100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

May 21, 1981 - Image 5

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1981-05-21

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

The Michigan Daily-Thursday, May21 1981-Page 3
Pickets at Wordprocessors
Labor and
management at
odds again

By ANDREW CHAPMAN
Several employees of The Wor-
dprocessors have set up a picket line
outside the State Street copy shop,
and are urging customers to boycott
all further use of the store.
Union Shop Steward Dave Her-
man said the group is picketing
because the Wordprocessors owners
have "broken agreements made
with the employees." James
Forrester, a former employee, said
the agreements were broken
because "the owners hired two
people not on the preferential hiring
}: :list." .
THE preferential hiring list is a.
list of people that the owners of The
Wordprocessors agreed to use to fill
any future positions that open in the
store. The list is made up of people
who were fired last April following a
picket and boycott staged by em-
ployees. The National Labor
Relations Board ruled then that
these former employees must be
rehired as soon as any jobs become
available in The Wordprocessors
shop.
THE PICKETING workers, who
call themselves Employees Against
; r ..~ Arbitrary Action, claim that the
recent hiring of the two workers not
on this list constitutes unfair labor
-. 'practices. According to Herman, the
picketing workers want "the owners
of The Wordprocessors to offer the
two positions under contention to all
the people currently on the preferen-
S- .tial hiring list, and to distribute
Daily Photo by JACKE BELL payment of the wages that these two
FORMER AND CURRENT Wordprocessors employees walk a picket line established in people have been receiving among
front of the shop to protest the hiring of two new employees by the shop's owners. The the people currently on the list."
picketers claim the hiring violates the provisions of a NLRB ruling. Joshua Peck, above left, Joshua Peck, one of the two per-
is one of the new employees, and, lower right, Wordprocessors union Shop Steward Dave sons hired recently, said, "When I
Herman, who is leading the boycott of the shop. began working I had no idea that the

union-management conflict was
boiling as furiously as it indeed
was."
June Smith, the owner and
manager of The Wordprocessors, de
clined to comment, but her lawyer,
Russ Boltz, said "we are very puz-
zled by the picket line and the
boycott .., we can't figure out why
they're out there." In response to a
flyer the picketers were
distributing, Boltz said, "We are
very hurt by their accusations."
Boltz said it is unclear whether the
two employees in question are part
of "the bargaining unit." The
bargaining unit is a term applied to
employees of Wordprocessors who
are covered by the NLRB set-
tlement.
If these two employees are within
the bargaining unit they are subject
to NLRB jurisdiction and cannot be
hired because of the existence of the
preferential hiring list. If these
workers fall outside the bargaining
unit, however, they are not subject
to the guidelines placed upon em-
ployment by the preferential hiring
list and are eligible for their current
positions.
Herman said the two people are
part of the bargaining unit because
"people holding the same jobs in
1979 were considered by the owners
to be part of the bargaining unit.
There is no difference in the jobs,
thus Peck's job should now be con-
sidered part of the bargaining unit."
"We don't want to see anybody get
canned," said Herman when ex-
plaining the union's position, "but he
(Peck) was hired contrary to the law
and the agreement which they (the
owners) signed."
See WORDPROCESSORS, Page 7

SEARCH FOR ACCEPTABLE TAX REFORM CONTINUES:

Milliken-Tisch meeting fizzles

LANSING (UPI)-A post-election summit con-
ference between Gov. William Milliken and Robert
Tisch on the future of property tax reform fizzled
yesterday because the tax cut crusader refused to
keep it private.
Tisch, who never has met face-to-face with
Milliken, arrived at the executive office late in the
day to find the governor gone.
THE BIZARRE episode capped a day of
reassessment in which Milliken and other gover-
nment leaders vowed to continue seeking an accep-
table tax reform plan in the wake of Proposal A's
stunning defeat.
Milliken met with top legislative leaders who had
joined him in supporting the ballot proposal as a sub-
stitute for radical tax slashing. No firm conclusions
were reached on the next step and it was not clear
whether action could come in time to affect summer
tax bills.

THE NEARLY 3-1 rejection of Proposal A Tuesday
was the main topic of discussion during the regular
morning session of the Senate. There was general
agreement that the vote was a repudiation of the
legislature, and some calls for immediate action on
tax cuts deeper than those offered by the proposal.
Final unofficial returns from the secretary of
state's office showed Proposal A was rejected
1,447,318 to 563,050 in an election which drew a sur-
prisinglyhigh turnout of 35.1 percent.
The magnitude of the defeat was impressive, as
Proposal A failed in all 83 counties and was rejected
in liberal and conservative communities alike.
IT CONTINUED a trend of nay-saying on property
tax reform issues over the past several elections.
Voters rejected two Tisch proposals, in 1978 and 1980,
and another moderate plan proposed by the governor
and legislators last fall.
The proposal would have cut local property and in-

come levies in half in return for an increase in the
state sales tax from 4 percent to 5.5 percent.
The campaign committee raised between $200,000
and $250,000 to promote the measure. The strongest
support came from labor unions and school
organizations.
Milliken allies downplayed the significance of the
defeat for his political career. It is an almost im-
possible task, they said, to develop a concensus on the
complex tax reform issue.
MILLIKEN SAID he would talk to various persons
to "get a sense of what now would be appropriate"
but stressed he would accept nothing "irresponsible"
such as the past Tisch proposals.
Milliken agreed to a meeting requested by Tisch on
the condition that it be private, insisting that was his
normal policy when meeting with citizens on public
issues. The governor cancelled the meeting when
Tisch balked..-

Back to Top

© 2025 Regents of the University of Michigan