Wow. Just wow.

The depositions continue.

Now there’s some social justice for you.

If the Episcopal Church Center really wants to save money on overhead costs, they need to get out of Manhattan.

Scott K, look also at the Stand Firm thread on this in the quoted comments on (I think) HOBD listserv at how GC has tried for years to relocate out of Manhattan and failed because staff didn’t want to move.  Talk about balancing their budget on the backs of the poor!  BTW, hope you two are doing well in Nashville, I have been rather scarce on commenting here and SFIF of late.

“And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.’” (Matthew 25:40 NRS)

In an effort to save money because of declining membership…...and therefore Church revenue…...815 decided not to renew the maintenance firm’s contract, and hired a non-union firm.  As a result, nine union members lost not only their jobs, but their medical benefits, which means that they’re going to have to find other jobs in order to provide coverage for their families.

NICE GOING, TEC!

Just as a reminder:
http://www.episcopalchurch.org/81803_112569_ENG_HTM.htm
of what TEC said about Disney as they were trying to cut costs ...

The article above read in the context of Martin5’s link highlights a bit of hypocrisy.  I don’t know the details and won’t get into finger-pointing without them, but the two articles together point to a disconnect.

martin5, thanks for that link.

I can’t help but start to become apoplectic when phrases like “economic justice” are thrown around. They are often used by those who fundamentally do not understand why something like a “hike in insurance rates” might happen. They are only concerned that it seems to be “unfair.” “Evil,” “mean,” and “greedy” businesses are to fault, not prevailing economic conditions that make it exceptionally difficult to run said businesses.

Doesn’t Trinity, Wall Street have a little spare cash?
Can’t some of the, possibly Episcopalian, lawyers working for ECUSA work ‘pro bono’ and gift what they would have been paid to serve these laid off employees?

So what’s your point, exactly?  Are you appealing for help for the terminated employees?  Is the Diocese of SC relocating them to Charleston to employ them?  Are the parishes in the Lowcountry taking up a special collection?  As a New Yorker and an Episcopalian, I can tell you…times are rough, same as everywhere.  Many of us are out of work.  Tough decisions are being made by everyone, not just in the for-profit sector of employers.  Religious and secular.

Slightly edited by elf.

#11 - There are several points.  First, the Church Center should reverse course and rehire them.  Somehow, I miss in your email some suggestion of what the Diocese or the Church Center is going to do for them.  Second, it is stunning hypocrisy to lecture others for doing the same thing you are doing.  Particularly since both DNY, the Church Center and many NY parishes have plenty of money - they are just choosing to spend it on other things (like litigation against the orthodox, lobbying the CoE to declare themselves out of communion with the global south, and the like).

That’s the point I was trying to make, pendennis.  Thank you.  The Church Corporation is what matters to them; evidently, nine people and their families don’t.

My, how stereotypically corporate and crassly capitalisticaly bourgoise of +Katharine. I guess deepdown she is every bit the self-hating Wall Streeter she reflexively rails against.

Hypocrisy always stinks.  After years of lecturing business about their obligation to the masses, somehow the folks at 815 failed to notice these 9 families they held in their own hands.  Perhaps 815 will become less ponderous in their pontifications about justice and sacrifice to others in the future?  Unless I am missing something, I see little that would lead me to believe that there will be a change in course.  Those who will not humble themselves are leading candidates for being humiliated.

It’s the way of the world.  All on this board should know who is running the world.

As I read the reactions, I find it amusing that the Liberals sound like conservatives and the conservatives sound like liberals. It was an economic necessity for the liberals and a matter of justice for the conservatives. I think TEC is vulnerable here with it’s focus on the disenfranchised, social justice and union advocacy.

Purely because of the pious, “thank God I am not like other men” attitude so often taken by the Beautiful People who run ECUSA, this is disgusting.  And what does Neva Rae Fox have to say?  “It needs to be clear that looking for a new contract is a normal business procedure.”  Well, gosh, Neva Rae, that sure sounds like something a spokesperson for Enron or AIG would say.  I’ll keep that in mind the next time you or your colleagues decide to pontificate about some business, social or legislative happening that’s even further out of your lane than Christianity.

As much as I dislike 815 and those who run it, they did not fire anyone.  Now, their hypocracy is evident, but they are not the ones responsible for the termination of the employees of another company.
Unions are a two edged sword.  Personally, I think they have long outlived their usefulness, but I also know that there are many owners and managers who take advantage of their employees and would continue to do so were it not for unions.  Likewise, there are unions that take advantage of their “monopoly power” in the labor market to take advantage of management and owners. 

While this shows, even more, the hypocracy of the leadership at 815, I can’t get too worked up over it.  I am more angry at the old cleaning/maintenance company than I am at 815 over this.

YBIC,
Phil Snhyder

The interest on the INTEREST on what 815 has already squandered on petulant property litigation would easily have covered the differential between the two contractors. Choices have consequences.

TEC leadership are willingly headed down a path towards what we farmers call “land poor”—owning all sorts of real estate but rarely having the cash available to cover ordinary expenses. Real estate, especially if it doesn’t cover its expenses, is a liability, not an asset.

First, the Church Center should reverse course and rehire them.

Based on what?  First, they were never fired.  Their company was outbid at the time of contract renewal.  The reason that their bid was not competitive was because they were unionized.

Somehow, I miss in your email some suggestion of what the Diocese or the Church Center is going to do for them.

Since this has nothing to do with the Diocese of New York as there is no connection with the Church Center, I don’t see how this relates to them.  As for the Church Center, there is no obligation since they were outside contractors.

Second, it is stunning hypocrisy to lecture others for doing the same thing you are doing.  Particularly since both DNY, the Church Center and many NY parishes have plenty of money - they are just choosing to spend it on other things (like litigation against the orthodox, lobbying the CoE to declare themselves out of communion with the global south, and the like).

There is no hypocrisy in choosing how to spend money as a business.  There may indeed be hypocrisy regarding the union statements, but it depends on what was resolved at GC and how the Church Center is obligated to act (legally AND ethically).

Where there is at least irony, if not hypocrisy, is that these employees would have health care for their families if it weren’t for the political ideology of those who are complaining so loudly.  They would have protection as a Union shop if it weren’t for these same people’s ideology.

Where there is hypocrisy is that those who are claiming the Church Center has done something wrong are the same people who argue that our social ills can only be solved by individuals and faith-based organizations. 

Also, the claim that only the “liberals” are well funded is specious.

FatherS tells us that whatever we do to the least of these…well, using them to make a political point does nothing to help them. 

There is an issue of the Church Center’s obligation to use a Union company given the GC resolutions.  If they are legally obligated, they should be held accountable.  If they are ethically accountable, their ethical failure should be exposed.

#19.  Glad to know how TEC feels about unions, helping people out of work, etc., when it is their own money, and that my DNY doesn’t need to worry about these folks just because, you know,  its the same church.    These workers probably live in the Long Island or NJ anyway, so we wouldn’t want to help someone across a border and violate the Windsor Report.  I am so glad to know that that TEC’s representatives are happy to be saving oddles of money by terminating these people.  Forget the Daily News - too bad, though, almost as many people read it (and more than read the Post, I believe) for the comics and salacious stories like this one.

Just don’t assume everyone here is a conservative.  I’m not.  On the other hand, it is probably safe to say I am no longer the only one that regrets that Hillary did not win.

I couldn’t help but notice how ECUSA has consistently done things to hurt people on days like Christmas Eve, and other church holydays. It is a lovely sign of the sensitive and gracious inclusivity and moral superiority of the the Corporation.

If TEC didn’t want to be looked at in a negative/hypocritical way on this issue no matter the reasons then they should have never gotten involved in the secular politics of marching in Anaheim against Disney. Doesn’t TEC have enough concern over their own faulted issues of suing other churches and dioceses and deposing good godly priests and bishops to be adding more heaping coals on its own head with this kind of hypocrisy?

ECUSA: pay attention to what I say, not what I do.

Classic.

BT19 - The whole point is that 815 is, by their actions, saying that increased expenses because of unions should be supported (Disney et. al.) but that that 815 should not have to bear the increased cost of unionization.  So, it is the old game of the rules applying to other people.
Now, I am not too worked up about this because, for the last several years, 815 and the leadership of TEC has acted as if the rules only apply to other people.
One of the big problems is that unions for unskilled workers (or low skilled workers) are a losing proposition.  It is much easier to hire and train non-unionized workers to do the job.  In similar vein, unskilled/low skilled workers are the ones most in need of protection from exploitation.  Particularly in a tight job market, those employees with few or no skills are easily intimidated because they are easy to replace.  As a Church organization, 815 should require certain guarantees and proofs that the empolyees that clean and maintain their buildings are not mistreated. 

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

As Margaret Thatcher said, “The problem with socialism is that pretty soon you run out of other people’s money.”

Spending Disney’s money is OK.

You know, it is not uncommon practice in personal service contractual situations for the contracting agency to make it known to a potential successor contractor that certain selected persons previously engaged would be either most welcome or most unwelcome to be included among the staff engaged under the new contract. Such practice assures the continuation of service of valuable, experienced contracted for persons under whatever terms the new contractor can arrange that will certainly set a good tone with the contracting agency. In this instance it seems either TEC was insufficiently sophisticated to be aware of such an option or TEC really wanted to unload the cleaning crew or something in between. Whichever, TEC certainly had within its power to retain the nine longstanding retainers who were summarily dismissed, but for whatever reason allowed them to just go away. I vote for conscious insensitivity on TEC’s part.

Another option (and this is pure speculation, but it comes from experience) is that the union itself refused to renegotiate because it didn’t want to cut its members’ pay.
About 20 years ago, Safeway was a large supermarket chain in the DFW area.  It was unionized while most other grocery chains were not.  Safeway employees were very highly paid, compared with their counterparts in other stores.  The managers at Safeway asked the union to cut compensation so that Safeway could be more competative in the DFW market - stating that the alternative was to leave the market.  The union refused to budge on compensation and, so, Safeway left the DFW grocery market - putting hundreds (if not thousands) of union employees out of jobs. 
The union touted this episode as a “win” to its members.  They refused to budge and, so, were victorious against evil management.
Of course, there were still those former employees that no longer had jobs.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

Brian at T19 - the issue is problematic when taken in context of the march with Disney workers.  Otherwise your points would hold.

The whole point is that 815 is, by their actions, saying that increased expenses because of unions should be supported (Disney et. al.) but that that 815 should not have to bear the increased cost of unionization.  So, it is the old game of the rules applying to other people.

You are confusing 815 and General Convention.

Philip Snyder you are correct:  if all we know is the newspaper report, then what you write is pure speculation.

#31. Brian from T19,

You are confusing 815 and General Convention.

That statement protected your queen but exposed your king.

TEC’s Dec financials are finally posted. They are preliminary and they are not good. TEC is probably looking to cut costs wherever they can. I have noticed that they have been cutting back on their expenditures .... except for legal ones that is. There are actually three budget lines for legal expenses. One is relatively new to Nov 2008 I believe, and I did not notice until recently. General Corporate Legal Fees. Add all three lines up and .... and it looks like $2.9 million was spent on legal fees.
http://www.episcopalchurch.org/documents/PreliminaryDecember2009BudgetarySummary.pdf
They probably can’t afford their cleaning staff.

So now we can expect +Katharine’s to schlep her own trash? Right.

Perhaps day-to-day trash schlepping now is handled by the Canon of the Ordinary.