Title: Let's Lay the Lavender/Union Question to Rest, Please.
Patrick Peterson wrote:
Unfortunately, this and other
attacks on the Stonewall Caucus seem to stem from our
support of recent efforts by Lavender Magazine staff to
form a union. The pattern of abuse and harassment that
union organizers were subjected to now appears to be
targeted toward those people who supported them.
Michael Moeglin responds:
It is astonishing that so many in the GLBT community find it necessary to continually flog this particular dead horse. Furthermore, some have made quite a production of commenting publicly about the issue, ostensibly on behalf of Lavender Magazine workers, without taking the trouble to communicate with those of us most directly affected by it.
I have been the Assistant Editor at Lavender (a non-management position) for the past ten months, and I am still left scratching my head at the presumptuous, knee-jerk responses I hear whenever the subject is introduced. The assumption appears to be that the present staff at the magazine has been coerced or manipulated by management to reject, or even to actively lobby against, the Union. This is patently untrue. The MN Newspaper Guild/Typographical Union and their agents did a crackerjack job of alienating most of us (the bargaining unit employees) all by themselves.
I cannot speak for my coworkers, but I came to feel that the Union's position was disingenuous. They continued to pursue contract negotiations well after a majority of Lavender employees clearly and repeatedly requested that they withdraw from the process and allow us to conduct our own business without further interference. My suspicion is that the Union used Lavender to test the viability of expanding their organization into smaller publications, thereby generating more revenue through membership dues and broadening the scope of the Union's influence.
Given that the Union failed to communicate with or meaningfully represent active Lavender employees while allowing itself to serve as a platform for former employees to air their grievances, I am pleased to report that as of May 20, 2002, the Union has withdrawn from the negotiation process. And not a moment too soon. On April 9, 2002, we filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board to decertify the Union. Mercifully, we have been spared that tedious process.
I apologize if this posting is not Minneapolis-specific enough, but I feel compelled to present a point of view in the matter that has been underrepresented throughout this tempest in a teapot.
Michael Moeglin
Ward 10
