[PEN-L:164] [Fwd: jhurd_dsa-doc: Kate Bronfenbrenner On Organizing To Win]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --C3CD7CCF77F8CA3DB6FEEC65 -- Gar W. Lipow 815 Dundee RD NW Olympia, WA 98502 http://www.freetrain.org/ --C3CD7CCF77F8CA3DB6FEEC65 for jhurd_dsa-doc-outgoing; Sun, 20 Sep 1998 14:25:45 -0500 (EST) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 15:16:30 EDT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jeff Benjamin Becerra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: jhurd_dsa-doc: Kate Bronfenbrenner On Organizing To Win Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From the Current Edition of Disgruntled: http://www.disgruntled.com/bronfenbrenner998.html A Conversation With Kate Bronfenbrenner On Organizing To Win By Daniel S. Levine There's not a lot of academic brainpower that goes in to researching issues important to unions and union members. That's not because of any lack of need or interest, but an economic reality about the way universities function. Kate Bronfenbrenner, director of Labor Education Research for the New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell University is helping to change that. Bronfenbrenner in 1996 led an effort to set up an academic conference on labor organizing. Now, along with AFL-CIO economist, Director of the Labor Studies program at Cornell Richard Hurd, AFL-CIO Director or Economic Research Rudolph Oswald and Associate Dean of the Industrial and Labor Relations School at Cornell Ronald Seeber, she has edited a collection of the papers from that conference called "Organizing to Win" (Cornell University Press, 370 pp.) Like the title suggests, the book is a mix of case studies and quantitative analysis of organizing drives to see what works and what doesn't when a union tries to organize a workplace. The volume is well timed because it comes as union leaders have acknowledged that the future of the labor movement depends on massive new organizing drives today. The outcome of this effort will not only effect union members, but workers throughout the nation. As the editors of Organizing to Win argue, all workers have suffered from the economic impacts of the decline of unions. "As a vast academic literature attests, unions raise wages. Unions also reduce wage inequality, increase equity (through the principal of equal pay for equal work), reduce gender- and race-related pay differentials, and tend to reduce age- and tenure-related pay differentials," they write. "In a nation in which the constitutional right of free speech does not extend to the private-sector workplace, unions are also the only true vehicles for workplace democracy and the only means through which workers gain an independent voice regarding their daily working conditions." Disgruntled recently talked to Brofenbrenner about the need for unions to revamp their organizing styles, about the problems they encounter and how their goals can best be met. Q: One of the most interesting things about this book to me is that it exists at all. Have you found in academia there's been much interest in looking at unions in this way? A: Part of the reason for the 1996 conference was to try to push other academics to start doing research in union organizing. There had been a handful of people like me who had come out of labor and gone into academia and were doing research, but there was just no research on organizing. This was a very aggressive process where we set out proposals with ideas for research, called people up and said "listen, why don't you do research." We advise them what it would take, helped them find people to connect with and in some cases helped them find funding. The problem is there is no automatic source for funding this. There's no support system within universities... Q: No corporate sponsorship?... (laughter) A: (laughter) No, no corporate sponsorship -- and no real foundation sponsorship either. Also, to do the kind of research that needs to be done on the current state of the labor movement, you need to understand the labor movement. You have to understand workers. You have to understand work and unions. And you have to have the trust of workers and unions. Not all academics have that, to say the least. A very small number of academics have that. Q: There is a perception among people outside of the labor movement that unions are dying and that workers don't much want them these days. What's your view of this? A: I think a lot of what pollsters have captured -- they think they are capturing that workers don't want unions -- I think they've captured more of the mass resignation by American workers that they can't get there. They want protections. They want better work situations, but what they have to go through to get there is just too hard. "Do you believe union workplaces are better places to work
[PEN-L:39] Beverly Sues Dr. Bronfenbrenner Again
Although Judge Gary Lancaster dismissed Beverley Enterprises' lawsuit against Kate Bronfenbrenner on May 26, that does not end the company's litigation against her. Not only has Beverly announced that they are going to appeal their decision, but on June 9, they filed a motion to amend its complaint against Dr. Bronfenbrenner and for Judge Lancaster to reconsider his May 26 decision dismissing the case. The motion seeks to amend the complaint to add statements made during a story broadcast by National Public Radio on May 28, 1998. The reason they want to add the NPR comments is that Judge Lancaster had dismissed Beverly's suit on the grounds that Bronfenbrenner gave priviledged testimony to members of Congress. Beverly now claims that Bronfenbrenner slandered them again, but in an unprivileged forum, when she said on "Morning Edition" that she "told the truth" when she gave the testimony. Beverly's motion to amend states: "Bronfenbrenner's statement to NPR that `they knew I spoke the truth' clearly refers to and incorporates her statements at the town hall meeting which Plaintiff claims to be false and defamatory. Some of Bronfenbrenner's statemetns from the town hall meeting were paraphrased during the radio broadcast by the NPR reporter. While Bronfenbrenner's original utterances at the town hall meeting may qualify for an absolute privilege as legislative testimony, there is no absolute privilege for the repetition of the false and defamatory statements to a news reporter, outside the context of the legislative proceeding, for future broadcast on a national news program." [citations omitted] The proposed amendment states in part: "39. In introducing the story, the NPR reporter summarized Defendant's statements at the `town hall' meeting as follows: "In her 10-minute speech, Bronfenbrenner accused Beverly of being one of the nation's most notorious labor law violators, consistently harassing and intimidating workers who try to unionize. She says management videotaped union meetings and fired labor leaders. "The story also included excerpts of a previously recorded interview with Defendant Bronfenbrenner, including the following statement by Defendant: "Beverly knew that they couldn't win on the facts. They knew that I spoke the truth." Beverly's proposed amendments contend that the above-quoted statements in the interview reincorporated and restated all the original statements made at the original town hall meeting -- even though Dr. Bronfenbrenner did not make them again in the interview. On this theory, Beverly contends that the news story covering this case led those who heard it to understood the story was "of and concerning Beverly and to incorporate and reiterate" her statements at the Legislative Town Hall meeting, even though Dr. Bronfenbrenner did not repeat them. Beverly alleges that the news story thus removes the legislative privilege and allows it to sue her as of the statements had actually been made during the news story. Hugh Reilly, Beverly's in-house counsel, may be reached at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ellen J. Dannin California Western School of Law 225 Cedar Street San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 525-1449 fax: (619) 696-
[PEN-L:276] Beverly Enterprises v. Bronfenbrenner
As those on these lists have probably heard by now, the case against Kate Bronfenbrenner was dismissed Friday on the ground that her statement was made in a congressional proceeding and therefore was privileged. No ruling was made on other issues in the motion to dismiss. Beverly opposed the motion on several grounds, in particular that references to findings in NLRB cases and court cases that it has violated the law are not based on fact and therefore Bronfenbrenner could not rely on them. Bronfenbrenner's case will be appealed along with another case Beverly filed against a union official for defaming it in the same hearing. The AAUP (brief by Matt Finkin) and congressional representatives are filing amicus briefs at the appellate level on grounds including academic freedom, first amendment issues, and related issues. As many on these lists know, a petition was circulated soliciting support for Dr. Bronfenbrenner. Within four days I had received nearly 600 signatures. They continued to come in later and stand now at about 700. Some people asked whether the petition did any good. I want to assure everyone that it assisted Dr. Bronfenbrenner in many ways. I won't and can't list them all, but they included getting national attention through the press and other means on the case and forced Beverly to clarify what it was doing. It brought a lot of support to Dr. Bronfenbrenner through many different sources, sources that would not have been available without your support. Often we are asked to sign petitions but then never know if it mattered. I can tell you that at least in this case it did. If there is someone willing to put the petition and signatures on a website so it can be available, let me know, and I will forward it to you. It is about 22 pages long the last time I looked. Regards, Ellen Ellen J. Dannin California Western School of Law 225 Cedar Street San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 525-1449 fax: (619) 696-
Bronfenbrenner
Thank you for your support. We have received nearly a thousand endorsements. Based on these we have put our a press release and expect coverage on this situation. We have also sent the material to the congressional representatives who attended and called the Town Hall meeting at which Kate Bronfenbrenner spoke and which led to the defamation suit. We are no longer taking signatures. Now I need to ask a favor. If you sent the original request for endorsements to someone, would you please follow up with this thanks and also a notice that we are not taking more signatures. My system is receiving about 150 or more emails a day now with no sign of let up. This has the potential to shut it down. So please help me out on this. Best, Ellen Ellen J. Dannin California Western School of Law 225 Cedar Street San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-525-1449 Fax:619-696-
Follow up on Kate Bronfenbrenner (fwd)
We have had an enormous outpouring of support for Dr. Bronfenbrenner. At this point, we don't need further endorsements. We will be going to the media today (Wednesday, February 23, 1998) with the petition and the hundreds of endorsements. We will try to provide updates as newsworthy events transpire. Thanks, Ellen Ellen J. Dannin California Western School of Law 225 Cedar Street San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-525-1449 Fax:619-696-
Kate Bronfenbrenner
We urge our colleagues to join with us in protesting Beverly Enterprises' attack on Dr. Kate Bronfenbrenner's academic freedom and first amendment rights. Michal Belknap, Professor of Law, California Western School of Law Clete Daniel, Professor of American Labor History, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University Ellen Dannin, Professor of Law, California Western School of Law Julius Getman, The Earl E. Sheffield Regents Chair and Professor of Law,University of Texas Law School and former President, American Association of University Professors Lois S. Gray, Alice Grant Professor of Labor Relations, NYSSILR, Cornel University Harry C. Katz, The Jack Sheinkman Professor of Collective Bargaining, NYSSILR, Cornell University Risa Lieberwitz, Associate Professor, School of Industrial and Labor Relations,Cornell University Richard Lempert, Francis A. Allen Collegiate Professor of Law and Chair of the Department of Sociology, University of Michigan Sanford Levinson, W. St. John Garwood & W. St. Garwood, Jr. Centennial Chair, University of Texas Law School Deborah Malamud, Professor of Law University of Michigan School of Law Ray Marshall, former Secretary of Labor Scott Powe, Anne Green Regents Chair, University of Texas Law School James Rundle, Labor Education Coordinator, Industrial & Labor Relations Conference Center The statement, including background information, is set forth below. If you are willing to add your name to the Statement of Protest, please e-mail Ellen J. Dannin at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please add my name to the Statement of Protest: Name: Title for identification purposes: Address: Phone number: Email address: -- Statement of Protest On February 9, 1998, Beverly Enterprises, a company with a deplorable record in labor relations matters filed a defamation suit in federal court against Dr. Kate Bronfenbrenner. Dr. Bronfenbrenner is well-respected academic who has done important research on a variety of labor issues. Beverly seeks both compensatory and punitive damages. With the complaint, Beverly's attorneys, Pietragallo, Bosick & Gordon of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Walter & Haverfield, of Cleveland, Ohio, served a massive request for production of documents. Among the documents requested, Beverly seeks copies of all documents and confidential survey data relating to Dr. Bronfenbrenner.'s research on union and employer behavior in union organizing campaigns. It also seeks documents concerning Cornell's policies concerning the faculty research, speeches, presentations, lectures and seminars. The circumstances and background of this suit make clear that this is a thinly veiled attack on Dr Bronfenbrenner's academic freedom and her rights under the first amendment. The lawsuit is based on remarks made by Dr Bronfenbrenner at a May 19, 1997 Congressional Town meeting sponsored by several western Pennsylvania congressional representatives and Rep. Lane Evans (D-Ill). They were joined by Senator Arlen Spector (R-PA). The meeting was called for the express purpose of investigating Beverly's employment policies. Beverly is one of the country's largest nursing home chains. Four days before the Town Hall meeting, Rep. Lane Evans had introduced the Federal Procurement and Assistance Integrity Act (HR 1624), which would give the labor secretary the authority to debar or suspend companies from receiving federal contracts if they have a clear pattern or practice of violations of the National Labor Relations Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, or the Fair Labor Standards Act. Of the more than 750 nursing homes Beverly Enterprises operates, 42 are in Pennsylvania. Beverly is defending itself from hundreds of unfair labor practice complaints brought by the National Labor Relations Board. It also has been identified by the U.S. General Accounting Office as a serious labor law violator. In January 1993, the NLRB issued its decision in Beverly I, finding that the chain had committed some 135 unfair labor practices at 32 facilities in 12 states between mid-1986 and mid-1988. Two other Administrative Law Judge decisions found Beverly had committed additional unfair labor practices between mid-1988 and early 1992 at a number of nursing homes. In the most recent Beverly decision issued November 26, 1997, NLRB Administrative Law Judge Robert Wallace found that Beverly's "wide-ranging and persistent misconduct, demonstrat[ed] a general disregard for the employees' fundamental rights." Dr. Bronfenbrenner's testimony at the meeting presented the results of her past decade's research concerning union organizing. Based on her studies, she c
