Not the time.

I have heard through the grapevine that Brother Gordon Krumm is under attack from five unknown members of our union. They want him removed from his duly elected position via recall vote, for reasons unknown.

Before I continue, be clear I know nothing regarding the circumstances that might have caused this situation, nor do I know who the five members might be. I simply know Gordon is hard working, thorough, and not one to take bullshit quietly. After this post is published I plan on sending him a note to see if he would like to clarify this situation for me. If anyone else has information to help me better understand this action, please feel free to send it to me via my about page.

First things first. Christy Clark is looking to turn us into the working poor, and this self immolation seemed like a good idea to these individuals? Might I recommend they also burn down our union hall, begin an anti-union graffiti campaign aimed squarely at CAW333, and perhaps toast the economy with Stephen Harper over a dish of steaming baby seal steaks?

Do you see my point?


Clear enough?

A gang of dictatorial plutocrats is about to try and hand this local it’s ass, and if we do not show a stunning amount of solidarity we will fall. Any of you who have been in a street fight might be able to ken what is about to come.

Second. If this union’s executive is serious about trying to increase participation levels among the members, it could not have chosen a worse way to proceed. Were these five members so intent on this action, at this time, they could not be persuaded to postpone their vendetta until after this contract is put to bed? The fallout from such a divisive action will permanently taint the reputations of every member of this executive if they allow it to continue, and is that really smart, when the members are about to entrust in them the right to negotiate the next contract on their behalf?

Speaking personally, am I supposed to trust people who have tried to remove my card, and now want to remove a duly elected officer of the local from his post?

Not fucking likely.

Finally, for those of you who might not be certain of the outcome of this, let me assure you Gordon will be fine. Rounding our membership up to 800 members for simplicities sake, that means they will need 200 signatures on a petition to get a meeting to have Brother Krumm removed, and then fully 50% of the membership, 400 members, will need to physically attend that meeting and vote for the motion to get him out.

Those numbers are from memory, so I might have the percentages off a bit, but the fact remains we would need to hold the two largest non-ratification meetings in this locals history in order for this assault on Gordon to succeed.

Good luck with that.

That rough assessment therefore begs the question; If I knew this from a casual reading of the bylaws of this local I did over a year ago, did the five individuals not also read the same bylaws? Did they not also see the insurmountable obstacle that stood between them and their goal?

Of course they did, and that speaks to motivation.

They do not believe they are going to get Gordon out, they just want to get under his skin.

This is a blatant attempt to warn him away from whatever he is doing that is upsetting them, and more broadly, it is going to be interpreted as a ham-fisted reminder to we peons that the status quo must not be questioned. Assuming the executive allows this to continue, the timing also implies it is meant to distract the membership from that other thing we are supposed to be dealing with, that contract thingy.

Not. Fucking. Cool.

I won’t say anything else for now on this topic, other than if these five individuals are truly so convinced of the nobility of their motives, they should let us all know who they are, and while doing so plainly explain why they feel such a drastic action as this must be undertaken, and at a time that could not possibly have been more poorly chosen.

Remember brothers, the truth will set you free.

EDIT March 11, 2012: I reviewed the bylaws yesterday evening and either my memory is wrong …which is what I suspect … or it has been changed from the copy posted on the wall at LTC two years ago. The procedure for the five members trying to obtain a recall is as follows; a petition must gather signatures representing 25% of the membership. If they succeed, a meeting is called to discuss the issues, which needs 25% of the membership in attendance to achieve a quorum. At the end of the meeting a vote is held and 50%+1 of those in attendance must vote for the removal of the officer in order for the recall to be successful. That means about 200 hundred people will need to sign the petition, and 200 people will need to attend the meeting in order for it to achieve quorum. At the end of the meeting about 101 people will need to vote in agreement with the recall in order for it to be successful. Not as impossible as my memory has led me to believe, but still not likely.

%d bloggers like this: