You are on page 1of 18

DISCIPLINARY CHARGES AGAINST ANDREW L.

STERN and ANNA BURGER
By having engaged in the conduct set forth herein, Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger, President and Secretary-Treasurer, respectively, of the Service Employees International Union, are hereby charged with violating Article XVII, Section 1, Paragraphs 2-7 and 11 of the SEIU Constitution. The conduct described below is part of SEIU’s punitive campaign of retribution directed against UHW and its democratically elected officers and members for exercising their free speech rights guaranteed under Title I of the LMRDA, as well as the SEIU Constitution. It is intended to silence not only their voices, but the voices of other SEIU members who might dare to join with them in criticizing the policies of, and actions by, SEIU’s top leaders. The charges of misconduct against Stern and Burger can be summarized as follows: (1) seeking to carry out a trusteeship of UHW for political purposes and in violation of requirements set out in federal law and in SEIU’s Constitution; (2) spreading lies and negative propaganda about UHW’s elected leaders among UHW members in order to deliberately undermine members’ confidence and trust in their elected leaders, while also disseminating that same propaganda widely throughout the entire SEIU in order to remind all members and officers of the potential consequences of crossing Stern and/or Burger; (3) collaborating with anti-union employers to undermine UHW’s organizing and collective bargaining efforts, thereby eroding, rather than strengthening, members’ welfare as well as the overall organizing goals of the SEIU; (4) knowingly filing a frivolous lawsuit against UHW as a public relations handle for attacking UHW’s elected leaders; (5) intentionally misrepresenting and harassing UHW’s delegation to the 2008 SEIU Convention; (6) orchestrating the removal of Sal Rosselli as President of SEIU’s California State Council for illegitimate, political purposes; and (7) orchestrating the removal of Sal Rosselli and other top UHW leaders from union office altogether by imposing an unjustified and oppressive “monitorship” on UHW as a prelude to imposing an unlawful trusteeship in retaliation for both UHW’s officers’ and members’ criticisms of SEIU policies and actions.

Charges
I. Federal law (the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act) and the SEIU Constitution contain clear standards designed to safeguard union members’ right to democratically control their local unions and to protect locally governed unions from arbitrary and politically motivated takeovers, or “trusteeships,” by national and international union officials. To these ends, federal law and the SEIU Constitution carefully limit the conditions under which international union officials may take over, or “trustee,” a local union. Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger have sought to violate these restraints by attempting to impose a politically motivated trusteeship on UHW under the guise of false allegations.

1

1.

During recent years, UHW’s elected leaders have criticized and opposed numerous programmatic practices and policies of Andrew Stern and Anna Burger. For example, UHW’s elected leaders have criticized such areas as: Stern and Burger’s undemocratic and concessionary approach to the renegotiation of the California Nursing Home Alliance agreement and its harmful implications for both nursing home residents and workers; SEIU officials’ undemocratic practices during the course of SEIU members’ renegotiation of their collective bargaining agreement with Tenet Healthcare; SEIU’s organizing plan for 2008-12; SEIU’s secret deals with companies like Aramark and the Compass Group; Stern and Burger’s unionwide plan for 2008-12 (the “Justice for All” plan); and Stern and Burger’s efforts to centralize and consolidate power in the hands of SEIU officials in Washington, D.C. at the expense of rank-and-file union members. In addition, UHW’s elected leaders have publicly opposed certain financial and administrative practices of Stern and Burger that raise serious ethical concerns. For example, in 2006 Andrew Stern published a book entitled “A Country that Works.” On or about February 3, 2006, Andrew Stern sought the approval of the SEIU International Executive Board for a plan to utilize at least $100,000 of SEIU’s funds and institutional resources to promote Stern’s book. Specifically, Stern’s proposal called for the Union to do the following: spend $6,000 to purchase 500 copies of Stern’s book; pay for Stern to conduct a book tour and pay for an SEIU staffperson to accompany Stern; pay for in-house SEIU services and staff time to promote the book, including the use of SEIU’s Political, Communications, Clerical and Administrative staff; spend $45,000 to hire a public relations firm to promote Stern’s book; spend $18,000 to fund a website administrator to help promote the book; and spend $16,500 for book events and related expenses. Stern recommended this proposal to the International Executive Board despite the fact that revenues from the sales of the book would not be delivered to SEIU’s treasury, but rather to Stern for his personal benefit. Simon & Schuster, the publisher of Stern’s book, had agreed to pay Stern an “advance” of $175,000 in addition to royalty payments derived from book sales. UHW’s President Sal Rosselli, who served on the International Executive Board at the time, voted against Stern’s proposal. Furthermore, Rosselli requested a copy of the contract between Stern and Simon & Schuster, and went directly to Stern to express, during private conversation, his opposition to the deal. Rather than respecting UHW leaders’ right to question, criticize and oppose Stern and Burger’s policies and practices, Stern and Burger have conducted a months-long, multi-million dollar campaign of retaliation that is aimed at silencing their critics and removing them from their elected office. On or about June 5, 2008, SEIU official Bill Ragen sent an email to other top SEIU officials that reveals the political motives behind the efforts of Andrew Stern and Anna Burger to remove UHW’s elected leaders. The email – which was addressed to a team of top SEIU officials including Stephen Lerner, Thomas Debruin, Kirk Adams, Denise Poloyac and counsel Edgar James – does not mention any concerns

2.

3.

4.

2

about financial or operational problems at UHW that might serve as legitimate grounds for trusteeship. Instead, the email reveals the outlines of a Machiavellian plan by top SEIU officials to use whatever means necessary to take over, dismember and eviscerate UHW and thereby remove UHW’s elected leaders. 5. In the email, Ragen discusses a number of possible strategies for accomplishing this goal, including: orchestrating the “implosion” of UHW; weakening UHW by stripping away its 65,000 long-term care (“LTC”) members through SEIU’s jurisdictional process; weakening UHW by recruiting away some of its key staff leaders; attempting to exploit “pockets of dissatisfaction” among UHW members in an effort to change UHW’s leadership during upcoming internal officer and board elections; filing lawsuits against UHW; initiating regulatory actions against UHW with the U.S. Department of Labor; and imposing trusteeship on UHW. Ragen identifies two leading options for displacing UHW’s elected leaders – trusteeship or “implosion” – and notes that his preferred strategy is orchestrating the “implosion” of UHW. The email, with its military references to “Iraq” and a “suicide mission,” is reminiscent of a secret government plan aimed at overthrowing a foreign government. The email begins as follows: Post-convention UHW work. A few thoughts. • Trusteeship would be difficult – it’s like Iraq, easy and then to get in and then a slog • Implosion would be better outcome – but what will it take? • Loss of LTC means half the local will be in the south, where there are pockets of dissatisfaction • Local elections are early next year • Some key senior staff may want to get out of a suicide mission • DFR’s – possible filing at Kaiser Sunset, elsewhere 7. The email reveals that SEIU officials, under the guidance of Andrew Stern and Anna Burger, consider trusteeship to be simply one of many possible means to accomplish their political goal of removing UHW’s elected leaders. The email also demonstrates that Stern and Burger are employing a broad array of the union’s resources to carry out a political coup d’etat against UHW’s elected leaders, including field staff, communications experts and legal support. The email hints at the scope, complexity and intensity of Stern and Burger’s campaign in its discussion of strategic and operational issues, including “communications strategy,” “member outreach,” outreach to other SEIU local unions, and legal strategy. The truth about the purely political nature of SEIU’s proposed trusteeship of UHW is also made evident by SEIU officials’ recent public assertions that SEIU had no intention of placing UHW under trusteeship, presumably because there was not sufficient evidence, nor legal rationale, to justify a legitimate trusteeship. On or

6.

8.

9.

3

about May 6, 2008, SEIU filed its first amended complaint to its April 29, 2008 lawsuit against UHW. In the complaint, SEIU alleged that UHW “began to fear (contrary to fact) that SEIU was planning to appoint a temporary trustee to run the affairs of the local union and remove them from office.” This statement is part of the public record in United States District Court, Central District of California. 10. On or about July 14, 2008, Stephen Lerner, a close Stern ally and one of the principal architects of SEIU’s campaign against UHW, published an article on The Monthly Review’s website in which he claimed that the SEIU never threatened to place UHW in trusteeship during the spring of 2008. He wrote that the claims made by UHW about SEIU’s trusteeship threat were “simply [not] true, no matter how often repeated.” This statement again illustrates that SEIU understood that it did not have valid grounds to place UHW under a trusteeship, and now seeks to improperly and illegally employ trusteeship for political purposes. 11. In the weeks since SEIU made the aforementioned statements, no new facts or evidence that might support a legitimate trusteeship have come to light. The only change in circumstances that has occurred is that a pattern of corruption within SEIU, but not UHW, has been identified and publicized – corruption that Stern and Burger have overlooked because the corruption was committed by their close political allies. Given their relationship to the growing corruption scandal, Stern and Burger have grown far more fearful of criticism and consequently are undertaking urgent and aggressive efforts to remove their critics from the face of SEIU – even going so far as to divert massive and vital resources from SEIU’s 2008 political campaign, thereby jeopardizing SEIU members’ efforts to elect candidates who will advance their interests. 12. The political purpose behind Stern and Burger’s trusteeship effort is further illustrated by the fact that UHW and SEIU sought to mediate their political differences on April 22-23, 2008 in Chicago. The two-day mediation process centered on political issues related to procedural and jurisdictional topics, not questions of any financial improprieties or problems with UHW’s organizational performance. 13. The political nature of the current trusteeship effort is also evidenced by Stern and Burger’s actions to halt progress towards resolving the dispute at the Chicago mediation. During the mediation, certain SEIU leaders, including Local 6434’s President Tyrone Freeman, agreed to the mediator’s proposal for resolving the dispute, as did UHW. However, Stern and Burger’s direct surrogates – Mary Kay Henry, Gerald Hudson, Tom Debruin, Dave Regan and David Rolf – opposed the mediator’s proposed solution, thereby blocking a resolution of the political dispute. 14. Furthermore, Local 6434’s President Tyrone Freeman made two communications to UHW’s President Sal Rosselli in which Freeman said he was willing to cease his political attacks on UHW, but that he was receiving pressure from Stern and Burger to continue the fight against UHW. Stern and Burger have continued to wage their

4

battle against UHW, for which they now seek to use an unlawful trusteeship as one more in a series of weapons to accomplish their political goal of displacing UHW’s elected leaders. II. By the following actions, SEIU has, at the direction of Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger, through a campaign of disinformation, knowingly and maliciously spread falsehoods about UHW and its leadership among UHW’s membership and the SEIU leadership nationwide in an effort to undermine UHW’s elected leaders. 1. On or about January 4, 2008, UHW’s elected Executive Board adopted a core set of principles known as the Platform for Change. The Platform for Change was developed by UHW and contains a series of principles regarding union democracy, transparency, and membership participation in all union decision-making. UHW crafted the Platform for Change with the aim of bringing it to the 2008 SEIU Convention in Puerto Rico for consideration by Convention delegates. On or about February 9, 2008, UHW President Sal Rosselli resigned from the SEIU Executive Committee to protest the increasingly undemocratic policies and practices of SEIU and the lack of democratic decision-making within SEIU. Rosselli made clear in his resignation letter to Stern that he resigned “not to walk away, but to stay involved and to be able to speak freely.” On or about February 10, 2008, UHW launched a new website (www.seiuvoice.org) to give SEIU members a space to voice their concerns about the need for greater democracy inside SEIU. The Platform for Change was featured on the website. In February of 2008, SEIU began its campaign to smear UHW and UHW’s elected leaders. Andrew Stern and Anna Burger supplied contact information for UHW's 150,000 members to his allies and surrogates, Tyrone Freeman and Dave Regan, to enable them to carry out a negative communications campaign consisting of direct mail, telephone and e-mail aimed at undermining support for UHW's elected leaders. Since February 2008, various officers of the SEIU, including Executive Vice Presidents Dave Regan and Mary Kay Henry, International Executive Board member Tom Debruin and SEIU Healthcare Division Chair Dennis Rivera, have repeatedly, in writing and orally, instructed UHW to “take down” the www.seiuvoice.org website. In fact, SEIU officials initially demanded that UHW take down the website as a precondition for participating in a two-day mediation session with SEIU, which began on April 22, 2008 in Chicago, which was aimed at seeking a solution to the political differences between SEIU and UHW. All of the instructions to take down the website were made at the direction of Stern and Burger, and were intended to chill the exercise of free speech by UHW members. On or about February 28, 2008, UHW began an internal election process among its long-term care members to determine whether or not they wished to remain in UHW or join a statewide long-term care local, namely Local 6434. An outside, third-party

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

5

professional organization (Mediation and Conciliation Services) oversaw the balloting. Given that SEIU was formulating a plan to force UHW’s long-term care members into Local 6434, a local that many UHW members seemed reluctant to join, this democratic referendum was conducted in order to probe and ascertain member sentiment with some precision. 7. Beginning in late February and continuing over multiple weeks, SEIU interfered in UHW’s internal election by conducting an aggressive campaign to disrupt the referendum and to convince UHW members to “Vote No.” Stern and Burger used the mailing addresses and phone numbers of UHW’s long-term care members to contact them via mail, telephone and email with instructions to “Vote No.” Some UHW members received as many as six and seven calls in a single day from SEIU’s phone banks. Although the phone calls originated in Illinois, Ohio, New York and California, the SEIU employed a devious mechanism for making them appear to have originated from the UHW’s toll-free number. This prompted thousands of UHW members to call UHW’s offices, jamming the local’s phone lines. SEIU officials also interfered with the third-party organization overseeing the election and sought to have it withhold its services. On or about March 6, 2008, Tyrone Freeman, a Stern protégé and surrogate, sent an email to UHW members that falsely accused UHW of “secretly negotiating…behind the backs of UHW members.” The meetings that Freeman was referring to were not secret and were approved by UHW’s Nursing Home Steward Council. By a letter dated March 24, 2008 that was sent to the homes of UHW’s 150,000 members and widely circulated among the SEIU leadership nationwide, Stern disseminated a number of unsubstantiated and maliciously motivated rumors accusing the UHW leadership of anti-union conduct. And while UHW subsequently demonstrated that the allegations in this letter were patently false, SEIU gave absolutely no circulation to UHW’s rebuttal of the lies and rumors that SEIU had previously broadcast throughout the Union, or its decision to abandon its threatened trusteeship based thereon. In particular, that letter falsely accused UHW’s leadership of colluding with the California Nurses Association (CNA) to sabotage union representation elections among thousands of hospital workers employed by Catholic Health Partners in Ohio. UHW not only disproved these allegations, but also showed how it had condemned the CNA’s conduct and offered assistance to non-union workers and SEIU bargaining units in Ohio and in Nevada in opposing CNA’s raids. 10. On or about March 28, 2008, SEIU began conducting an “opinion poll” of UHW members, using McGuire Research Services, a polling firm based in Denver, CO. The poll was designed to assess UHW members’ support for its elected leaders and to test a series of false attacks against these leaders in order to identify segments of UHW’s membership that could be organized to oppose UHW’s elected leaders.

8.

9.

6

11. On or about March 24, 2008, SEIU launched a website (www.seiufactchecker.org) that it used as an additional platform for waging its disinformation campaign against UHW and for further disseminating the lies and rumors contained in Stern’s letter of that date. For example, SEIU posted false and inflammatory information accusing UHW of failing to assist security officers employed by Inter-Con Security Services who were attempting to organize a union at Kaiser Permanente facilities in California. Via email and the website, SEIU disseminated numerous false accusations that were designed to undermine support for UHW’s elected leaders by falsely accusing them of violating core trade union principles. For example, SEIU’s materials falsely reported that UHW is “elitist” and interested in “just us” rather than “justice for all;” that UHW “looks the other way when employers contract out some jobs and services at lower, nonunion wage and benefit rates” in order to “leave more money for current members;” and that UHW practices “two-tier unionism.” 12. UHW members and Inter-Con security guards wrote to Andrew Stern on multiple occasions asking that he correct the lies being spread about UHW. In particular, on or about April 10, 2008, security guards with Inter-Con at Kaiser Permanente facilities wrote a letter to Andrew Stern in which they demanded an end to “malicious claims about UHW” and called on Stern to “correct the record, remove the lies posted on seiufactchecker.org about UHW, and issue an apology." Stern failed to correct the falsehoods broadcast by his staff and instead continued to repeat the same untruthful attacks against UHW’s elected leaders. 13. On or about April 2, 2008, SEIU sent a second “attack” mailer to the homes of UHW members. This mailer falsely alleged that UHW leaders were “wasting members’ dues money” and that “UHW-W members deserve better than to have their local union resources and staff wasted on phony ballot elections that mislead members about their union representation…UHW-W leaders should stop wasting members' dues money”, e.g., by conducting democratic referenda among their membership. 14. On or about April 7, 2008, SEIU sent a third attack mailer to the homes of UHW’s 150,000 members. The mailer alleged that UHW was one of only a few SEIU locals that had not signed SEIU’s “democracy pledge.” Although SEIU had never sent this “democracy pledge” to UHW’s elected leadership for their consideration, the mailer falsely implied that UHW’s leadership was against union democracy. 15. On or about April 15, 2008, SEIU notified UHW that the elections it had conducted in February 2008 to elect delegates to the SEIU Convention in June 2008 improperly limited candidate eligibility despite contrary legal advice from UHW’s legal counsel. Within a matter of hours, UHW acknowledged its mistake and pledged to conduct new elections under procedures approved by the SEIU. Nonetheless, between that date and the June Convention, Stern and Burger carpet-bombed the SEIU membership and leadership nationwide with a continuing series of press releases and internal member/officer communications publicizing UHW’s honest mistake and accusing its leadership of intentionally seeking to undermine union democracy. The

7

best that can be said of this malicious P.R. campaign was that it was a case of “the pot calling the kettle black.” 16. More particularly, on or about April 17, 2008, SEIU sent an e-mail to UHW members and staff attacking UHW’s leaders and accusing them of having nothing but “contempt” for their members. 17. On or about April 18, 2008, SEIU sent another e-mail to UHW members’ work and personal emails, accusing UHW of intentionally barring 98% of its membership from the Convention delegate elections. 18. On or about April 28, 2008, SEIU sent an attack mailer to the homes of UHW members, alleging that “UHW-W Bars 98% of Rank-and-File Members from Running in Union Election.” This mailer was sent despite the fact that UHW had already taken steps to correct the errors of its first delegate election by invalidating its results and agreeing to conduct a new election. This mailer accused UHW of having “insulted its members while planning the election.” 19. Meanwhile, while Stern and Burger were on notice and fully aware that the officer and ex-officio delegate elections conducted by Local 6434 were also unlawful, they informed no one of this fact and took no action to require Tyrone Freeman, who is Stern’s and Burger’s protégé, to rerun his unlawful elections; nor did they issue press releases and send a continuing stream of attack mailings to Local 6434 and SEIU members and officers publicizing Freeman’s blatantly unlawful elections that effectively precluded virtually 100 percent of Local 6434 members from eligibility to run for office except for those few that Freeman had chosen to include in his slate. 20. Throughout the month of May 2008, SEIU employed mailings, leaflets, and recorded telephone calls to attack UHW’s elected leaders for not agreeing to swallow its entire “Justice for All” convention platform, hook, line and sinker, including its plan to undermine member democracy and to confer and concentrate expanded powers in the hands of the SEIU President and Washington, D.C. staff. 21. In particular, on or about May 10, 2008, SEIU sent a mailer to all UHW members that claimed that, “UHW is the only SEIU local union represented on the SEIU Executive Board that doesn’t support the Justice for All Plan.” On or about May 13, 2008, SEIU placed recorded telephone calls to UHW’s membership. The voice recorded for the call is Monica Russo, a member of SEIU’s International Executive Board and President of Local 1999 FHU. Russo made much of the fact that the UHW was the only local represented on the International Executive Board that had not fallen into step and endorsed the “Justice for All Plan.” 22. On or about May 15, 2008, SEIU staff leafleted UHW members working at Centinela Hospital in Los Angeles. The leaflet stated: “Your local union, UHW, has not joined us in supporting the ‘Justice for All’ program.”

8

23. During these months, SEIU used numerous devices (return post cards attached to mailings sent to UHW members’ homes, solicitations to contact SEIU via telephone and email, and website sign-up devices) in an effort to recruit a base of support inside UHW’s membership to assist SEIU in conducting its political campaign against UHW’s elected leaders. 24. The nature and scope of this unprecedented, negative and very costly publicity campaign by Stern and Burger, selectively targeting UHW’s elected leaders and carpet-bombing all SEIU affiliates and their officers with their relentless adverse publicity, was politically motivated, discriminatory and vindictive. Further, it was unethical, wasteful of members’ dues, disloyal to the Union as an institution and in violation of the oath of office taken by Stern and Burger. Their conduct, and particularly their deliberate, malicious, and pervasive campaign to disseminate false charges against the UHW leadership also constituted conduct unbecoming of a union member, much less top elected official of our Union.

III.

By the following actions among others, SEIU, at the direction of Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger, purposefully collaborated with anti-union employers in an effort to undermine the organizing and collective bargaining efforts of UHW and its members. 1. From January of 2007 until the fall of 2007, UHW was in productive negotiations with Windsor Healthcare, a nursing home company, about changing its relationship with the union. The two parties were close to reaching an agreement to ensure access to free and fair union representation elections by the company’s non-union workers. UHW had already reached an agreement at one Windsor facility. During this same period, SEIU engaged in discussions with Windsor and encouraged the company to refrain from having a relationship with UHW and instead urged it to join the Nursing Home Alliance. In the spring of 2007 Windsor executives showed up at an Alliance meeting and were greeted by Jon Barton, an SEIU official. By the fall of 2007, UHW’s negotiations with Windsor had collapsed after SEIU attorneys told Windsor executives that UHW would not be representing nursing home workers for much longer, so there was no need to negotiate with UHW. In addition, SEIU shared with Windsor UHW's organizing plan, which UHW had submitted to the SEIU Long Term Care Division's Steering Committee and which made reference to UHW’s goals at Windsor. Windsor reacted very negatively to the unexpected disclosure by SEIU officials and then broke off discussions with UHW. In March 2007, during the negotiations with Nursing Home Alliance operators for a new alliance agreement, nursing home operators made proposals to establish an agreement with SEIU and Local 6434, but not with UHW. On April 6, 2007, Alliance operators met and negotiated with Local 6434 and SEIU in secret, with SEIU having deliberately excluded the UHW. SEIU officials continued to negotiate with Alliance operators in April and May of 2007 while continuing to exclude UHW from these discussions even though UHW represents 75% of all unionized nursing

2.

9

home workers in the State of California. Scott Carlson of the Nursing Home Alliance informed Alliance operators that, if the Nursing Home Alliance agreement were renewed, the Alliance operators would not assign free and fair organizing rights to any new facilities located in UHW’s geographic jurisdiction. 3. On or about March 10, 2008, Stern and Burger directed Josie Mooney, a Special Assistant to the President, and Tom Debruin, International Vice President and Eastern Area Director, to meet secretly with a California-based political consulting firm to devise a smear campaign against UHW and its President. This group was known as the “skunk team” and sought to make use of “opposition research” about UHW that was prepared at the direction of Sutter Health, UHW’s most anti-union employer. On or about March 24, 2008, SEIU sent a mailing that falsely accused UHW of sabotaging union representation elections in Ohio to workers at St. Francis Medical Center in Lynwood, CA and CHW Mercy Medical Clinics in Sacramento, CA, both of which were just days away from holding union elections for UHW representation in their facilities. On or about April 16th, 2008, SEIU staff assisted Good Samaritan Hospital in Los Angeles with its attempt to decertify UHW by distributing anti-UHW literature to hospital workers in the days leading up to a decertification election at the hospital. During February and March of 2008, UHW held a referendum among its long-term care members to determine whether or not they wished to remain in UHW or to join a statewide long-term care local, namely Local 6434. During this referendum, Kindred Healthcare, with the assistance of SEIU, worked to block UHW members employed at Kindred facilities from participating in this referendum. In addition, Kindred’s facility-based managers told UHW members that the company would only agree to a relationship with SEIU and Local 6434, and not with UHW. Sunbridge Healthcare Corporation also refused to permit UHW to conduct voting at its facilities and directed its facility-based managers to campaign against the vote by, for example, telling workers that they should support SEIU and Local 6434 because they are the only entities with which Sunbridge was willing to bargain. Country Villa also prohibited UHW from conducting votes at its facilities and its managers also told employees that they were better off having Local 6434 represent them – “that was the future.” All of this was, of course, engineered by SEIU as part of its campaign to undermine UHW, regardless of the adverse impact it would have on the UHW membership, who also happen to be SEIU members whose interests Stern and Burger are under a duty to promote. During March of 2008, UHW was negotiating with nursing home company Country Villa over a successor collective bargaining agreement for a facility, formerly operated by Pleasant Care, that had declared bankruptcy. By April of 2008, Country Villa suddenly refused to continue negotiating with UHW alone, and insisted that

4.

5.

6.

7.

10

SEIU and Local 6434 be invited to the negotiating table. This action was taken pursuant to a request from SEIU and Local 6434. 8. In June of 2008, SEIU collaborated with Scott Carlson, the chief negotiator for the employers of the former California Nursing Home Alliance, to convince nursing home employers not to negotiate collective bargaining agreements with UHW. The employers were told not to settle with UHW because they would get a better deal with SEIU and Local 6434. Two of those operators, Country Villa and Sunbridge, gave Local 6434 a home to organize in exchange for that deal. On or about August 25, 2008, Scott Carlson called former Alliance nursing home operators and informed them that SEIU planned to conduct a hearing to place UHW in trusteeship. SEIU officials informed nursing home operators of their plans for the hearing before informing UHW.

9.

10. Since January of 2008, SEIU officials including Jim Philliou, Dave Regan and Amy Adams have denied UHW’s multiple requests for a copy of an SEIU database containing data that is vital to the collective bargaining efforts of UHW’s nursing home members. The database, which was prepared over a multi-year period by SEIU’s Research Department in California and Washington, D.C., contains essential data on the financial and operational performance of California’s nursing homes and is the most comprehensive database on California nursing homes that SEIU has ever assembled. UHW made multiple requests for the database given that 7,000 UHW nursing home members employed at more than 100 facilities are in negotiations during 2008 – the largest ever coordinated bargaining campaign conducted by UHW’s nursing home members. Nonetheless, SEIU officials have refused to make the database available to UHW negotiators despite the fact (1) that the database would be an invaluable aid to assist and support their bargaining positions and to improve members’ wages, benefits and working conditions, (2) that UHW members pay millions of dollars of dues money each year to SEIU to fund the operation of its Research and other departments for the benefit of all members, and (3) that UHW represents 75% of all of California’s organized nursing home members – meaning that SEIU officials’ actions have withheld this important member-funded resource from the hands of a super-majority of the SEIU members who need it. 11. On or about September 1, 2008, SEIU collaborated with Stanford Hospitals and Clinics to send a nine-page mailing attacking UHW to workers at Stanford Hospital and Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital who were just days away from an NLRBsupervised union representation election. 12. This deliberate SEIU interference in the collective bargaining relationships between UHW and the employers of its members, and SEIU’s withholding of essential financial, analytical and collective bargaining tools, not only served to undermine UHW members’ collective bargaining efforts, but constituted unethical conduct and gross disloyalty to them and dual unionism and conduct unbecoming a member in violation of the oath of office.

11

IV.

SEIU, at the direction of Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger, knowingly and in bad faith filed a frivolous lawsuit that falsely accused UHW of corruption and financial impropriety in furtherance of their campaign to destroy the reputation and political credentials of UHW and its democratically elected leaders. 1. On or about April 24, 2007, UHW created the United Healthcare Workers and Patients Education Fund (PEF) for the purpose of educating the public, healthcare patients and healthcare workers by means of classes, meetings, seminars, conferences, written and printed material and electronic means of communication concerning the ongoing healthcare crisis in America and how and why to provide high quality, affordable health care for all people regardless of their means. The fund was incorporated as a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation. The fund was governed by 10 members of UHW’s elected Executive Board and was established according to the advice and with the assistance of UHW’s legal counsel. UHW’s elected Executive Board authorized the transfer of up to $6 million into the fund, but transferred only $3 million. One year later, on or about April 24, 2008, UHW voluntarily resolved to dissolve the United Healthcare Workers and Patients Education Fund and to return all of its funds and property to UHW. UHW promptly informed Stern and Burger of its actions and furnished them with all of the Fund’s books and records. Of the $3 million that was initially transferred into the Fund, only about $100,000 was spent towards educating the public, healthcare patients and healthcare workers. The entire balance was returned to UHW and placed in its general fund. Notwithstanding the foregoing, on or about April 29, 2008, Stern subsequently directed SEIU’s lawyers to file a lawsuit in federal court alleging that UHW’s top officers had fraudulently misappropriated $3 million of their members’ dues by temporarily transferring it to the United Healthcare Workers and Patients Education Fund. The lawsuit demanded an accounting of the Fund’s books and records already in SEIU’s possession and sought to have the defendants individually reimburse UHW from their personal funds. The named UHW officers/defendants promptly demanded that SEIU withdraw its frivolous lawsuit, filed in bad faith, and, when SEIU refused to do so, filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice, which motion was granted on July 22, 2008, by Federal District Court Judge John F. Walter. See SEIU v. Rosselli, et al., CV 08277-JFW (PLAx), July 22, 2008 Meanwhile, on or about May 20, 2008, SEIU rounded up several UHW members who were willing to allow their names to be used as plaintiffs in a second, identical SEIU-sponsored lawsuit against UHW’s leadership that is being handled by the same SEIU lawyers responsible for the first lawsuit.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

12

7.

On or about August 12, 2008, the independent auditors responsible for auditing UHW’s finances concluded that, because the money transferred to the Fund had never left the control of UHW’s elected leadership, that money would be shown in its certified audit as an asset that continued to belong to the UHW. At no time has the SEIU accused the named UHW defendants in these lawsuits with having personally profited in any way as a consequence of their alleged wrongdoing and has, in fact, admitted that the modest expenditure of UHW’s monies by the PEF during its short lifetime would have been perfectly lawful had these expenditures been written on UHW’s account, rather than the PEF’s account. Yet the SEIU is pressing forward, attempting to punish the defendants by capitalizing on “this distinction without a difference.” By the foregoing conduct, including financing and maliciously pursuing frivolous lawsuits in bad faith against UHW’s top leadership in order to punish and discredit them for having exercised their statutory and constitutional rights to criticize certain policies and actions of the SEIU’s top officers, Stern and Burger are pursuing, in bad faith, what amount to false charges against the named UHW defendants, at great expense to the union treasury and in violation of their oath of office. Further, such conduct is most certainly intended to impair the interests of UHW and it constituted conduct unbecoming of a member.

8.

9.

V.

SEIU, at the direction of Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger, intentionally misrepresented, harassed and maligned UHW’s delegation to the SEIU Convention in Puerto Rico simply because UHW disagreed with certain elements of Stern’s proposed four-year program (the “Justice For All” plan), which was presented to Convention delegates for their consideration and vote. 1. Before and during the 2008 SEIU Convention, SEIU spread lies about UHW among other Convention delegates. In particular, SEIU spread false rumors that UHW’s delegates were only at the Convention “to cause trouble” and to disrupt the Convention proceedings. Consequently, many delegates refused to speak with UHW’s delegates during the Convention. The Stern-appointed presidents of some local unions explicitly instructed their delegates to refrain from talking with UHW’s delegates. Furthermore, SEIU spread false information about UHW’s positions on core programmatic issues by, for example, telling delegates that UHW opposed any efforts to organize non-union workers. Some delegates reported these lies to UHW delegates at the Convention. SEIU’s campaign of “character assassination” against UHW was capped by falsely describing UHW as a proponent of “Just for Us” unionism, which SEIU staffers contrasted with Stern’s so-called “Justice for All” plan. As delegates entered the convention hall for the opening day of the 2008 SEIU Convention in Puerto Rico, SEIU staffers handed all delegates a poster-sized piece of

2.

13

literature that criticized UHW for not supporting the “Justice for All” plan. The literature piece stated: “Look who’s uniting to win Justice for All” and noted to readers that UHW was the only healthcare union represented on the International Executive Board that had not endorsed the Justice for All plan. 3. Mike Fishman, a Stern ally and a Vice Presidential candidate on the Stern/Burger slate of candidates, presented the findings of the Credentials Committee to the full convention floor in an extremely biased fashion that singled out UHW for lengthy and undeserved criticism while failing to discuss serious violations committed by Tyrone Freeman, another Stern ally, in the conduct of delegate elections at Local 6434. Fishman similarly glossed over serious allegations of violations committed by Local 1021 during its delegate elections. Local 1021 is also headed by a Stern ally who was appointed to her position by Stern. Fishman’s extremely biased attack on UHW before the Convention’s nearly 2,000 delegates also served to unfairly discredit UHW officers Jorge Rodriguez and Sal Rosselli, who were running for reelection in balloting that was conducted two days later. During the Convention, SEIU and its allied local unions distributed literature to delegates that misrepresented UHW’s position on core issues. For example, Stern’s ally Annelle Grajeda instructed staffers to place on delegates’ hotel room doors a “door hanger” that was part of Stern’s orchestrated effort to mischaracterize UHW. The door hanger reads: “What's justice for some? Dwindling returns for a shrinking union base, collapsing influence with employers and politicians, and a future for us but not for our children… Join with us. Secure your future and your children's. Stick with justice for everyone. Support Justice for All." Grajeda was Stern’s appointed leader of SEIU Local 721 in Los Angeles, was recruited by Stern and Burger to serve as the President of the California SEIU State Council following Stern and Burger’s orchestrated ouster of Sal Rosselli, and was Stern’s successful nominee at the 2008 SEIU Convention to fill one of six SEIU Executive Vice President seats prior to her removal as a result of recent corruption charges. During the Convention, Stern’s protégé and ally, Tyrone Freeman, instructed staff to distribute a two-sided piece of expensive color literature to Convention delegates as part of Stern’s disinformation campaign directed against UHW. The piece reads: “A federal judge will decide if UHW-W officials violated the law. It's up to you to decide if they violated your trust. When 10 UHW-W officials diverted $3,000,000 of members' money to an outside fund, they may have broken more than just federal laws. They broke their promises to members like you. You work hard. You pay your dues. You expect union leaders to fight for your best interests…” It goes on to state: “A lawsuit filed by SEIU against these 10 UHW-W officials charges that they set up a questionable ‘education’ fund that only they controlled. In less than a year, $3 million of your dues were transferred to this sham organization…” During the 2008 SEIU Convention, SEIU placed UHW’s delegation under surveillance. In particular, SEIU placed individuals with video and still cameras on narrow catwalks directly above UHW’s delegation on the convention floor in order

4.

5.

6.

14

to monitor and photograph the activities of the UHW delegation. These catwalks were closed to the public. SEIU took no such action toward any other delegation at the Convention. Its action was intended to intimidate UHW’s delegates and chill the exercise of their free speech rights during the course of the Convention. 7. While the SEIU and its officers and their loyal convention delegates were most assuredly entitled to advocate for adoption of the Stern administration’s “Justice for All” program, and to oppose the UHW’s “Platform for Change,” they were not entitled to conduct a campaign to smear and vilify UHW and its delegation, and to intimidate and chill its delegates’ exercise of their own free speech rights. Such malicious conduct is both unethical and unbecoming of a member and in violation of the oath of office.

VI.

By the following conduct Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger, have perpetuated their unlawful campaign of retribution directed at UHW’s elected leaders and members by imposing an oppressive “monitorship” as a prelude to their announced intention to impose a trusteeship on UHW, thereby effectively terminating UHW’s elected leadership and suspending the democratic rights of the UHW membership while seizing financial and political control of their Union and their resources. 1. On or about August 12, 2008, The Los Angeles Times began publishing a series of articles detailing a pervasive pattern of corruption in SEIU Local 6434, the Long Term Care local into which the SEIU planned to forcibly transfer 65,000 of UHW’s long-term care members, despite the fact that, through a democratic referendum, these members expressed their wish to remain in UHW. This left SEIU with no option but to demand that Tyrone Freeman, Stern’s appointed President of Local 6434 and the principal architect and beneficiary of Local 6434’s corruption, take a paid leave of absence. On or about August 23, 2008, SEIU had no other option and placed Local 6434 under trusteeship, removing all of its unlawfully elected officers, thereby mooting an imminent lawsuit by the U.S. Department of Labor to force the local to conduct new officer elections. Stern, Burger and their staff immediately devised a PR maneuver effectively to assign the blame for these hugely embarrassing revelations on UHW’s officers, staff and members. When Local 6434’s corruption became public, SEIU was on the verge of executing its plan to force UHW’s 65,000 long-term care members into Local 6434. Local 6434’s then-President, Tyrone Freeman, had long been a close ally of Stern and Burger, having been mentored by them and having loyally assisted them in disseminating negative, false propaganda about UHW throughout California On August 25, 2008, SEIU learned that The Los Angeles Times was poised to publish another article that pointed to corruption allegedly committed by yet another Stern appointee, Rickman Jackson, the appointed President of SEIU Healthcare Michigan.

2.

3.

4.

15

On the eve of publication, SEIU sent to the reporter a press release announcing SEIU’s intention to conduct a hearing to place UHW under trusteeship. This PR maneuver amounted to an attempt to eclipse the story describing Jackson’s corruption. UHW only learned about this “Notice of Hearing” and accompanying SEIU press release indirectly, i.e., from the reporter rather than from the SEIU. 5. The Notice of Hearing cited five reasons for imposing a trusteeship on UHW, including the same frivolous allegations set forth in the SEIU’s lawsuit that had been dismissed by a federal district court judge on July 22, 2008. SEIU has not produced any evidence that UHW committed any action that would be grounds for a lawful trusteeship. Nonetheless, in a letter over Burger’s signature, that is dated August 27, 2008 and was sent to the entire UHW membership as well as many other SEIU members, the SEIU transmitted copies of Stern’s Trusteeship Notice and its unfounded allegations, and explained why it had already determined to impose a trusteeship on UHW, despite the fact that the SEIU had not even conducted a hearing on the matter at which the UHW might, very possibly, rebut the false allegations. By letter dated August 26, 2008, SEIU demanded, unreasonably, that UHW prepare and then turn over to Stern’s personally appointed Monitors an extraordinarily large volume of documents in the space of hours. In fact, Stern’s Monitors, Stephen Lerner and Tom Debruin, also happen to be the principal agents that are assigned by Stern and Burger to undermine UHW’s organizing and collective bargaining activities in retaliation for UHW’s speaking out against SEIU’s policies and actions—clear evidence of Stern’s politically motivated malice and bad faith. Although UHW’s officers and staff have fully cooperated with the SEIU Monitors and have done their level best to furnish every requested document in a timely manner, the SEIU and its Monitors have continued to make unreasonable demands and to engage in aggressive conduct seemingly in an effort to provoke some incident that would arguably permit Stern and Burger to impose an emergency trusteeship that would effectively deprive UHW, its officers and members of their right to present a genuine and effective defense against the SEIU’s announced trusteeship of UHW. By directly and indirectly engaging in the foregoing conduct, Stern and Burger have violated their oath of office, acted in a manner unbecoming of members, and acted maliciously and in bad faith to press false charges against the UHW’s leadership. And by electing to do so in the context of a trusteeship proceeding where they will enjoy the opportunity to serve as prosecutor, judge and jury, they have sought to usurp the impartial role of the federal courts to resolve Stern and Burger’s politically motivated allegations of unlawful conduct by UHW’s duly and democratically elected officers.

6.

7.

8.

9.

16

VII.

SEIU, at the direction of Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger, orchestrated the removal of UHW President Sal Rosselli from his position as President of the SEIU State Council for illegitimate, political purposes. 1. The SEIU California State Council is the coordinating body for SEIU local unions in California and is governed by an Executive Board comprised of SEIU local leaders and others. The majority of the California State Council’s Executive Board members were appointed to their SEIU positions by Stern. On or about February of 2005, Sal Rosselli was elected as the President of the SEIU California State Council. His four-year term was set to expire in February of 2009. On or about October 23, 2007, Andrew L. Stern revoked the charter of the SEIU California State Council in an effort to replace Sal Rosselli as president of the State Council before his term expired. Stern took this action because Sal Rosselli and others on the California State Council refused to support California healthcare reform legislation secretly negotiated by Stern and Governor Schwarzenegger, which lacked vital protections for consumers. In addition, Rosselli was targeted for removal because of his disagreement with Stern and Burger’s policies and actions. On or about November 6, 2007, Stern established a “new” charter and slightly modified Bylaws for the California State Council and called for new officer elections. Before and during the balloting, SEIU officials intimidated, coerced and threatened a number of the members of the California State Council’s Executive Board in an effort to secure their votes for Grajeda, who was the preferred candidate of Stern and Burger, over Rosselli. During this balloting, the Executive Board failed to elect Annelle Grajeda as President by virtue of the fact that the local unions controlled by Stern and Burger’s allies had failed to make millions of dollars in monthly dues payments to the California State Council and consequently were ineligible, under the Council’s new charter, to vote. Accordingly, on or about November 19, 2007, Stern simply and unilaterally announced a “temporary change” to the voting rules of the State Council in order to permit his allies, including Tyrone Freeman and others, to vote despite their failure to have paid the dues they owed to the State Council. This “temporary change” to the voting rules circumvented long-standing constitutional procedures and paved the way for the election of Stern's chosen representative, Annelle Grajeda, then the appointed President of SEIU Local 721, who had agreed to support the weakened healthcare reform legislation. At the 2008 SEIU Convention, Stern rewarded Annelle Grajeda for her “loyalty” by nominating her to become one of the six Executive Vice Presidents of SEIU. On or about August 31, 2008, Annelle Grajeda was forced to step down from her position as President of Local 721, as well as her new office of SEIU Executive Vice President, amidst allegations of financial improprieties at Local 721 and the State

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

17

Council involving improper payments of tens of thousands of dollars to her exboyfriend. 8. By engineering Rosselli’s removal as the duly and democratically elected President of the SEIU’s California State Council, and manipulating the Council’s Charter and its voting rules in order to guarantee the election of a loyalist willing to function as his surrogate, Stern, with Burger’s active support, engaged in unethical conduct, unbecoming of a member, and in violation of the their oath of office.

Prayer for Relief
For having engaged in the conduct set forth above, we request that the International Executive Board take the following disciplinary action against Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger: I. Find Andrew L. Stern and Anna Burger guilty of having engaged in constitutionally prohibited conduct; and Sanction and reprimand Stern and Burger and order them to issue a public apology to UHW, its members and officers; and

II.

III. Enjoin Stern and Burger for a period of at least 24 months from making any decisions, directly or indirect, as well as attempting to influence any decisions affecting UHW and its membership; and IV. Enjoin Stern and Burger from engaging, directly or indirectly, in any activity designed to undermine the democratic rights of UHW’s membership to govern themselves via their duly elected officers or to influence their exercise of these constitutional and statutory rights; and V. Direct Stern and Burger to refrain from any conduct that could impair the political autonomy of UHW; and

VI. Impose a fine on Stern and Burger in an amount sufficient to reimburse the union treasury for their wasteful expenditures occasioned by the pursuit of their personal vendetta against UHW and its leaders; and VII. Appoint, with the advice and consent of UHW, an impartial overseer with impeccable credentials and with full access to SEIU personnel and all necessary resources, to monitor compliance by Stern and Burger with the International Executive Board’s decision and order.

18