Opinion: Tom Curtis on unions and the OEA

Why do they continue to exist?

The leadership of the OEA, an organization most of us paid dues into during our entire teaching career, is an interesting group of union officials. Please keep in mind, the operative word here is union. The term union has many connotations in and of itself, some good, but some not so good. If you are a dues paying member, the OEA may recognize you in some instances. However, once you retiree and are no longer paying dues, you are nonexistent to them and they fail to even communicate with you. That is my experience concerning the STRS debacle and the OEA. This shows the true consideration the leadership of the OEA has for the individual teacher. These OEA leaders are very self-serving people, but would adamantly deny such.

The OEA has attempted to drive a wedge between actives and retirees concerning the STRS situation for the past three years, by criticizing and name calling the retirees for their efforts to gain equality. None of this has been positive. The OEA has failed to respond to requests for documentation of their negative allegations about the retirees. The result, we can no longer trust the OEA or the STRS. That one fact is unsettling to so many of the STRS membership.

Unions are becoming less and less functional in our society today, as they no longer are able to keep people under their control and are very costly to operate. The OEA seems to always be in financial trouble, which is how they justify yearly increases in an already very expensive dues structure. Unions may have served their purpose in a society of industrial labor workers, but that is no longer the case. Those jobs have been eliminated or sent elsewhere, often because of union involvement. As a means of breaking a union hold on a company, the company simply closed their doors and took those manufacturing jobs to another state or worse, to a foreign country.

The United States no longer is considered to be a manufacturing country, which is what made this country great. Look at the concessions the UAW is now considering? Items they would never have given into in past years. In my opinion, unions are the younger siblings of the lawyering profession. Union officials take advantage of any negative situation they can and attempt to derive their income from doing such. Do these officials truly share in the plight of the people they represent, or do they benefit from that plight? I will leave you to ponder that question.

I have been a member of five different unions during my lifetime. 4 of the 5 were very large and powerful in their day. In looking back at my experiences with these unions, the true inspiration and motivation of these union officials is often not what the membership thinks it to be. These officials attempt to gain control of the group of people they claim to represent through many avenues.

Many of their tactics are justified, above board and for good reason, but many are not and are often ethically challenged. They often work on the premise that they will do whatever it takes to get the job done. If these officials are challenged about their processes and procedures, they do not respond to their challengers, they attempt to ignore them as though they do not exist. If they do respond, as the president of the OEA did to Dr. Dennis Leone’s 13-page position paper concerning the questionable operation of the STRS in May 2003, they do so in a manner they have perfected for many years.

They attack that person(s) and what they have stated as being nothing but allegations and misrepresentations. They make false claims about that person in order to damage that person(s) credibility, like calling them a fanatic. Are we retirees fanatics, that would depend on which camp you belong too? What is disturbing about their attacks, is that they cannot and will not defend their statements. They ignore all of those who question them. Now THAT is what I call a lack of credibility!

The OEA has failed to date to validate any of the remarks made in print about Dr. Leone’s position paper. The OEA has made many allegations about his motivation and vigorously attempted to discredit him, so he would not be elected to the STRS board. It has been stated that the OEA spent roughly $150,000 of teacher dues or PAC money in their attempt to regain some of the board seats they have lost, due to their lack of responsibility and ensuing loss of credibility. Unfortunately, they just do not get it!

In my opinion, if anyone deserves to be on the STRS board, Dr. Dennis Leone stands far above most others in the understanding of what needs to take place at the STRS. He has stood strong on all of his issues and never wavered on his commitment to bring accountability, trust and faith back to the STRS. His efforts have saved the STRS millions to date and improved the processes and procedures used by staff to operate our system.

Why did the OEA do this to the one person that every member of the STRS owes a huge debt of gratitude? That is very simple to answer. The OEA trained and helped elect numerous past and present OEA executive committee members to board seats. The OEA held control of 5 of the 9 board seats for more then a decade.

The OEA has certainly not helped to bring accountability, trust and faith back to the STRS in these past three years. Their position has been, yes it happened, but let us move on and just forget about the huge misspending that occurred. Looking into the past serves no purpose. Really? What is that all about? Why no accountability for those that failed their fiduciary responsibility?

The only accountability those board members will have to answer to have come from the Ohio Ethics Commission. This is due to retiree Sondra Stratton, filing a complaint on behalf of the STRS membership with the OEC. I know of no such discipline effort on the part of the OEA. However, they still feel they should have a strong influence concerning who is elected to the board. That is a union mentality, protect your own, even if they are wrong and move forward. What good is that notion to the members of the STRS, absolutely none? That idea does not follow common sense.

The OEA was in charge of the board for over 20 years by holding 5 of the 9 board seats and they failed to properly fund the health care benefit this same union promised us throughout our career. In my opinion, the OEA is most responsible for the lack of faith and trust we now have in the STRS, but they still want to run the show. They are shameless.

Have the OEA union officials been affected by the decisions made by their own people, most certainly? Most notably, they currently hold only 2 of 11 board seats. The others have been replaced. Language in SB 133, which the OEA aggressively fought until the very last minute prior to the vote by the legislature, makes sure that no one group of people, union or non-union will hold a majority of the STRS board seats ever again. What does that tell you? Has their membership suffered, I cannot answer that. One would think it would have. Again, the OEA has never taken any responsibility for what their people permitted to happen at the STRS.

Unfortunately, the OEA leadership has not been affected in the same manner as the STRS membership. We lost big time! The health care benefit we were promised throughout our careers, which the OEA failed to make sure was properly funded, does still exist. Yes, it still exists, but in a very different manner and scope than promised. It is certainly not the Cadillac plan many retirees were promised at retirement and the STRS literature always taunted as being such.

Further, for those retirees who lost their spousal and dependent children subsidy, it has become 800% more costly. Who would have ever dreamed that the STRS would totally eliminate the spousal and dependent child subsidy with no grandfathering offered to those most affected? None of the other four public pension systems has done this to their membership. Where was the OEA concerning this issue? They were nowhere to be found, because we are retirees, no longer pay dues to the OEA and thus do not deserve their support.

There is one sad fact concerning this issue of health care. The huge 800% increase in the health care benefit cost only affects a minority of the STRS membership and does not appear to matter to the majority. It appears the majority is either ignorant of this fact, which the OEA has certainly NOT publicized, or they are just not too sympathetic to those members suffering the most financial loss. I do know one thing, the OEA called on many local active union officials and OEA-R members to testify at the September STRS board meeting. The OEA had speakers make statements about how affordable our health care program is. That is only true for those that do not have to provide for a spouse or dependent children, but their statements at that meeting never indicated such, WHY NOT? The OEA is so deceptive it is sickening to me.

In summary, the OEA leadership has made no effort to bring the actives and retirees together. The OEA is the party most responsible for the lack of affordable health care. The OEA leaders of today appear to be little more then a group of union-minded leaders looking to keep their own dedicated flow of income arriving monthly. I guess you cannot blame them for that, as we all need a source of income. On the other hand, they want a much larger income than the people they represent. To me, just how they work their process is what is very questionable. I have not found one member who can truly explain in a dollar value response, why the OEA is such a good thing.

Why does the OEA continue to exist?

11/02/05