage but still can't afford health care.

When I was a kid, my dad, a member of the United Steelworkers of America, had fabulous coverage. My chronic condition was treated by a family doctor. There weren't lots of kinds of available treatments, but he was there to at least help make me more comfortable. He updated my immunizations. I went to a dentist regularly. My brother went to specialists for knee care and surgery. I was even able to go to Cleveland Clinic for hand surgery at 18. My parents had excellent coverage which provided excellent .

As my child has grown, we've forgone dental care. She's been to the dentist 4 times in her life and she will soon turn 16.

We no longer have a family practitioner for regular check ups, not with a $30 copay.

My $75 emergency room visits are more cost effective for acute symptoms than consistent care for 6 months.

Did I mention, I have excellent coverage? That I pay more than $100 every two weeks for this coverage?

And again, CNN notes, I'm not alone:

Many people without adequate insurance are also delaying or forgoing medical care until it becomes an absolute emergency, said Dr. David Chin, managing partner of consulting firm Pricewaterhouse Cooper's Global Healthcare Research Institute.

I HATE having to forgo care for my child. It makes me feel like a failure.

I think, that at my age, I should be able to provide some minimum care. My standards for that minimum were set by my parents, but that kind of care, is just not even possible for me to provide, it's way out of reach.

Again, from CNN

More importantly, Collins pointed out that the number of underinsured increased 60% from 2003 to 2007. That compares with a 5.1% increase in the number of uninsured Americans - to about 46 million - over the same period, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

"The 25 million [number] can still be an underestimate," Collins said.

What's also troubling, she said, is that the ranks of the underinsured are spreading across income levels and have seen the most rapid increases lately in middle-income households earning between $40,000 to $60,000.

Yep, it's troubling. As I think about the new tests and if I can afford to fill the new prescriptions, it's cold comfort to read the Commonwealth fund's report on women and health care:

The study found:

* 52 percent of women had any one of four problems getting needed health care because of cost compared to 39 percent of men: did not fill a prescription; did not see a specialist when needed; skipped a recommended medical test, treatment, or follow-up; or had a medical problem but did not visit a doctor or clinic.
* 45 percent of women accrued medical debt or reported problems with medical bills in 2007, compared to 36 percent of men.
* Women were also more likely to skip tests and screenings: almost half of women (45%) delayed or did not receive a cancer screening or dental care because of costs, compared to 36 percent of men.

I don't know what the answer is on Health Care. I know it's not working for me and my family. And from the data, it doesn't seem as if it's working for most women and their families.

I do know that I want things to change, because I'm freaking tired of being miserable, worrying and having to choose between breathing and paying for food, phone, electric or just about everything else in life.

For me, SINGLE PAYER is the best possible answer for women and the families they support; women like me. But at this point, I'd like to just see a real public option. Maybe, I could even opt out of my employer sponsored health insurance, potentially meaning yearly dental care, an annual pap smear (yeah, I said it, pap) and perhaps, even the ability for me to pick up the phone and decide to go to the radiologist or head to CVS and pick up that new prescription.

But, can this Congress grow up and get it done? Maybe, if they listen to West Virginia Senator Rockefeller:

On Thursday, Rockefeller admitted he expects little bipartisan support.

"There is a very small chance any Republicans will vote for this health-care plan. They were against Medicare and Medicaid [created in the 1960s]. They voted against children's health insurance.

"We have a moral choice. This is a classic case of the good guys versus the bad guys. I know it is not political for me to say that," Rockefeller added.

"But do you want to be non-partisan and get nothing? Or do you want to be partisan and end up with a good health- care plan? That is the choice."

Bi-partisanship isn't worth the cost to women and families like mine and those worse off. I believe this Congress does have a moral obligation to all of us, but especially the 100 million Americans who make the choice between paying the phone bill, or paying for a prescription.

Right now, I'd really like the public option so that I can stop, put down the electric bill, close my eyes, and finally, just breathe.

Read More...

I'm a single mom. And I've got lots on my mind, yeah, like many of you.

I seem to always be worrying about the future. You know like:

How do I make the mortgage this month?
Do I have to by generic or can I go for the brand name cereal?
Oh, no, not the Electric bill?

But now, I got this other thing on my mind, college.

My kid is looking at graduating. She attends a very small private school in DC on a scholarship (rock on my most amazing kid for getting a scholarship) and can graduate as early as this winter.

As proud as I am of this amazing kid, I'm like a lot of parents, I'm worried. I'm worried about how to put her through her top choices, and it appears, students are worried about the same thing according to MSNBC:

For many transfers, the financial burden dawned on them after several years. The poor economy and high tuition has already filtered down to high school seniors. A recent survey showed that many don't want to make the same mistake as their old counterparts — they're forgoing costly schools now.

I'd love for my daughter to go to her top choices, Stanford or Middlebury, but I can't see how I'll be able to afford more than Ohio State, if I can even do that. And this seems to be the real trend, rising costs for college, across the board.

As the economy worsened, less has been given to endowment funds, less to state run schools, even to the county schools. Take Winona State University in Minnesota:

Tuition at WSU has increased 85 percent since 2001, from $3,110 to $5,768 per year.

An 85% increase in 8 years?

How is that even possible? According to the Freakonomics blog,there's a lot of factors, but they boil it down to staffing.

Support staff! SNIP

This explanation seems satisfying (intellectually, at least, if not emotionally). But it’s probably also important to consider how much money colleges have been putting into student amenities as well. When I visited my undergrad alma mater a few years ago, the chancellor pointed out that three buildings had gone up in the past decade or so that were each larger than any existing building on campus. There was a library, a convocation center (a multipurpose arena), and a huge student gym. The gym, he said, was a top priority because parents and prospective students increasingly think of themselves as customers, shopping for the most amenities for the best price, and the colleges that didn’t come to grips with this would soon see their customers going elsewhere.

I get the support staff increases. With new technologies, you do need new types of staff. When I went to college, we had 3 computer labs on campus and my Apple at each of them always seemed to freeze up everytime I tried to type a freakin' paper, I hear Macs are much better than my old computer lab days, but, I digress. Today, how many kids still rely on the computer lab? How many professors are reading e-mailed papers or papers saved on google docs?

As we have moved into the age of technology, strains have been placed on our schools from the elementary level to the highest levels of graduate education. But what do we get from all of this? From the technology to the cost to the education?

What do we really get?

Indigestion seems to be the answer for me. Indigestion caused by worry.

As a single working mom, I don't think I can afford either. Could somebody pass the Tums(r)?

Read More...

I'm a single mom. And I've got lots on my mind, yeah, like many of you.

I seem to always be worrying about the future. You know like:

How do I make the mortgage this month?
Do I have to by generic or can I go for the brand name cereal?
Oh, no, not the Electric bill?

But now, I got this other thing on my mind, college.

My kid is looking at graduating. She attends a very small private school in DC on a scholarship (rock on my most amazing kid for getting a scholarship) and can graduate as early as this winter.

As proud as I am of this amazing kid, I'm like a lot of parents, I'm worried. I'm worried about how to put her through her top choices, and it appears, students are worried about the same thing according to MSNBC:

For many transfers, the financial burden dawned on them after several years. The poor economy and high tuition has already filtered down to high school seniors. A recent survey showed that many don't want to make the same mistake as their old counterparts — they're forgoing costly schools now.

I'd love for my daughter to go to her top choices, Stanford or Middlebury, but I can't see how I'll be able to afford more than Ohio State, if I can even do that. And this seems to be the real trend, rising costs for college, across the board.

As the economy worsened, less has been given to endowment funds, less to state run schools, even to the county schools. Take Winona State University in Minnesota:

Tuition at WSU has increased 85 percent since 2001, from $3,110 to $5,768 per year.

An 85% increase in 8 years?

How is that even possible? According to the Freakonomics blog,there's a lot of factors, but they boil it down to staffing.

Support staff! SNIP

This explanation seems satisfying (intellectually, at least, if not emotionally). But it’s probably also important to consider how much money colleges have been putting into student amenities as well. When I visited my undergrad alma mater a few years ago, the chancellor pointed out that three buildings had gone up in the past decade or so that were each larger than any existing building on campus. There was a library, a convocation center (a multipurpose arena), and a huge student gym. The gym, he said, was a top priority because parents and prospective students increasingly think of themselves as customers, shopping for the most amenities for the best price, and the colleges that didn’t come to grips with this would soon see their customers going elsewhere.

I get the support staff increases. With new technologies, you do need new types of staff. When I went to college, we had 3 computer labs on campus and my Apple at each of them always seemed to freeze up everytime I tried to type a freakin' paper, I hear Macs are much better than my old computer lab days, but, I digress. Today, how many kids still rely on the computer lab? How many professors are reading e-mailed papers or papers saved on google docs?

As we have moved into the age of technology, strains have been placed on our schools from the elementary level to the highest levels of graduate education. But what do we get from all of this? From the technology to the cost to the education?

What do we really get?

Indigestion seems to be the answer for me. Indigestion caused by worry.

As a single working mom, I don't think I can afford either. Could somebody pass the Tums(r)?

Read More...

I work. I know, big surprise. You probably thought this was all I did.

I have a job and it pays the bills, case closed.

Well, not really. I'm going through the process now of being represented by a union, other than my current membership in the Freelancers Union (Hey All You Freelancers!! Love ya!!). I'm looking to be represented because I changed positions in my agency and it looks as if now, I may be eligible to be in the bargaining unit. And I am THRILLED!

This past summer, I tried to find out the same information, but didn't know who to contact within my agency to determine if I was in the bargaining unit or not. So, I went the route a lot of folks do, I asked management.

I've viewed management as a resource, not necessarily as management. I've believed that they wear many hats and one of the main hats is that of serving as a resource to employees, including being a resource to find information out about union representation.

Unfortunately, I was wrong.

I have since requested union assistance in being represented. In a matter of weeks, they have pushed for me and others like me to be represented in my agency. They've provided me information on legal rulings and have included me in information they send out to members, and I'm still not a member yet. They are doing all of this work, in hopes that I might be able to be represented by them, to the tune of $299 a year.

That's it. $299. That's the membership fee. That's $11.50 per pay. I can't think of anything I pay for that's so small and which I can receive so much for, by just being a member.

And now, this brings me to the Employee Free Choice Act.

The Hill Blog had a number of quotes from around the US in reference to Employee Free Choice. The number one thing I hear from conservatives when unions are brought up is about Dues. Here's the quote from Grover Norquist (Mr. I-want-to-drown-Government-in-a-Bathtub)

The percentage of American workers paying union dues out of their paychecks has fallen from 33% in the 1950s to below 13% today. Fewer than eight percent of non-government workers are in unions.

The union bosses have made it clear that their number one goal is to force more Americans to pay union dues–average about $500 per worker.

So, I decided to find out where this number is coming from. I searched Google for Average Cost of Union Dues. Top three results are anti-union screeds. After that, it's a mix of unions and anti-union forces.

What's a girl to do?

I tried a new search. what are the median US union dues more anti-union crap mixed with union stuff.

What happens when you want an authoritative source of information and not anything biased?

I'd normally turn to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But this is where it became really interesting. Instead of finding what I really wanted, I found something entirely new and even more interesting than what I originally looked for, I found statistics on race, age and gender for unionized workers. And, I found median income values for those groups and subsets.

The data on union membership were collected as part of the Current
Population Survey (CPS). The CPS is a monthly survey of about 60,000
households that obtains information on employment and unemployment
among the nation's civilian noninstitutional population age 16 and
over.

Some highlights from the 2008 data are:

--Government workers were nearly five times more likely to belong
to a union than were private sector employees.

--Workers in education, training, and library occupations had the
highest unionization rate at 38.7 percent.

--Black workers were more likely to be union members than were
white, Asian, or Hispanic workers.

--Among states, New York had the highest union membership rate
(24.9 percent) and North Carolina had the lowest rate (3.5 percent).

Wait, I'm not done:

Union Representation of Nonmembers

About 1.7 million wage and salary workers were represented by a
union on their main job in 2008, while not being union members them-
selves. (See table 1.) About half of these workers were employed
in government. (See table 3.)

One of the things that Republicans say when bashing unions is first, DUES, DUES DUES (um, dudes I want to pay MEMBERSHIP DUES for a union the way you, Mr Norquist, want to pay membership dues for your country club. I just get more out of my union, I get advocacy. Do you get that from the country club? Sorry, I digress). As if the concept of paying for a service is scary. I suppose to a Mr. Norquist or Mr. Newt Gingrich or Mr. Dick Cheney (oh, wait, he was a dues paying member of the IBEW, so his word probably doesn't count) that paying for services render is scary because some of the services rendered are things like negotiating, or arbitration, or shop steward advocacy or web sites or... darn scary stuff.

Recently, I joined AFGE. No, I'm still not in the bargaining unit, AFGE is now filing suit on my behalf (and apparently, a number of other folks like me who have asked), but I decided I'd at least pay my dues to my local for the services I've already used, like the advocacy of my shop steward.

I might not be the kind of person who can or would pay to join a country club, but I am the kind of person who can manage to pay $11.50 per pay to help my local build itself into a stronger union with better and more fabulous services. Most importantly, when I pay my dues, I am one of many, speaking in one voice, the union. What could be more American that that? E Pluribus Unum

Read More...

Alternative title: Dicke E Dauch, More Evil Day by Day

Welcome to the world that has become the United States Labor market.

It's filled with companies that pay CEO's hundreds of thousands of dollars and into the multimillions of dollars.

From the American Red Cross' Multi-Billion dollar Blood Business to Wal-Mart's sticking it to folks like Debbie Shank (and yes, they were well within their legal right to do so), but what Dick E Dauch did and continues to do, well, it just kind of makes me ill, to the nth degree.

Why you might ask, well, I think the Detroit News kind of figured that one out:

Since American Axle was spun off from General Motors and reconstituted in 1994, the union negotiates with American Axle, not GM, and does not get the sweetheart deal other UAW workers will get. In fact, Local 235 went on strike for three months last year and lost. It was a cold, bitter dispute, complete with fires in the oil drums. The unionized workers, numbering nearly 2,000 at the time, gave in to deep wage cuts, in some cases from $28 an hour to $14, in exchange for keeping their jobs. Apparently it was not enough. Fewer than 300 union members were working in the plant Monday.

In the meantime, Dick Dauch, the CEO and chairman of American Axle, was given an $8.5 million bonus by his board of directors after the strike and gave assurances to the workers and the city of Hamtramck that he would keep production here.

Yes, emphasis is mine.

I followed the strike. I was a bit obsessive about it.

I posted pictures like that of a 60 year old woman in an officer's chokehold. Or how Republican staffers who were meeting with UAW members about the bridge loans to the auto industry had NEVER heard of American Axle or their 11 week strike.

I followed one of my favorite workers Jerd0708, and cross referenced worker pay and executive pay, an issue that resinates with workers from Wal-Mart to the American Red Cross to the guys and gals on the docks. It's the Entitlement Mentality of the highest levels of executives that seals the fate of so many of us who simply want to work. Folks who just want to put in an honest day of work for an honest day of pay.

More than ever, I believe in the power of unions, but we need stronger labor laws to make it possible for union workers to rebuild the middle class. We need to pass the Employee Free Choice Act to make it possible for more workers to sign a union card and join a union. Together maybe we can start holding boards of directors, CEOs and other executives accountable for their actions when they give an $8.5 million bonus to Dick E Dauch (I said BONUS here) just for the hell of it.

One other thing:
We as a nation need to do a better job of ensuring that companies can't just flee one jurisdiction to go to another because somewhere, down the road, doing so might be cheaper (think of what American Axle is doing in moving jobs to Mexico or Kongsberg Automotive moving production into Poland) in terms of labor costs and environmental costs. Again, from the Detroit News:

Chris Son, the director of communications at American Axle, called late Wednesday to say that the layoffs are "fallout from the GM and Chrysler shutdowns." He also confirmed that the Mexicans will continue to work as the Americans are out on the street.

"For logistical reasons, a level of production will continue in Mexico," said Son. "At the same time, there will be lower production requirements in Detroit. Other than that, I have no further comment on that matter."

Logistical reasons, right. Chris and Dick, if American workers can't buy cars produced with your parts, what's the point in moving to Brazil, Poland or continuing operations in Mexico? If we can't buy these cars, who will? Oh wait, I know the answer, guys like you, right?

Read More...

45% of the US blood supply comes from the American Red Cross. 45%, that's a huge amount from a single source.

Blood is collected through donor blood drives. And the blood is then handled or transported by phlebotomists, drivers, RNs, LPNs, technicians (in the lab, product management, and apheresis departments), and one mechanic.

These are front line workers for the collection and processing of blood.

These front line workers set up blood drives all over the country.

When you think of a blood drive, think of the work as equivalent to the set up and break down of an event like a small circus, carnival or maybe a convention.

And these are safe events, or at least intended to be safe events through the regulation of blood as a "drug" but the FDA. Yep, these events are FDA regulated.

Front line American Red Cross workers follow FDA guidelines, yet since 1993, the FDA has fined the American Red Cross more than $21 million for violation of blood safety laws and regulations. In fact, the American Red Cross has been under a Consent Decree

The 2003 consent decree settled charges that the Red Cross had committed "persistent and serious violations" of federal blood safety rules dating back 17 years.

So, what does all of this mean?

What all of this means is that BLOOD is BIG BUSINESS. Blood is, as the New York Times noted after the FDA announcement of a $5+million fine:

The Red Cross has struggled for years to get its multi-billion dollar blood business, by far its biggest money-maker, into compliance with federal rules.

The American Red Cross makes MULTI-BILLIONS of dollars on donated blood.

Let me repeat that

They make Billions of dollars based on all of our volunteer blood donations.

So, the Red Cross makes billions and billions on supplying 45% of the nation's blood, but is now fighting unions representing front line blood drive event workers. These are the same workers who put on these blood drive events, make them safe and then do it all over again at another location. These workers provide reading material, documentation throughout the blood drive, ask health history questions of donors, perform mini physical exams for donors, take blood, care for the donor afterward donation, pack up the blood, break down the event, and bring it back to the lab for processing and testing, only to do it again the next day or week, depending on their schedule.

And the fines? Are they based on the work of the front line workers? The ones primarily handling the blood, well, according to NPR's All Things Considered, not so much, it is a "management problem".

So, we have a multi-billion dollar business, management problems, FDA fines, and now, they're crying broke as they sit at bargaining tables with 9 different unions as they negotiate front line worker agreements.

So, the unions got together and told the American Red Cross just what they thought of their anti-union, anti-worker negotiation tactics and I got to meet some of these workers on Friday on E street in Northwest DC.


These are the workers who make our blood supply safe, and they have been reduced to marching on Washington for getting what they deserve, a fair negotiation with the American Red Cross.

The request for massive concessions and pay freezes across the board has been covered in a number of local papers, like the New Haven Register who noted something interesting which really got me thinking:

The union claims that the Red Cross is demanding pay cuts for workers, as well as staffing changes that would replace some workers with management representatives.

“They’re not licensed. They’d be making medical decisions, based on what?” asked Crystal Guimaraes, a registered nurse from Naugatuck. She said workers at blood drives need to know what to do in the event of medical complications, physical reactions or seizures.

Would these be the same managers who were at the heart of the fines to the American Red Cross in 2006? Are they part of the "Management Problems" that NPR reported?

And, what about the response from the American Red Cross:

In a statement released Friday, Donna M. Morrissey, spokeswoman for American Red Cross Blood Services Northeast Division, said the Red Cross blood supply “has never been safer, and the American Red Cross is committed to the health and safety of every blood donor who volunteers to roll up their sleeve and every patient who receives blood.”

Morrissey said the pay and benefits package offered to union members is “consistent” with pay and benefits provided to nonunion employees. The Red Cross also has frozen salaries for nonunion workers for the next year and made changes to its retirement programs for all staff.

What I notice in this comment is something big that's been in the news lately and was oddly unaddressed:

What about BONUSES?

So, I went hunting and found that the American Red Cross pays "incentives", from the American Red Cross website:

Donor Recruitment Representative (Great Lakes Region-Flint/Saginaw/Bay City/Midland, Michigan) American Red Cross Blood Services, Ohio/Michigan Division; Salary: $35,000 +Incentive; Benefits: TBA; FAX: (517) 484-0374; Email: jacksonnr@usa.redcross.org; Please send resume via email; Posted: 3/2/2009.

Incentive pay sounds like a bonus to me, and this is only at a volunteer recruiter level. What about higher levels like the CEO level (which has been a virtual revolving door since Bernadine Healy left in 2001) or directors and regional levels? And for an organization with more than 30 CEO's, can you imagine the kind of money we're talking about when we're talking about a multi-billion dollar business?

Take the Director of Collections in Connecticut who received a sizable un-reported bonus (the size is unknown because it's not being reported by the American Red Cross and is not being provided to the unions during the negotiations). And why would this blood collections director receive a huge incentive? Well, it's for introducing the MCS machines to the region.

I suppose I'm way more concerned today than say a year ago about how big companies hide their payments to employees. After the issues with AIG bonuses and all the banks that got money from the government for sinking their companies, well, would you really blame me for being suspicious?

Let's take the case of Theresa Bischoff, American Red Cross CEO for New York. In 2005, based on Red Cross records, she earned a salary of $315,656. And performance bonus of $60,000. And this is on the American Red Cross web site.
There's also Christopher Lamb who received a retention bonus of $132,600 and Douglass Loock who received his retention bonus of $105,215. And these three folks all work in areas related to plasma and blood.

If in 2005, when the Red Cross was going through turmoil due to their response to Katrina, they were also handing out retention bonuses of $100k to some of their top executives, and these are only reported on the top 5 paid non officers. If during turmoil they were handing out this kind of money, what are they doing now? Clearly, what they're doing now is trying to get out of negotiating with people like Christine Holschlag (she's the one with the mega phone). And for a Congressionally chartered non-profit like the American Red Cross, that's just not acceptable.

The American Red Cross does answer to a higher power, they answer to all of us donors. We make it possible for you to make volunteer blood donation into a MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR business. It's time for you to negotiate in good faith with the unions representing the folks who make our blood supply safe. Until you do, you won't be getting checks from me or my blood. I'm just not comfortable with your profiting on the backs of folks making our blood supply safe. It's time for you to do the right by your workers and not so much your CEO's. I think you can put down the AIG play book now, don't you?

Read More...