MADISON, Wis. – There must be a light at the end of the tunnelin the labor dispute at CUNA Mutual, but there's not even a glimmerof light showing yet. Though the stalemate continues to trudge on,the ugliness of the dispute has picked up dramatically. Unionofficials, members and supporters staged pickets at the homes ofCUNA Mutual board members and the credit unions they operate. Atfirst, in a Dec. 5 press release, the union (Office of ProfessionalEmployees International Union Local 39) claimed to have stagedpickets in four cities: * Columbus, Indiana targeting CUNA MutualChairman, Loretta Burd, who is president/CEO of Centra CreditUnion; * Denver, targeting board member Alan Peppers who is CEO ofDPS CU; * Ormond Beach, Florida, targeting Ralph Canterbury,retired president of US Airways Federal CU; * Honolulu, targetingboard member Farouk D.G. Wang, Director Buildings & GroundsManagement, University of Hawaii at Manoa. The union says theypicketed and handed out leaflets about the labor situation thatstated CUNA Mutual is attempting to bust the union and outsourcejobs. After Credit Union Times looked further into the picketing,it appears the Honolulu picketing never actually happened. Oneunion official said a “landslide or mudslide” prevented thempicketing Wang, so instead an OPEIU official spoke with Wang overthe phone. In Ormond Beach, Florida, the union says it could notpicket the home of Canterbury because he lives in a gatedcommunity. They said there was activity in the “community”, butcould not produce anyone for Credit Union Times to talk with whomight have been there. Details are sketchy in Denver, but itappears at least some picketing happened there, including atPeppers home. By far the brunt of this attack was felt worst bychairman Burd. Credit Union Times has confirmed that both Burd'shome and credit union were picketed on Friday Dec. 3. Chris Lupton,an OPEIU organizer, said the picketing first started at Burd'shouse early in the morning. “We were out there for about 45minutes. Her husband called the sheriff on us. We weren't doinganything wrong. The one thing we were told was to move our cars,”said Lupton. From there the picketers moved to the credit union.Lupton said they stayed just outside of the CU's parking lothanding out leaflets and carrying signs. Lupton described it as avery successful picket with about 40% of members leaving the CUtaking leaflets. Lupton said the police were called, but did nottake any action against his group. However, he said another groupmay have been asked to move their pickets. One source who did notwant to be identified said some of the 20 or so picketers were infact blocking drive-thru lanes and causing a disturbance. Theinformation officer for the Columbus Police Department told CreditUnion Times that the police were called to the scene at both Burd'shome and the credit union, but no charges were filed and any issueswere resolved on the scene. The pickets at Burd's home and CU addsto the increasing ugliness of the dispute, and clearly indicatesthe union's corporate campaign is back on. It had been halted afterformer CUNA Mutual CEO Mike Kitchen met with OPEIU President MikeGoodwin this summer. The union says the corporate campaign isdesigned to bring the battle to the public and to CUNA Mutualclients. “I think we want to wake them up a little bit to the factthat they have done nothing to resolve this contract, that they arenot being well advised. Whoever they are listening to is givingthem bad advice,” said OPEIU Local 39 Business Manager JohnPeterson. “They're going to have a great year if not a better yearthan last year. We want to open people's eyes that they're notworking with us,” said Peterson. CUNA Mutual spokesperson SydneyLindner said the latest pickets won't deter CUNA Mutual fromseeking a contract that it believes is fair for the employees andfiscally responsible for the company to position it for the future.“We believe that Friday's picketing is inappropriate, uncalled for,and completely tasteless, and we fail to see how picketing ourcustomers will benefit the employees that Local 39 claims torepresent,” said Lindner. “This type of union thuggery will notcause us to deviate from what we need to do to ensure the long-termfinancial viability and success of our company,” said Lindner. Shesaid the company still believes its current proposal is anexcellent offer and deserves ratification. There was moreincendiary news last week that the union says goes to the heart ofits argument. A U.S. District Court ruled in favor of the union ina case concerning CUNA Mutual's decision to outsource 22 janitorialpositions. The union initially claimed that the outsourcingviolated its collective bargaining agreement and called forarbitration. In March an arbitrator agreed with the union. CUNAMutual fought that, saying the arbitrator did not have theauthority to consider the dispute. The U.S. District Court ruledthe arbitrator did not exceed his authority. Further, the courtsaid the lawsuit was frivolous and ordered CUNA Mutual to pay theunion's legal fees. “Although I cannot conclude the plaintiff (CUNAMutual) pressed its case in bad faith, plaintiff should have knownits suit was doomed to fail in light of the well-settled lawagainst its position,” the court said in its ruling. “We arenaturally pleased with this result. We hope CUNA Mutual will acceptthe decision and meet with us to return the housekeeping work tothe union,” said Peterson. Lindner pointed out that of the 22people affected by the outsourcing, 16 took other jobs at thecompany. The other six elected to take the company's severancepackage. She said CUNA Mutual is saving $1 million a year byoutsourcing and the company believes it is in its best interest tobe able to outsource when it makes good business sense. In the newcontract on the table, CUNA Mutual would have been able to makethis outsourcing move without having to face arbitration. “Thisruling will not have an impact on the company's bargainingproposal. This decision reinforces why the outsourcing provisioncontained in our contract offer is necessary to ensure our abilityto manage the company in the best long-term interests of ourconsumers, policyholders and employees,” said Lindner. As for thecourt deeming the suit frivolous, Lindner said, “There's nothingfrivolous about a company having the right to save 50% on a $2million budget.” She said the ruling gives non-union competitors ofCUNA Mutual an advantage to run their companies more costeffectively. The two sides have not scheduled any new negotiatingsessions have been scheduled. -

[email protected]