Pages

Thursday, April 7, 2011

The Verdict on The Verdict is in - Thumbs Down For ADDA

Members who commented on the ADDA's latest missive, were not impressed.

This, from the latest comment, appears to sum up the general mood:

After reading this ADDA newsletter I still have BIG questions about this agency shop business and I think all DDA's are entitled to answers if you're trying to take money from everyone:

1) How much do you plan to take from each DDA. Not too complicated, just give the rates for top step 2, top step 3 & top step 4. YOU CAN'T ASK US TO BUY SOMETHING WITHOUT DISCLOSING THE PRICE!!!!

2) What the hell are you spending this money on. Is it all litigation? If so on what? YOU CAN'T ASK US TO BUY SOMETHING WITHOUT TELLING US WHAT IT IS !!!!

Is it so unreasonable? Would anyone walk into a store and say "I'm going to buy something, don't care about the price or what it is."

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

The reason why there were no positive comments on the verdict is most likely that Seligman sent an email to all the ADDA members telling them NOT to comment.

He's probably trying to quiet down the ADDA crazies until the Agency Shop passes, and then he'll probably let them out of their cages again.

I thought the best comment on the Verdict was "You must think we are idiots - like we wont see how feckless it is to announce that the next Joint Labor-Manangement Committee is on the day the newsletter arrives.

And if that's not bad enough, how facile it is to "submit your concerns ASAP to any member.." but you don't give their contact info, only Seligman's email so that he can filter the "concerns.""


That sums up the way the ADDA operates - here, make sure you tell us your concerns but 1) there's no email address to send your comments to and 2) the meeting where your 'concerns' could have been raised has already happened anyway.

$20k a month and no emails, a website that is still out of date, and a bs newsletter with no news. Bet you can't wait to sign up for the Agency Shop.

What a freakin joke.

Anonymous said...

I would have summarized it even more succinctly:
NO BLANK CHECK!
NO BLANK CHECK!
NO BLANK CHECK!

Anonymous said...

DDAs are between a rock and a hard place. We need a group authorized to negotiate with the County on things like medical benefits and such like, and the administration is precluded from doing it on our behalf. But letting this ADDA be our representatives is a huge mistake as they mostly want to settle their own beefs with Cooley - some of them are carrying over beefs with Garcetti. In fighting their battles on our dime, they end up making the ADDA irrelevant and ridiculous.

No better example can be found than the stupid decision to endorse John Eastman for AG. It was clearly designed to be a slap in the face to Cooley. Well how did that help the 695 other DDA's who don't agree with Ipsen and Seligman? The Eastman endorsement was THEIR moment in OUR name, and the rest of the ADDA board did nothing to stop it.

The problem isn't the idea of an Agency Shop, it's the idea of an Agency Shop with this bunch of losers calling the shots in our name, on our dime.

Maybe it's time for an Alternate ADDA?

Anonymous said...

"9:35pm" - You make an excellent point. I can't wait for the Cooley years to be over.
But you are so right when you raise the Eastman endorsement. But you left out the most important theme: past is prologue.
Everyone remember when these fools endorsed Schwarzenegger? They practically married the ADDA name to Arnold and what did rank and file get in return? Safety Retirement?
Nope. Instead Cooley gained incredible traction and even his insiders boasted of his status on the Judicial "kitchen cabinet."