New CCSF Benefit – Best Doctors Medical Advise

Posted Leave a commentPosted in News

My mission is not only to build a Powerful Union, but also to provide you more Value!

 

Best Doctors Medical Advise

Are you making the right medical decision?

When you’re facing a critical medical decision – whether an important health question or a serious diagnosis – getting it right is everything. We make it happen. Best Doctors connects you to more than 50,000 world-renowned medical experts. As a result, you’re sure you have the right information, the right diagnosis and the right treatment.

 

Have a Best Doctors expert conduct an in-depth free and confidential review of your medical case.

Have your case reviewed by one of our Best Doctors through our InterConsultation® service and get a confidential expert report, including recommendations for the best course of action.

Get expert advice about medical treatment.

(more…)

Online Voting Bylaw Voters Manipulated, What Happened?

Posted Leave a commentPosted in News

What Happened on April 26th with the Online Voting Bylaw Amendment Vote?

This is what happened.  The chain of events:
It took one year, APRIL 2016 TO APRIL 2017, to get an online voting bylaw amendment to vote after constant blocking, delaying and strategic attempts to stop the process. Once the attempts to stop the process was clear, a large group of members came together and hired an attorney. After we had hired an attorney, to get online voting to a membership vote we were still faced with hurdles from the Executive Board.  Matter of fact myself and another member were sued by the DSA President Eugene Cerbone with the help of the DSA Secretary John Lawsha and the lawsuit was facilitated by the DSA Attorneys at Rains, Lucia, Sterns, St. Phalle & Silver.  They attempted a strategic lawsuit to scare us to stop.  I will explain more on this later.  But in the end, I won the malicious lawsuit.

After stead fast persistence, the DSA brought our Online Voting Bylaw amendment to vote on April 26th, 2017 but did it without legal notification to the members.

They violated California Corporations Code 7511(a) cc.
They did not follow the law in regards to notification, notification with detailed information should have been at a minimum 10 days prior to the vote.
http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/corporations-code/corp-sect-7511.html

What they did was, they immediately brought it to vote and started a Misleading Scare Campaign and Tricked a lot of members into voting NO with a Home Address Hoax.

They violated California Corporations Code 7513(c) cc.
Stacking ballots and envelopes next to a ballot box for members to get, is not the way ballots should be solicited by law nor by our bylaws as well.
http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/corporations-code/corp-sect-7513.html

The DSA fabricated a False Document made to masquerade as the truth and the Executive Board signed it agreeing to its written form. On April 26th, the DSA also electronically faxed this false document to department faxes. These falsehoods in the document on DSA letterhead mislead members and persuaded them to Vote No giving the Executive Board an unfair gain to increase no votes.  Why do you think they wanted a No vote so bad?  Was it because the ballots would be out of their control?

In the first paragraph of the false document, they stated that the Constitution and Bylaw Committee did not endorse the Online Voting Bylaw amendment.  That was false, endorsement or non endorsement was not discussed with the Constitution and Bylaw Committee.  As a matter of fact, several of the Constitution and Bylaw Committee members were in support of it.   At a DSA General Membership meeting a Board of Director and Constitution and Bylaw Committee member stated that this statement was not true and that this document regarding not endorsing of the online voting bylaw amendment was never shared with him and that he had no knowledge of it, until it became public to the members.  Matter of fact two Constitution and Bylaw Committee members had told me privately that they were for the online voting bylaw amendment.  After the statement was made at the meeting the DSA President stated, “Oh, we’ll remember that for next time.”

In the first bulletin point they perpetuated their Home Address Hoax.

In the fourth bulletin point they wrote a false statement, they lied to you, saying their is No Flexibility.

Fact 2e

Fact 5c

Did they violate California Corporate Code 6811cc?
http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/corporations-code/corp-sect-6811.html

In May I sent an email to the DSA President formally objecting to any early ballot box pick up.  What happened? They picked up the ballot boxes early anyways.

In our Online Voting Bylaw that was put to vote in April of 2017, had safeguards in place to ensure a fair and secure vote to protect the members ultimate power, the power of their vote, in the present and going forward into the future.  We need a fair and secure voting process to stop the tricks, hoaxes, manipulation, scare tactics and fear mongering.  A truly professional union would promote a fair and secure voting process.

So what do you do when your requests, your recommendation, your attempts to stop legal violations are ignored?  What do you do if these changes are not made immediately will affect all the members?  What do you do when the utmost power of members, voting, is manipulated and they won’t stop the manipulation?

 

Advanced P.O.S.T. Certificate Requirements

Posted Leave a commentPosted in Research

How to get your Advanced P.O.S.T. Certificate.

I have listed the requirements on how to qualify for an Advanced P.O.S.T. Certificate. In this post you will be able to get an idea of how close you are to qualifying or if you are qualified. I recommend that you do contact the training division to determine how many training points you have.

As for college credits units, if you have attended college you should have an idea of how many college units you have. The Basis Police Academy depending on which academy you attended, the college units can vary from 22 units to 28 units.

SFDSA Collective Bargaining Agreement states:  

Paragraph 151 https://www.scribd.com/doc/316119452/SFDSA-CBA-2014-2017

Professional Achievement POST Premium. Bargaining unit members who possess an intermediate POST certificate shall, upon presenting documentation to the Department, receive a premium of six (6.0%) percent of their base rate of pay.   (more…)

Why doesn’t the DSA send you Emails?

Posted Leave a commentPosted in News

For years the DSA Secretary has violated the law in regards to electronic communication.  The President of the DSA’s responsibility is to ensure that the association follows the laws, bylaws and regulations.    The DSA stopped sending emails to members sometime in the spring after I brought this to their attention.  I have always encouraged them to follow the law.  So why did it take 5 months for them to do this?  Why did they keep you in the dark with little to no info. for months? (more…)

Intermediate P.O.S.T. Requirements

Posted Leave a commentPosted in News

How to get your Intermediate P.O.S.T. Certificate.

I have listed the requirements on how to qualify for an Intermediate P.O.S.T. Certificate. In this post you will be able to get an idea of how close you are to qualifying or if you are qualified. I recommend that you do contact the training division to determine how many training points you have.

As for college credits units, if you have attended college you should have an idea of how many college units you have. The Basis Police Academy depending on which academy you attended, the college units can vary from 22 units to 28 units.

SFDSA Collective Bargaining Agreement states:  

Paragraph 151 https://www.scribd.com/doc/316119452/SFDSA-CBA-2014-2017

Professional Achievement POST Premium. Bargaining unit members who possess an intermediate POST certificate shall, upon presenting documentation to the Department, receive a premium of four (4.0%) percent of their base rate of pay.   (more…)

How to fix a Staffing Shortage

Posted Leave a commentPosted in Research

In 1994 the POA updated the Police Charter and added Staffing Levels. Very smart decision by there association.

image

In 1994 the Police Staffing legislation was proposed to the Board of Supervisors.  The Board of Supervisors voted on the Police Staffing legislation.  The Board of Supervisors voted 9 in favor and 2 against with the majority in favor Police Staffing Proposition D was placed on the ballot for the San Francisco Voters to vote on. Police Staffing Proposition D passed by majority vote of the San Francisco voters.

POLICE STAFFING. The police force of the City and County shall at all times consist of not fewer than 1,971 full duty sworn officers. The staffing level of the Police Department shall be maintained with a minimum of 1,971 full duty sworn officers thereafter. That figure may be adjusted pursuant to Section 16.123.

All officers and employees of the City and County are directed to take all acts necessary to implement the provisions of this section. The Board of Supervisors is empowered to adopt ordinances necessary to effectuate the purpose of this section including but not limited to ordinances regulating the scheduling of police training cases.

Further, the Commission shall initiate an annual review to civilianize as many positions as possible to maximize police presence in the communities and submit that report to the Board of Supervisors annually for review and approval.

The number of full duty sworn officers in the Police Department dedicated to neighborhood policing and patrol for fiscal year 1993-1994 shall not be reduced in future years, and all new full duty sworn officers authorized for the Police Department shall also be dedicated to neighborhood community policing, patrol and investigations.

Maintaining a optimal level of staffing always seems to be problem.  It’s a dangerous balance of cost savings and public safety.  But if the scale is tipped to far towards cost savings not only does it effect public safety but it also effects the employees by overworking them to fill vacant positions.  Please read this excerpt from an article depicting the cost savings.

Staffing and overcrowding issues at the new jail, which houses The City’s long-term prisoners, became such an issue that an older facility was reopened on the same property in October. Sheriffs deputies have been putting in almost 1,500 hours of overtime per week, sometimes working 16-hour days, prompting the Board of Supervisors to call for the budget analyst’s report.

Overtime staffing is about 35 percent cheaper than hiring more sworn personnel because of mandatory fringe benefits, the report found, but the facility should be staffed with permanent personnel nonetheless, “In order to avoid staff fatigue and to ensure that the facility is operated safely.” – SF Examiner

In a 1999-2000 Civil Grand Jury Report, they express the dangers of mandatory forced overtime on employees.

Shortage of Sheriff’s Department Staff In spite of annual increases in funded positions from 818 in Fiscal Year (FY) 1997-1998 to 845 in FY1998-1999 and 897 in FY1999-2000, the Sheriff’s Department reports that it has a shortage of deputies in the jails. The department’s shortage of staff has apparently resulted in a departmental overtime budget that will be exceeded by $4.9 million in FY 1999-2000 because deputies have been assigned mandatory overtime shifts. Workers’ compensation claims will also cause the department’s budget to be exceeded by 40 percent, with at least $1,370,493 to be paid in claims for the 1999-2000 fiscal year. A pattern of increased overtime spending by the department is beginning to appear. The November 19, 1999 Controller’s Audit of the Sheriff’s Department stated that overtime spending for jail staffing increased by more than $650,000, or almost 60 percent, over the previous two fiscal years, 1997-98 and 1998-99. This pattern benefits no one. As the Controller’s Audit noted, “[i]n addition to its impact on the budget of the Sheriff’s Department, prolonged overtime by staff members may lead to fatigue and diminished attentiveness, conditions that can endanger the safety of the staff, jail inmates, and the public.” – SF Civil Grand Jury

In 2015, San Francisco Board of Supervisors vote 6-5 to boost police officers beyond charter mandate.

The City is slated to fund eight police academy classes — that includes $11 million for the first five classes next fiscal year — to hire some 400 new police officers.  The two-year hiring plan is expected to bring San Francisco in compliance with the 1994-voter mandated staffing level of 1,971, a level last met in 2009.  The City must go beyond the mandate, setting a goal of more than 2,200 officers, based on population growth since 1994.  While the resolution isn’t a mandate, it does commit the board politically to funding the effort.  “That the board commits to fully funding police academy classes to exceed this goal of 2,200 full duty sworn officers,” the resolution states. – SF Examiner

In a 2015-2016 Civil Grand Jury Report, they express the overtime continues to contribute to fatigue and stress, they learned it is primarily due to the lack of funding for requisitions over the past four years.

Consistent with the findings of the 2013-­2014 Civil Grand Jury in its report titled “Inquiry into the Programs and Operations of the San Francisco Jails,” the custody division continues to rely on a mandatory overtime policy to meet the needs of staffing 24 ­hour shifts at five jail locations. While closure of San Francisco County Jail #3 and the associated reassignment of staff to other facilities might have eased the overtime problems, the Controller’s Six Month Budget Status Report for FY 2015­-16 projected total overtime pay of $17.1 million compared with $14.8 million in FY 2014-­15 and $10.5 million in FY 2013-­14. We learned that this is primarily due to the lack of funding for requisitions over the past four years. Some City officials observed it is less expensive to pay for overtime than to fund the 40 positions that have been requested. – SF Civil Grand Jury

Wouldn’t it be a good idea to explore the idea of adding a Sheriff’s Staffing to the City Charter?

 

Members Document Inspection Rights

Posted Leave a commentPosted in News

One of your rights as a member is the power to view some of the association documents.  The association is a mutual benefit corporation and must follow California Corporation Law.  We have all heard rumors about members requesting to view documents and as the rumor goes the association did not allow the viewing of the documents.  Well, I have listed the Corporation Law for you review and if you want to view and copy a corporate document this is the law.  The Secretary of our association is the keeper of the records, all requests for documents would go through him unless you are requesting a financial document.  For financial document requests you must contact the Treasurer.  I would also include the President in the email or written request because he is responsible for the association to follow and comply with California Corporation Law.  At the bottom of the article I will list two ways to file a complaint if the association does not lawfully comply with your request.

CORPORATIONS CODE – CORP
TITLE 1. CORPORATIONS [100 – 14631] ( Title 1 enacted by Stats. 1947, Ch. 1038. )
DIVISION 2. NONPROFIT CORPORATION LAW [5000 – 10841] ( Heading of Division 2 amended by Stats. 1978, Ch. 567. )
PART 3. NONPROFIT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATIONS [7110 – 8910] ( Part 3 added by Stats. 1978, Ch. 567. )
CHAPTER 13. Records, Reports, and Rights of Inspection [8310 – 8338] ( Chapter 13 added by Stats. 1978, Ch. 567. )

ARTICLE 3. Rights of Inspection [8330 – 8338] ( Article 3 added by Stats. 1978, Ch. 567. ) (more…)

How to file a Grievance – Samples and Forms

Posted Leave a commentPosted in News

blackandyellowleadershipRecently, I have helped an association member follow up on a grievance that was supposed to have been submitted to the U.S.  As I looked into this matter, I discovered that the person that said they wrote a grievance and sent it to the U.S. never did.  When it comes to serious matters like this, I recommend you write and file your own grievances this will guarantee it gets done.

I will place the instructions in this post on the grievance procedure steps.   Also in this post will be a link to downloadable a grievance form. If you would like a copy of a Sample Grievance, please contact me, it will give you ideas and you can see the steps in the process.  I have also located some helpful grievance checklists and worksheets from another association which we can adopt to assist and use to write a solid grievance.

1st Step  the procedure.  The grievance procedure is written in the Collective Bargaining Agreement starting on page 8.  

2nd Step Complete a Grievance Form.  Download this form.

Downloadable Association Grievance Form

 

3rd Step download the Example Grievance  Checklist 

Grievance Checklist by Ken Lomba on Scribd

 

4th Step download the Grievance Worksheet

Grievance Worksheet by Ken Lomba on Scribd

 

 

Strong and Smart Contracts

Posted Leave a commentPosted in News

We need stronger and smarter contracts.  We are getting beaten at contract negotiations every time.  Take a look at these news excerpts about other union contracts.

The salaries of San Mateo County sheriff’s deputies are at least 7 percent higher than those of deputies in eight other Bay Area counties, and they’ll receive a 3 percent bump in 2015 thanks to the Board of Supervisors.

“I’m glad to see they’re making 7 percent more,” said Supervisor Don Horsley, the county’s former sheriff. “San Mateo County has a much higher cost to live in the county than Alameda, Solano, and Contra Costa counties.”

Gina Papan, who has been endorsed by the Deputy Sheriffs Association, said she had not reviewed the agreement but understands that, “significant concessions were made and the county is saving millions on this contract.” The Deputy Sheriffs’ Political Action Committee also made a $37,000 expenditure in support of Papan’s campaign, for a mailer.

County Human Resources Director Donna Vaillancourt said the county originally decided to guarantee deputies they would get at least 3 percent more than others because it was having difficulty recruiting and training quality candidates. With the current economy, that is no longer the case, she said.- Mercury News

(more…)