Kaiser: "We won't bargain with Coalition unions or SEIU-UHW in 2018"

This week, Kaiser Permanente finally revealed how it’s going to deal with its now fractured “partnership” unions.

On Monday, Kaiser’s executives gathered about 100 representatives from nearly all of its unions in a ballroom at the downtown Marriott Hotel in Oakland, Calif. In attendance were leaders from both of the partnership groups including SEIU-UHW’s Dave Regan, AFSCME’s Denise Duncan, Pete diCicco, Walter Allen, and Hal Ruddick.

Kaiser’s executives -- including Greg Adams, Dennis Dabney, Jim Pruitt and Chuck Columbus -- announced they will not bargain with either the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions or SEIU-UHW this year.

Kaiser, however, will begin negotiating in the weeks ahead with the newly formed Alliance of Health Care Unions for contracts covering most of the Alliance’s members. Kaiser says it’ll negotiate with the Alliance unions at a single bargaining table, although it plans to sign separate labor contracts with each Alliance union rather than a single “national agreement.”

When will Kaiser bargain with SEIU-UHW?

Not until next year, when SEIU-UHW’s local union contract expires.

So why is Kaiser bargaining first with the Alliance unions?

According to Kaiser, it’s scheduling bargaining according to the expiration dates of each union’s so-called “local agreement.” (Note: In addition to a single “national agreement,” each partnership union also bargains a “local agreement” that covers issues specific to that particular part of Kaiser’s workforce.)

It turns out that most of the Alliance unions’ “local agreements” expire in 2018. Meanwhile, virtually all of the Coalition unions’ local agreements don’t expire until 2019.

 

Dave Regan

Kaiser’s announcement on Monday represents a big setback for Regan, who attended the Marriott meeting with Greg Pullman (Regan's Chief of Staff), Bruce Harland (Regan’s hack attorney), and several others.

Why?

The Alliance unions will go to the bargaining table first… before Regan and the other Coalition unions. This will allow the Alliance to set a pattern as far as wages, benefits and working conditions that Kaiser will undoubtedly ask SEIU-UHW to follow.

That’s precisely the opposite outcome from what Regan has been trying to achieve.

Since at least 2017, he made multiple attempts to seize control of the Coalition so he’d have greater power over this year’s national bargaining.

Now, as a result of overplaying his hand and expertly exploding the partnership unions into pieces, national bargaining has been canceled and Regan -- along with SEIU-UHW’s members -- have been relegated to the back seat.

In addition, Regan has successfully destroyed the unity among Kaiser’s 29 partnership unions. This will likely allow Kaiser to drive further wedges between them.

How did Reagan react to Kaiser’s announcement on Monday?

One hint comes from the red-hot rhetoric that SEIU-UHW used in an update to its members after the meeting. Here’s an excerpt:

Kaiser said they will refuse to negotiate a new National Agreement, leaving each union to bargain their own local agreement… The level of arrogance and contempt from Kaiser leadership in the meeting was palpable. There is no Partnership in Kaiser’s mind… Kaiser’s idea of “Partnership” is more like a Dictatorship. SEIU-UHW and our Coalition allies will not stand for this.

SEIU-UHW’s Dave Regan Continues His Losing Streak against California Hospital Association

Dave Regan has apparently lost yet another round of his legal battle against the California Hospital Association (CHA), according to court records.

On June 14, 2017, Regan’s lawyers submitted a formal notice to the Sacramento County (Calif.) Superior Court announcing that Regan is dropping his personal lawsuit against the CHA. A copy of the notice is posted below.

Why is he dropping his lawsuit?

Regan was likely forced to do so by an outside arbitrator, who was ordered by a Superior Court judge to examine whether Regan’s personal lawsuit violates a provision of Regan’s secret deal with the Hospital Association. As part of the deal, Regan signed a far-reaching “gag clause” and arbitration provision that blocks him and SEIU-UHW members from criticizing hospitals execs, supporting legislation contrary to execs’ interests, suing hospital corporations, or even mentioning hospital executives’ gold-plated salaries in public.

Here’s what happened:

In late 2015, Regan’s “partnership” deal with the CHA collapsed in flames.

Under the 2014 partnership deal, Regan agreed to use SEIU’s political power to deliver $6 billion a year in new Medicaid revenues to California’s hospital corporations. In exchange for the cash, hospital CEOs would push 60,000 of their employees into Regan’s union. Regan sweetened the deal for the bosses by agreeing to ban workers from striking and forcing SEIU-UHW members into pre-negotiated labor contracts with stripped down wages and benefits.

Soon after the collapse of his secret deal, Ragin’ Dave Regan angrily sued Duane Dauner and three other top CHA officials. Regan also re-filed a statewide ballot initiative to target CHA’s members.  

The CHA quickly filed a counter-suit against Regan, arguing that his actions were prohibited by the “gag clause” that Regan himself had signed on behalf of SEIU-UHW.

In June of 2016, a judge agreed with the CHA and ordered SEIU-UHW to withdraw the ballot initiative after Regan had spent millions of dollars of SEIU-UHW members’ dues money to collect signatures to qualify the initiative for the ballot.

 

SEIU-UHW's Dave Kieffer

Next, the CHA asked the court to force Regan to drop his lawsuit against Dauner and three other top CHA officials. The CHA argued that the suit also violated Regan’s gag clause. In January 2017, a judge ordered the issue to be resolved by an outside arbitrator.

Last week, Regan’s lawyers informed the court that Regan is dropping his lawsuit against Dauner and three other CHA officials, including Kaiser Permanente’s Greg Adams. Regan likely dropped the suit as a result the arbitrator’s decision, which is not available to the public.

This latest developments represent yet another stinging defeat for Regan and SEIU-UHW. 

When Regan announced his secret deal with the CHA in 2014, Regan borrowed a page from Donald Trump and famously called it an "audacious new proposal to save the labor movement" …even though it violated every value held dear by the labor movement.

Way to go, Dave!

Several important questions remain unresolved:

• Did the arbitrator also order Regan to pay all of the CHA’s legal costs? That could total millions of dollars.

• Who will pay all of millions of dollars of legal bills connected to Regan’s disastrous lawsuit, including the fancy lawyers hired by Regan? Since the suit was filed in Regan’s personal name, shouldn’t he pay for it? Regan will undoubtedly try to push the costs of his bone-headed lawsuit onto SEIU-UHW’s members.

• What about the $34 million that Regan squirreled away inside a secret “partnership” organization? The CHA has demanded that Regan return the money. Their demands are part of legal claims filed with the Superior Court.

Stay tuned.

  SEIU-UHW Dave Regan's request to drop lawsuit against California Hospital Association: June 14, 2017 by tastysternburger on Scribd

SEIU’s Dave Regan Loses Another Court Battle to California Hospital Association

SEIU-UHW’s Dave Regan lost yet another legal battle to the California Hospital Association (CHA) over his secretive, sweetheart deal with hospital CEOs.

On January 13, 2017, a Sacramento County (Calif.) Superior Court judge effectively tossed out Regan’s personal lawsuit against CHA’s CEO, Duane Dauner, and three other CHA officials. Instead, the judge ordered Regan’s allegations to be sent to binding arbitration, as required by Regan’s secret 2014 “partnership” deal with the CHA.

A copy of the judge’s decision is below.

Regan’s suit, initially filed on November 24, 2015, alleges that four top leaders of the CHA violated their “fiduciary duties,” committed “dishonest acts and gross abuses of authority and discretion,” and carried out “unlawful conduct” by “undermining” Regan’s scheme to secure billions more dollars of Medicaid funding for California’s hospital corporations.

Why was Regan trying to put more taxpayer money in hospital corporations’ pockets?

It was one of the requirements of his secret deal with the CHA. Specifically, hospital CEOs required Regan to deliver $6 billion a year in additional revenues to California hospital corporations as the price for “buying” special treatment from CEOs during SEIU unionization campaigns.

And that’s not the only concession Regan gave to hospital CEOs.

 

Dave Regan and Duane Dauner

He also agreed to force any newly organized workers into cheap, pre-negotiated SEIU-UHW labor contracts that included a ban on strikes and a far-reaching gag clause barring SEIU-UHW from criticizing hospital companies and their gold-plated executives.

Regan’s lawsuit is yet another piece of the paper trail documenting “Wall Street” Dave’s backroom deals with hospital CEOs.

The suit also offers a window into the internal battles raging between SEIU’s officials. For example, Regan’s lawsuit says Dauner met “secretly” with officials from SEIU to “undermine” Regan’s Medicaid funding scheme.

Which SEIU officials?

LaPhonza Butler (President of SEIU Local 2015) and Jon Youngdahl (former Executive Director of SEIU California State Council), says Regan.

According to Regan’s suit, SEIU officials undercut him by telling Dauner that “UHW and its president, Plaintiff Regan, would soon lose half its membership and that Defendant Dauner needed to deal with Butler and the SEIU State Council – not Regan and UHW – if he wanted to accomplish any legislative and policy goals that were important to CHA’s members.”

Jon Youngdahl

Last spring, Tasty published a leaked 30-page document containing the questions that SEIU-UHW attorneys posed to Dauner during a closed-door legal proceeding, including grilling him about Dauner’s meetings with SEIU’s LaPhonza Butler and Jon Youngdahl.

Elsewhere in the suit, Regan alleges that Dauner “sabotaged” him and “hid” his activities from Regan and others.

Regan’s suit seeks Dauner’s removal from the board of directors of “Caring for Californians,” a partnership organization jointly established by CHA and SEIU-UHW following their 2014 deal. The organization was funded with $50 million that Regan and Dauner diverted from their organizations’ coffers.

Regan and Dauner are the Co-Chairs of “Caring for Californians.” The remaining seats on its Board of Directors are split evenly between CHA and SEIU-UHW. That’s why Regan also sued Greg Adams (Group President at Kaiser Permanente), Mark Laret (CEO of UCSF Medical Center), and James Holmes (CEO of Redlands Community Hospital). They’re CHA’s appointees to the “Caring for Californians” board, and Regan alleges they, too, committed “unlawful conduct” and violations of their fiduciary duties.

So who did Regan appoint to fill SEIU-UHW’s seats on the board?

Three SEIU-UHW staffers: Dave Kieffer, Cass Gualvez, and Arianna Jimenez.

With last month’s ruling in Sacramento Superior Court, Regan has maintained a perfect winless record in the multiple lawsuits that followed the collapse of his secret deal with the CHA.

In June of 2016, for example, a Superior Court judge ordered SEIU-UHW to withdraw a statewide initiative from the California ballot or face millions of dollars in penalties. In November 2016, the court ordered SEIU-UHW to submit to binding arbitration over Regan’s refusal to return $34 million to CHA and SEIU-UHW.

 

LaPhonza Butler

What’s next for Dave?

Regan, who is rumored to be stepping down from his position as SEIU-UHW’s president, apparently will be wrapped up in lawsuits for the foreseeable future.  

At least one question remains unclear. 

Who will fund Regan’s lawsuits after he steps down? In the suit discussed in this post, Regan sued as an individual, not as SEIU-UHW. Should SEIU-UHW’s members continue to pay tens of thousands of dollars to litigate Regan’s personal lawsuit? 

  Judge Orders Arbitration in Lawsuit by Dave Regan (SEIU-UHW) vs. California Hospital Association: 01-13-201... by tastysternburger on Scribd

Back in Court: California Hospital Association Sues SEIU-UHW for Millions Locked up in Covert Partnership Organization

The California Hospital Association (CHA) has taken SEIU-UHW to court… again.

This time, CHA is trying to recover tens of millions of dollars that SEIU-UHW has locked away inside a secret “partnership” organization, according to records obtained from Sacramento County Superior Court. (Below is a full copy.)

On October 14, CHA’s and SEIU-UHW’s attorneys will face off in a Sacramento courthouse.

Here’s what’s happening.

When SEIU-UHW’s Dave Regan and CHA’s Duane Dauner signed their secret partnership deal in 2014, they also agreed to set up and finance a secret new organization to carry out their joint projects.

The new organization’s first priority was to help SEIU-UHW convince politicians to steer $6 billion a year in new Medicaid funds to California’s giant hospital corporations.

 

Dave Regan and Duane Dauner

If SEIU-UHW had succeeded in this task (they didn’t), then the hospital CEOs would have allowed SEIU-UHW to unionize 30,000 of their employees… but only as long as the workers were banned from striking, forced into cheap labor contracts, and silenced by a massive gag clause.

The covert partnership organization -- ironically named “Caring for Californians” by its founders -- was funded with $50 million that Regan and Dauner diverted from their treasuries in 2014.

With millions in its bank count, “Caring for Californians” leased office space in Sacramento, hired Peter Ragone as its Executive Director, hired attorneys and staff, etc. The organization was soon spending $40,000 a month in operating expenses, according to court filings by the CHA.

For a time, things were going swimmingly for Wall Street Dave. Fantasies of his class-collaborationist partnership danced through his head as he performed late-night lap dances for some of California’s wealthiest corporate CEOs.

Peter Ragone, CFC's Executive Director

By November of 2015, however, Dave’s partnership had exploded in a fiery display that lit up California’s skies. The partnership was dead!  

At the time of the partnership’s demise, “Caring for Californians” still had $34 million in unspent cash sitting in its bank account.

And that’s what the latest lawsuit is all about. The $34 million.

Under the terms of Regan and Dauner’s secret partnership deal, the $34 was supposed to be returned to CHA and SEIU-UHW on January 1, 2016. However, Regan -- in an apparent fit of vindictiveness against his former pin-striped pals -- is refusing to return the money to either organization.

According to CHA’s lawsuit, Regan has vetoed any return of the money to both CHA and SEIU-UHW.

How?

“Caring for Californians” is run by an eight-person Board of Directors, with equal numbers of seats filled by CHA and SEIU-UHW. Regan and Dauner are co-chairs of the board. Since January of 2016, says CHA, Regan has used his four votes (one of them is SEIU-UHW staffer Arianna Jimenez) to block every proposal to return the $34 million.

So what’s happening to the money?

It’s simply swirling down the drain, says CHA. 

Here’s an excerpt from a recent CHA legal filing, which refers to “Caring for Californians” by its initials “CFC.” The term "Code of Conduct" refers to the secret partnership deal signed in 2014.

“On December 31, 2015, the Code of Conduct terminated pursuant to its terms. Since that time, CFC has had no ongoing work, and neither CHA, UHW, nor any CFC Director has made any efforts to initiate new endeavors. Nonetheless, CFC has continued to spend approximately $40,000 each month on operating expenses for resources and services it has not been using. These are not only unnecessary expenditures, but they also decrease the amount available for redistribution to both CHA and UHW as provided by the Code of Conduct.” (p. 3)

Interesting, right?

 

SEIU-UHW's Arianna Jimenez

Regan is so vindictive he’s willing to piss millions of dollars of SEIU-UHW members’ money down the drain to get back at CHA.

How much money do SEIU-UHW members stand to lose? According to the CHA:

“As of September 1, 2016, the CFC has approximately $34 million in its accounts that is not currently encumbered. Pursuant to the terms of the Code of Conduct, approximately $27.2 million would be returned to CHA and approximately $6.8 million would be returned to UHW.” (p. 4)

What’s CHA asking the judge to do?

CHA’s lawsuit asks the judge to force SEIU-UHW into binding arbitration so it can recover its $27.2 million. Plus, it wants SEIU-UHW to pay all of CHA’s attorneys fees.

If history is a judge, it looks like SEIU-UHW’s members will be footing the bill for yet another idiotic blunder by Regan.

Here’s a copy of CHA’s suit filed on September 6, 2016:

  California Hospital Association's lawsuit versus SEIU-UHW over $34 Million Locked in Secret Partnershi...

Arbitrator Imposes Injunction and Possible Fines against SEIU-UHW for Violating Its Secret Partnership Deal with California Hospital Association

Tasty obtained a complete copy of the 42-page decision recently issued by an arbitrator investigating SEIU-UHW’s violations of its secret “partnership” deal with the California Hospital Association (CHA). 

The arbitrator's decision, dated June 6, 2016, imposes an “injunction” and “a cease-and-desist order” on SEIU-UHW in order to force it to withdraw a statewide ballot initiative that violates the partnership agreement’s gag clause. 

The decision also empowers the arbitrator to impose possibly millions of dollars of future fines and penalties on SEIU-UHW if Dave Regan, the union's president, fails to withdraw the ballot initiative. 

SEIU-UHW threatened to put the Hospital Executive Compensation Act of 2016 on the November 2016 ballot unless hospital executives allowed SEIU-UHW to unionize up to 60,000 hospital workers without employer opposition. SEIU-UHW, in turn, agreed to force the workers into pre-negotiated labor contracts with cheap wages, substandard benefits, and a ban on strikes.

Here’s an excerpt from the arbitrator’s decision:  

“In light of all these circumstances, and for the reasons expressed above, I am compelled to conclude that a cease and desist order and an injunction is appropriate and that it should extend to UHW, its agents, employees and surrogates, including [Nathan] Selzer and [Ben] Tracey, and those acting in concert with them. I further agree that it is appropriate to issue an injunction in a partial final award and to retain jurisdiction for purposes of considering damages or other relief if the Initiative remains on the 2016 ballot.” (p. 41)

Nathan Selzer, who serves as SEIU-UHW’s Communications Director (2015 salary: $131,317) and Ben Tracey, the union’s Healthcare Outreach Director (2015 salary: $145,495), filed the statewide ballot initiative on behalf of SEIU-UHW.

In March of 2016, a California Superior Court judge ordered the arbitration process. 

SEIU-UHW's Dave Regan and CHA's Duane Dauner

In April and May of 2016, the arbitrator held seven days of hearings where more than a half dozen CHA officials testified, including CHA CEO Duane Dauner and Kaiser Permanente’s Greg Adams, who serves on the CHA's Board of Directors.

Only one SEIU-UHW official, Dave Kieffer, took the stand. Regan failed to testify.

What's the basis for the arbitrator's decision?

As part of SEIU-UHW's "partnership" agreement with the CHA, the union's president Dave Regan signed a gag clause that prohibits SEIU-UHW -- purportedly a union of healthcare workers -- from "pursuing, sponsoring or supporting” any legislation, ballot initiative, regulatory, or other efforts that are “adverse to the interests" of hospital corporations.

Here’s the arbitrator's order: 

Based on careful consideration of the evidence and the arguments of the Parties in their entirety, I issue the following Partial Final Award:

1. The Complaint is sustained.

2. UHW, including but not limited to its agents, employees and surrogates Selzer and Tracey, and those acting in concert with them, are prohibited from pursuing, sponsoring or supporting the 2016 Executive Compensation Initiative.

3. UHW, including but not limited to its agents, employees and surrogates Seltzer and Tracey, and those acting in concert with them, are directed to immediately withdraw the 2016 Executive Compensation Initiative pursuant to California Election Code Section 9604(B) and take any other action necessary to terminate their pursuit, sponsorship and support of that Initiative.

4. I will retain jurisdiction for the purpose of considering damages or other relief if the 2016 Executive Compensation Initiative appears on the November 2016 ballot. (p. 42)

SEIU-UHW must now withdraw the ballot initiatives before June 30, the final date on which state officials permit such measures to be withdrawn. 

Later this week (June 24), SEIU-UHW will go before a judge in Sacramento County Superior Court in a last-ditch attempt to overturn the arbitrator’s decision.

Stay tuned for more news and analysis.

Here’s a full copy of the arbitrator’s decision, entitled “Opinion and Award in Arbitration Proceedings before Arbitrator Richard L. Ahearn Pursuant to the Code of Conduct Agreement between California Hospital Association and SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.”

  Arbitrator's Decision against SEIU-UHW for Violating Gag Clause in Secret Partnership Agreement with Califo... by tastysternburger

Judge Hands Victory to Hospital Association in Latest Legal Battle with SEIU-UHW's Dave Regan

Here's the latest news from the revealing legal battle between SEIU-UHW and the California Hospital Association (CHA).

Earlier this week, a Sacramento Superior Court judge handed the CHA a victory in its counter-suit against Dave Regan. The judge ordered SEIU-UHW to submit itself to binding arbitration due to its alleged violations of the secret "partnership" agreement Regan signed in 2014. Until now, Regan has refused to go before an arbitrator by claiming SEIU-UHW is no longer bound by the arbitration clause.

Not so, says the judge.

SEIU-UHW is liable for Regan's violations because Regan committed the violations while his secret deal with the CHA was still in effect, according to the judge’s ruling. (See a full copy below.)

Petitioner CHA seeks an Order under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2 compelling arbitration before Arbitrator Richard Ahearn of three complaints brought by CHA against Respondent SEIU, United Healthcare Workers-West under the parties' written arbitration agreement… 

Petitioner California Hospital Association's Petition to Compel Arbitration is granted.

Which three complaints will now be sent to arbitration?

Here's where this lawsuit gets especially interesting. It reveals the dirty details of Regan's secret sell-out "partnership" deal with hospital CEOs. As part of this deal, for example, Regan agreed that SEIU-UHW would not "sponsor or support legislation, initiatives, or regulatory action adverse to the California hospital industry" or even make comments "raising concern about... executive compensation in health care."

What? A labor union that can't even whisper a peep about CEOs' fatcat salaries? Or support legislation that the Bosses don't like? Or file complaints against hospitals that violate patient-care standards? This, my friends, is SEIU-UHW -- the Bosses' union.

Here's how the judge describes three specific provisions of Regan's sellout deal (a.k.a., "the Code of Conduct") that’ll now be arbitrated:

CHA's First Complaint concerns an email UHW sent to a number of California hospital executives in November, making numerous derogatory statements about CHA and its leadership. CHA's November 15, 2015 arbitration complaint alleged that the derogatory language UHW used in the email violated Section I(B(I) of the Code of Conduct which requires that the parties' address their differences in a "positive manner" and refrain from "personal attacks or derogatory comments."

In its Second Complaint CHA alleged that UHW's sponsorship and support of the Hospital Executive Compensation Act of 2016 violated Sections 1(B) and 11(C) of the Code of Conduct by which UHW agreed not to "sponsor or support... initiatives adverse to the California hospital industry" or make comments "raising concern about... executive compensation in health care."

CHA's Third Complaint in arbitration concerns the lawsuit UHW brought against four CHA officers, accusing them of violating a fiduciary duty to CFC and committing various torts. (Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 2015-00187138-CU-CO-GDS) Among the Anti-Employer activities Section 1(B)(2) expressly prohibits is "litigation" that is "directed at or with respect to CHA... and any of [its] officers, directors, managers or shareholders." CHA contends that UHW's lawsuit breaches the provision…

Stay tuned.

  Judge's Order Compelling SEIU-UHW to Undergo Arbitration for Violating Terms of Secret Deal with Calif...

Email from Dauner to Regan: "You can't call me 'sabateur'"

Regan and Dauner

Here's an e-mail from Duane Dauner to Dave Regan that helps explain the legal battle that's raging between SEIU-UHW and the California Hospital Association.

It highlights a gag clause that Regan wrote into his secret "partnership" deal with the hospital industry. 

According to Dauner, the gag clause is so far-reaching that it blocks SEIU-UHW from supporting legislation, taking legal action, and even exercising free speech.

On November 24, 2015, SEIU-UHW filed a lawsuit in Sacramento Superior Court calling Dauner "corrupt" and a "saboteur." It alleges that Dauner (CEO of the California Hospital Association) and two other executives violated their responsibilities to a joint "partnership" committee by entering into an agreement with the SEIU California State Council to sponsor a statewide revenue-generating ballot initiative that competes with Regan's preferred initiative.

Two weeks later, on December 7, Dauner sent the following e-mail to Regan (SEIU-UHW's President) notifying him that SEIU-UHW's lawsuit violates the gag clause in Regan's secret deal with the CHA (aka, the "Code of Conduct").

Under the gag clause, SEIU-UHW is prohibited from calling Dauner a "saboteur." Why? Regan's gag clause prohibits SEIU-UHW from making "derogatory" comments about bosses.

Furthermore, the gag clause blocks SEIU-UHW from filing a lawsuit or taking any legal action against the CHA… or against any of "the officers, directors, managers or shareholders" of the corporations that signed Regan's deal.

Oh... and SEIU-UHW can’t initiate or support any regulatory action or legislation -- including ballot initiatives -- unless it first gets the approval of the hospital industry's bosses.

Regan's gag clause is so broad, in fact, that it bans SEIU-UHW from carrying out any "anti-employer activities" whatsoever!

In the end, we'll likely see that Regan's sell-out gag clause is the source of his own undoing -- a sort of self-administered guillotine blow to the cervical region.

Here are some excerpts from Duane’s e-mail to Dave (full text is below):

Dave,

CHA hereby gives notice of its complaint that SEIU-UHW's litigation against C. Duane Dauner, Gregory A. Adams, Mark R. Laret, James R. Holmes, and Caring for Californians, LLC (collectively, "the Defendants") violates provisions of the Code of Conduct, including Subsections I(B) and II(C)...

In particular, under Section I.B of the Code of Conduct, SEIU-UHW is prohibited from "carry[ing] out or engage[ing] in any ‘Anti--Employer Activities,’" which are defined to include "instigating or supporting... litigation" that is "directed at or with respect to CHA or signatory hospitals or health systems and any of their officers, directors, managers or shareholders." The Union's decision to file a lawsuit against CHA's President and three of its officers is a clear violation of this provision.

Furthermore, the inflammatory language SEIU-UHW uses in its complaints -- labeling Mr. Dauner as a "saboteur" and accusing him of "corrupt acts," for example -- constitutes a separate violation of the Union's duties to refrain from "reputation... attacks" or "personal attacks" directed at CHA and its officers and to avoid "derogatory comments" about CHA. (Sec. I.B.1 and I.B.2)

These recent actions make clear that SEIU-UHW has abandoned any pretense of compliance with the Code's requirement that it address differences with CHA through "cooperation rather than confrontation" and "in a positive manner." (Preamble, Sec. I.B.1) The CHA therefore intends to bring this complaint to Arbitrator Ahearn promptly, seeking an order requiring SEIU-UHW to immediately withdraw both lawsuits and prohibiting SEIU-UHW from filing similar litigation in the future.

  California Hospital Association's e-mail to SEIU-UHW's Dave Regan on Violations of Secret Gag Cla...

Lawsuit Spotlights $10 Million of SEIU-UHW Funds Given to Industry Execs

Dave Regan’s lawsuit against Duane Dauner (California Hospital Association) and Greg Adams (Kaiser Permanente) contains interesting details about just how closely SEIU-UHW was working with the CEOs atop California's hospital industry.

According to the lawsuit, Regan funneled $10 million of SEIU-UHW members' union dues into a bank account controlled by fatcat CEOs.

That is... until Regan's secret deal with the hospital bosses exploded in flames.

Now, Regan is suing the CEOs in hopes of recovering $7 million of the $10 million. Here's what SEIU-UHW says in its lawsuit filed Nov. 24 in Sacramento County Superior Court:

CHA and UHW committed to each other to fund CFC. In accordance with this commitment, CHA agreed to provide $80 million in funding to CFC, and UHW agreed to provide $20 million in funding. To date, CHA and UHW have contributed half of their funding obligations to CFC. CFC currently holds more than $7 million dollars of UHW contributions…   (p. 6)

What happened to the other $3 million?

Apparently, it’s already been spent. 

Regan and his CEO pals have reportedly been writing fat checks for consultants, lawyers, offices, trips, fancy meetings, and staff -- including the hiring of Peter Ragone as the Executive Director of Regan's now-defunct "partnership" organization. 

Peter Ragone: Exec Dir. of imploded partnership orgz'n

In total, $3 million of SEIU-UHW members' money has disappeared down the sewer like a prodigious purple bowel movement.

As far as the remaining $7 million, it’s currently frozen beyond SEIU-UHW's reach because, according to the terms of Regan's secret deal with the California Hospital Association, it can only be transferred with the consent of Duane Dauner, says the lawsuit.

CFC owns, possesses, and has a right to possess the funds within its bank account, including those lent to it by UHW. Defendants intentionally and in a gross abuse of their authority as Directors of CFC substantially interfered with CFC's property by terminating all operations of CFC by vetoing any proposed expenditures. (p. 18)

In other words, the $7 million is sequestered beyond SEIU-UHW's reach. "UHW has suffered and will continue to suffer substantial and irreparable harm," says the suit (p. 22).

Will SEIU-UHW members ever recover their $7 million? Good question.

And here's an even bigger question posed by observers: 

Why did SEIU-UHW's Executive Board ever authorize Regan to gamble upwards of $25 million of union members' dues on a hare-brained scheme that has exploded in flames and has landed SEIU-UHW in a desperate and expensive court battle?

Stay tuned!

Kablam! SEIU-UHW Dave Regan’s "Partnership" with the California Hospital Association Crashes and Burns

Plaintiff Regan and Defendant Dauner

In case there was any doubt about the implosion of Dave Regan's partnership with the California Hospital Association (CHA), check out the latest news...

On November 24, SEIU-UHW sued the CHA’s CEO Duane Dauner in Sacramento County (Calif.) Superior Court for ditching Regan in favor of his new pals Mary Kay Henry, Laphonza Butler, Jon Youngdahl, the SEIU California State Council, the California Teachers Association, and the California Medical Association.

The full lawsuit is available below. Also, here’s a link to a Dec. 1 article in "Courthouse News."

Regan’s lawsuit -- which reads like a jilted lover’s divorce case -- revolves around Mary Kay Henry’s recent success in outmaneuvering Regan by inking her own secret deal with the CHA.

Under Henry’s deal, the CHA agreed to team up with the SEIU California State Council, the California Teachers Association and the California Medical Association to introduce a statewide ballot initiative that competes head-to-head with Regan’s initiative. Regan's ballot initiative was supposed to be the "centerpiece" of SEIU-UHW’s ongoing partnership and organizing deal with the CHA.

Not anymore. The CHA has pulled its support from Regan's initiative, which is now "certain to fail," according to the lawsuit.

 

Mary Kay Henry and Laphonza Butler

Basically, the CHA has declared an end to its "partnership" with SEIU-UHW, thereby jettisoning Wall Street Dave like a pair of old shoes. That means an end to Regan's plans to unionize 60,000 hospital workers under a sweetheart deal that gags healthcare workers, bans them from striking, and forces them into contracts with substandard wages and benefits… which Regan famously called an "audacious new proposal to save the labor movement."

This ain't good news for Regan.

He’s poured $15-20 million of SEIU-UHW members' dues into his failed partnership with the CHA. And he’s staked SEIU-UHW's entire future -- including its membership growth and labor relations strategies -- on a partnership that's been relegated to the trash bin.

No wonder Dave is coming unhinged.

Last month, he penned an angry letter ("The Shame of SEIU") in response to SEIU's secret deal with the CHA, in which he wrote he's "repulsed and disgusted" by SEIU officials who are selfishly pursuing "control, internal power and organizational dominance."

He also sent a ranting letter to CHA's members in which he personally attacked his former bedmate, CHA CEO Duane Dauner.

In Dave’s latest act of vengeance, he filed a 23-page lawsuit against Dauner and three other CHA officials… including Greg Adams, a top Kaiser Permanente executive who also serves as the chair of the CHA's Board of Directors. Mark Laret, the CEO of UCSF Medical Center, is another defendant.

Regan's attack on Kaiser's Greg Adams is intriguing and may signal the unraveling of SEIU-UHW’s partnership with Kaiser. According to Regan's suit, Greg Adams "accepted and enabled" the CHA's decision to throw SEIU-UHW under the bus. In addition, Adams "agreed to shut down" the CHA's labor-management cooperation committee with SEIU-UHW, according to the suit, effectively putting the kibosh on Regan's partnership with the CHA.

Defendant Greg Adams, Kaiser Permanente

Here are some excerpts from Regan's suit, which predictably contains plenty of ranting and raving. For example, the lawsuit calls Dauner "corrupt" in its opening line.

The suit also makes interesting claims about secret meetings and clandestine maneuvers carried out by Purple Palace officials in their plot against Regan, as well as the impact of SEIU’s recent decision to strip 80,000 members from SEIU-UHW and transfer them to "SEIU Local 2015."

The following excerpts refer to the two groups that have introduced competing ballot initiatives: the "ABC Coalition" (i.e., the CHA, SEIU California State Council, the California Teachers Association, and the California Medical Association) and the "CFC" (SEIU-UHW).

At or around the same time CFC was developing its idea of a ballot initiative to fix and fully fund the Medi-Cal program, a separate coalition that includes the California Teachers Association ("CTA"), the California Medical Association ("CMA"), and the SEIU State Council ("State Council) (collectively known as the "ABC Coalition"), began to develop a competing ballot initiative…

Defendant Dauner intentionally opposed the filing of CFC's initiative prior to the filing of the ABC Coalition's initiative for a nefarious purpose -- that is, in order to put CFC's initiative at a disadvantage, while providing both a strategic and procedural advantage to the ABC Coalition. Defendant Dauner, however, kept to himself the fact that he had been secretly working with the ABC Coalition to undermine CFC's initiative…

In or around March 2015, Defendant Dauner had been secretly meeting with members of the ABC Coalition, although the ABC Coalition had not yet been formally organized…

During this same period, Defendant Dauner also met with representatives of the SEIU State Council in order to keep them informed of the business of CFC, including but not limited to CFC's confidential "Strategic Plan." The SEIU State Council is led by Jon Youngdahl ("Youngdahl"), who is the Executive Director of the State Council, and Laphonza Butler ("Butler"), who is the President of the State Council.

In addition, Butler is the President of the SEIU, United Long-Term Care Workers ("ULTCW") as well as the provisional President of SEIU, Local 2015. Local 2015 represents approximately 285,000 home-care and nursing home workers m California… Local 2015 is the result of a merger of home care and nursing home members from three SEIU-affiliated Unions: SEIU Local 521, ULTCW, and UHW. As a result of the merger, UHW lost half its membership to Local 2015.

Prior to the merger, representatives of the SEIU State Council informed Defendant Dauner that Regan would soon lose half of UHW's membership and that Defendant Dauner needed to deal with Butler and the State Council – not Regan and UHW – if he wanted to accomplish any legislative and policy goals that were important to CHA's members.

Beginning in or around March 2015, Defendant Dauner decided to work covertly with CMA, the SEIU State Council, and CTA, while duplicitously pretending to carry out his duties as a Director and Officer in the interest of CFC.

Defendant Dauner chose to work with the ABC Coalition for several reasons. First, he feared CTA's political reach in Sacramento. Second, he no longer wanted to be involved in a "strategic partnership" with UHW because the partnership was threatening his power within CHA, and members of CHA were calling for an end to the partnership for ideological reasons. Third, he believed that he could take advantage of an internal SEIU disagreement between Butler and Regan regarding the transfer of UHW members into Local 2015…

On November 2, 2015, Defendant Dauner requested a conference call with Regan and multiple other persons, including other Directors of CFC to discuss CFC's initiative and his agreement with the ABC Coalition.

On the call, Defendant Dauner revealed that he had been secretly meeting and negotiating with the ABC Coalition regarding its competing initiative…

Defendant Dauner explained that he had engaged in these covert actions because the CHA Board of Directors had instructed him to do so and that a "substantial number of hospitals," affiliated with CHA did not want CHA to participate in CFC or to continue its partnership with UHW. The reason that a substantial number of hospitals wanted to end the strategic partnership between CHA and UHW is because these hospitals are philosophically opposed to the unionization of the hospital industry and seek to remain non-union so that they may continue, without interference, to provide their employees substandard working conditions, pay, and benefits. Because the ABC Coalition does not consist of any labor organization that seeks to organize hospital workers in California, working with the ABC Coalition is preferred over working with UHW.

During the call, Defendant Dauner revealed that his discussions with the ABC Coalition had led to a written agreement, executed by and between CTA, CMA, and the SEIU State Council and Defendant Dauner and CHA.

According to Dauner, the agreement with the ABC Coalition provides that Defendants and CHA will jointly sponsor, and contribute financially to the ABC Coalition's The School Funding and Stability Act of 2016 that is in direct competition with CFC's initiative, Invest in California's Children Act.

Defendant Dauner further agreed to "to veto any expenditure" to support CFC's initiative, and [Kaiser’s Greg] Adams, [UCSF’s Mark] Laret and Holmes agreed to support Dauner in this cessation of CFC's activities. Thus, the CHA Directors agreed to terminate all of CFC's operations by using Defendant Dauner's veto power.

Put otherwise, Defendant Dauner agreed to use his position of power to quash CFC's initiative and to support the ABC Coalition's competing initiative, and the other CHA Directors accepted and enabled this decision. As a result, lacking any financial support, CFC's initiative is certain to fail and the ABC Coalition's initiative will have no effective opposition…

Adams, Laret and Holmes approved this sale after the fact and have since agreed to shut down CFC as part of the deal with the ABC Coalition…

On November 18, 2015, Defendants spoke with Regan regarding the ABC Coalition's initiative. Defendants pleaded with Regan to dissolve CFC. Regan, however, refused to agree to dissolution. In accordance with his agreement with the ABC Coalition, Defendant Dauner stated that he would exercise his veto power, as Co-Chair, on any and all decisions that came before CFC regarding expenditures related to CFC's initiative, which CFC had unanimously voted to file and fund.

The lawsuit alleges that Dauner, Kaiser's Greg Adams, and CHA officials have committed fraud, concealment, breach of fiduciary duty, "conversion," "trespass to chattel," and other "fraudulent or dishonest acts or gross abuse of authority or discretion." It seeks to force the CHA to pay financial damages to SEIU-UHW and also seeks the removal of the CHA's Dauner from his position as a co-chair of the joint labor-management committee set up by the CHA and SEIU-UHW. Regan is the other co-chair.

More details are available in the full lawsuit below.

Stay tuned for more analysis and commentary!

  SEIU-UHW's Lawsuit against Duane Dauner, Greg Adams and the California Hospital Ass'n, Nov. 24, 2...