Celebrity deathmatch...Stern vs. Roselli ... LEGAL ACTION?

As one who used to be on Roselli's list, I've received tons of "information" from Sal and the old guard at UHW. DVD's, letters, news clippings, etc. I'm very loyal to our union, but to me, loyalty involves always being vigilent to help keep our union on the right track. So I have listened to Sal and his supporters. I've written back and forth. I really tried to talk those folks into staying within our ranks when they formed NUHW. We can tolerate dissent and we should always embrace constructive reform. But though I believe Sal is basically a good union man with the best of intentions, I also believe he made some very big mistakes. The wars continue, and we all know the anti-union, anti-EFCA forces are having a heyday. Is our SEIU off course? As I said in a previous post, I believe every member has the duty to honestly ask that question frequently. The members are the sole source of union power. We are then, charged with the responsibility of keeping our union on the right track. We too often let go of the reigns then blame the horse for going astray, and we do tend to buy spirited horses. We need to be constructive, polite and civil, but firm in our resolve to steer the course of this now mighty union. One way the current controversy could be calmed is by taking legal action against Mr. Roselli. In fact, I believe that the charges that SEIU makes against him (http://www.seiu-uhw.org/whitepaper/)really requires such charges to be brought. There are allegations of the conversion of millions of dollars for illegal use against SEIU. As members, we should insist that if you make an allegation like that, we want criminal charges brought, as we have all been robbed. If a crime has been committed, and our union fails to bring charges against that crime, we are passively accepting such behavior and defrauding the dues paying members.
In short, if we allege criminal wrongdoing, we ought to bring charges or shut our pie hole!

Scott's picture

Re: Celebrity deathmatch...Stern vs. Roselli ... LEGAL ...

It's very late (or early), so I'll just comment briefly.

I agree that, if we really have a legal standing, we need to move forward. However, looking at information from both sides, plus reports from some external sources, I have a feeling that the reason we don't move forward is that doing so would shine an unwelcome spotlight on the issue. Perhaps we've, shall we say, "embellished" the information to make a case. Or we may have been engaged in our own illegal activities.

What's that old saying about glass houses...and stones?


"An intractable problem can only be resolved by stepping beyond conventional solutions." — Ozymandias