Archive for category politics
California nurses call for investigation of alleged discriminatory hiring practices against Filipinos at SF’s St.Luke’s hospital
If you don’t think racism and discrimination still exists in our era of diversity, consider this: A de facto ban against hiring Filipino nurses at the St.Luke’s Campus of Sutter Health’s Calif. Pacific Medical Center (CPMC) appears to be policy in San Francisco.
No Filipinos, as blatant as that.
Just like the old sign that the Filipino National Historical Society displays, the one from the 1920s that reads, “Positively No Filipinos Allowed.”
You can take that sign and stick it on the door at St.Luke’s, right now, says the California Nurses Association, the nurses union.
And now it wants to do something about it.
At a press conference on Thursday, the union will call for the San Francisco Human Rights Commission to investigate the hospital. The union will also announce its intention to file a class action grievance against Sutter and CPMC.
The union provided compelling evidence which included signed statements by former managers and current job stats, that suggests Filipinos are being unfairly discriminated at the St. Luke’s campus.
From numbers provided by CPMC, the numbers are revealing. Before the take-over of the hospital in 2007 the Filipino RNs at St.Luke’s were 66 percent of the nursing population.
Between 2007 and 2008, just 48 percent of new hires were Filipino.
From Feb. 2008, when the nurses union and the community organized to stop the closure of St.Luke’s, to the present, the percentage of new RN hires who were Filipino dropped dramatically to just 10 percent.
They didn’t all just give up their RN credentials and take jobs as Wal-Mart greeters.
Nato Green, the labor representative who works at St.Luke’s said it’s no coincidence. “I believe this reflects Sutter’s decision to use race to divide workers and stop collective bargaining activity,” Green told me. “ Going from 66 percent to 10 percent (of new hires) is a fairly remarkable coincidence.”
It all comes after the union forced Sutter to keep St.Luke’s open. The nurses union expected some push back, but not this.
“CPMC and Sutter have chosen to retaliate by carrying out a punitive, illegal and immoral campaign of discrimination,” said Zenei Cortz, the California Nurses Association president. “There is no excuse for racial or ethnic discrimination. A hospital should be a center of therapeutic healing for patients, not a model for bigotry.”
The union also produced affidavits signed under penalty of perjury. Ronald Rivera, a former nurse manager, who worked there from April 2006 to April 2010 when he resigned on good terms, provided his testimony.
“One day I spoke with Diana Karner (VP of nursing) on the phone about hiring new RNs,” he attested. “Diana said to me that we probably should not hire any more foreign graduate nurses. She explained that patients complain because “it is hard to understand them and be understood by them.”
Another signed affidavit came from Ronald Villanueva, who actually was sitting in and overheard the conversation between Karner and Rivera. “I was shocked and I wondered if she knew I was a foreign graduate nurse,” he wrote.
A third declaration came from from Chris Hanks, who was the Director of Critical Care from 2008 to 2009 and reported directly to Karner. Hanks was alarmed when told point blank “you are not to hire any Filipino nurses.” Hanks challenged Karner at their weekly meetings, until he was Karner told him, “The Filipinos are always related , or know each other, and that’s not good. You’re not to hire them.”
Karner the VP of nursing didn’t return my telephone call.
Kevin McCormack, of CPMC’s media relations said she was out of the office and unavailable. What did he think of a ban on hiring Filipino nurses? “That would be illegal,” he said. “You can’t ban hiring specific groups.”
He called it “ridiculous” and implied it was a stunt by C N A to fan the ongoing labor dispute with CPMC.
“We have a long history of hiring Filipino nurses on all our campuses, including St.Luke’s, and we are still hiring them,” McCormack read from CPMC’s official statement. “We have many RNs at our St. Luke’s campus who are Filipino and know how extraordinary they are. To say we are imposing quotas on them is outrageous.”
It is outrageous, but the numbers don’t lie.
The Filipino nursing staff at St.Luke’s is shrinking and it is such a precipitous drop that it can’t just be by accident or happenstance.
A Sunday Fourth: Freedom as religion to all good patriots
I love it when the Fourth of July is on a Sunday. On a day that is considered by many a holy day, a Sunday Fourth makes it pretty clear to me what this day is about. It is a religious day, for what is America’s religion but freedom itself?
In America, of course, you can be part of some organized religion, whatever you choose, or not. You can believe in God, gods, or just in yourself.
“USA, USA, USA.”
But mostly we believe in your right to say, “No, thank you.”
You can even drop the “thank you,” and be as vigorous in your dissent, alone or all together, however you wish.
When you’re an American that’s what we understand to be true and what we fight to protect.
We have faith in this freedom. It’s called patriotism.
Patriotism isn’t a blind allegiance to folks in Washington, and the policies of the elected.
To be a patriot is to be one who knows that freedom is beyond debate. The Founding Fathers may be dead, but the founding principles are still alive.
A patriot is there to make sure it stays that way. Who are these “patriots”? They aren’t all from a particular gender, ethnicity, or income group. Nor are they the rabid folk who call conservative talk shows and waste good tea. Indeed, immigrants tend to be the best patriots, fighters and rebels to the core. Many are here because they believed and fought for the same things we believed in, only in their own homelands. Ask the Southeast Asian who fought with the U.S. in the Vietnam War. Ask a Filipino veteran of WWII. They are no less American than the descendents of the Mayflower.
And here we are all together this Sunday, celebrating our freedoms without question.
That’s what we Americans believe in, religiously.
Emil Guillermo on the coincidence of the U.S/England World Cup match and Philippine Independence Day: A good day for beating back the colonizer!
What a coincidence the U.S. tied its former colonizer at the world’s game 1-1. Or as the NYTimes’ Nick Kristoff tweeted, the U.S. “beat” England, 1-1….
Of course, the U.S. didn’t. But it’s acceptable underdog-speak. Reminiscent of the famous headline “Harvard beats Yale, 29-29,” when the improbable tie must be acknowledged with something more than an “attaboy.”
But I was with Alexi Lalas, the former MLS star, who was unwilling to be diplomatic and on the pregame on ABC forecasted a 2-1 victory.
Why not?
The U.S. can play now. It’s not like the day of Kyle Rote Jr. and the old NASL. U.S. players play with the top English clubs now. Our independence from soccer inferiority has already been declared.
So U.S. ”beats” England didn’t come to mind immediately. In fact, the U.S. was lucky the Brit keeper had Teflon mits. Good for pols, bad for goaltenders. The goal was like a gift from the soccer gods, as if some invisible foot (like Adam Smith’s hand?) nudged the ball to the net, an equalizer by providence.
But that’s it for karmic justice.
On the day the U.S. faced its colonizer, the U.S. has some other significant imperial baggage of its own.
On June 12, 1898, the Philippines proclaimed its independence from Spain after the Spanish-American War’s battle of Manila Bay.
But the proclamation wasn’t recognized by Spain or the U.S.
The Spanish took advantage of the communications lag and before the announcement had ceded the Philippines to the U.S. in the Treaty of Paris 1898. The U.S. had its own imperial designs and made Philippines its first colony. That was all news to the victorious Filipinos and General Emil Aguinaldo. And with that, the U.S. -Philippine war was begun, and hundreds of thousands of lives, both American and Filipino,were lost.
So you can see how all these years later, on this day, karma could only carry the U.S. so far.
But now that we’ve tied the Brits, maybe we can all feel better about bankrupting BP and destroying the English pension system!
USA, USA, USA!!!
Emil Guillermo on the California primary vote: Does anyone have time for democracy anymore? Plus: The GOP’s Twin Towers of Estrogen
We just had an election in California, and once again, in my humble polling place, we had more poll workers than voters.
If Justin Bieber were there, then we’d have a crowd. And then the state’s future would be dictated by the tastes of 12-year olds—which might be an improvement. They know what it’s like to live on an allowance.
Still, just 23.4 percent voted in San Francisco. Los Angeles County was lower yet at 19.6. Maybe if we could jump up those numbers by allowing voting while texting AND driving the state’s numbers would go up. Voting by IPhone? There’s got to be an app for that.
Who voted the most? Little Sierra County, northeast of Sacramento, population around 4,000, had a turnout of 73.3 percent! (I’m checking if a few goats weren’t allowed to cast ballots to pad those numbers).
I imagine there’s not much to do in Sierra County but wait for an election to have an excuse to get out of the house. Does that mean those of us in slightly less rural areas have too much to do to value democracy?
We show up when it counts, of course. Like for a general election when the presidency is at stake. But all politics is local, remember. This is the stuff that hits home. And not many showed up.
MONEY, MONEY, MONEY
The big lesson in California is that money is still everything in politics—if you have more than $30 million. That’s roughly what Steve Poizner spent on his campaign and he didn’t win one county. So let’s revise the adage. You need almost $100 million to be victorious like Meg Whitman, the GOP’s first female standard bearer to run for governor of the state. She along with Carly Fiorina, who won the GOPs senate race, are the party’s new public face: The twin towers of estrogen. You can talk about diversity if you’d like, but Democrats have had women, gays, lesbians, Asians, Latinos, blacks for years. Why praise the GOP for something it should have embraced a long time ago?
But here’s why you should be suspicious: Anytime you hear someone say they want to run “California like a business,” run away. Fast.
That’s not what we need in this state. Arnold’s already tried and look what he’s done.
After Tuesday, the state finds itself with two failed CEOs who have used their parachute money to enter politics (remember, they’d still be CEOs if they were really successful).They now want to do something useful with their lives besides make money. They think because they ran a business, they can run a government.
As Arnold found out, it’s trickier than it looks, mostly because government isn’t about dollars and sense nor bottom lines and profits. It’s still about people and services that make up a community.
A CEO of a major corporation, whose trick to raise revenue include off-shoring, laying off older workers, and generally trimming human beings to show profit, just doesn’t have the skill set for the kind of government that fosters community. But whose to stop the vanity of Whitman and Fiorina who have the money to put their business skills to the test. You want to be the guinea pig?
Tell me how smart it is to spend nearly $100 million for a 4-year job? Where’s the fiscal responsibility in that?
PUBLIC FINANCING and MCLEOD
The only way to get good people to run is to eliminate money as a factor. And unfortunately, Prop.15, which called for a public funding experiment failed.
Money is the reason why American Filipino Rod McLeod’s run for Superior Court judge in San Francisco was notable. Spending less than $2,000, he was trying to buck the trend in an office that should be above money. His opponents , however, spent about $100,000 each.
McLeod took the high road and finished third.
It counts. But what does it mean with just a 23% turnout?
Emil Guillermo on campaign finance: Rod McLeod’s run for SF judge a political experiment that tries to be above it all by spending practically nothing
Rod McLeod–an accomplished trial lawyer and partner at one of the world’s biggest firms–is running on Tuesday for a Superior Court judgeship in the City and County of San Francisco.
But he doesn’t want to be bought and sold like a common politician.
To McLeod, that would be unseemly.
A vote for him is a vote against the same old same old in politics where money trumps all. Isn’t that refreshing.
He felt that way when I first wrote about him. Now with days before the election he still feels confident he’s done the right thing.
“I want to put a stake in the idea you have to have money to run,” McLeod told me this week.
McLeod has been outspent in the campaign by about 100-1 so far. Compared to two of his opponents who have raised in excess of $100,000, McLeod has spent about $1,250 his own money in the race.
He’s decided to take zero campaign contributions in order to run as a truly objective and impartial individual, beholden to no one, especially those who might expect that donations come with strings attached.
“I don’t want to be the best judge money can buy,” said McLeod, a native San Franciscan and American Filipino, who went to Saint Ignatius High School, and earned his law degree at UC Berkeley’s Boalt School of Law.
Personally, I’ve been good friends with McLeod for nearly 30 years, and I can say he never takes the easy way out. I’ve known him as a man of uncompromised principle who stands up for what he believes in—even if it could hurt him.
And it has.
At one time, McLeod was considered a rising star in local San Francisco politics after his appointment to a vacant spot on the city’s Board of Education in the ‘80s. Winning the seat outright in an open election should have been a cinch, except for his unwavering decision to keep his children in Catholic schools.
That glitch was enough to send McLeod back into the private sector to focus on his stellar legal career (he’s currently a partner at Jones and Day). Not exactly a hard fall. But definitely, it was the public’s loss. McLeod, who was in the Army for over a dozen years as a paratrooper, has always been ready to serve. But when I last saw him, the plan was for an early retirement.
So in a way, McLeod’s last minute decision to run for the position of retired Judge Wallace Douglas was a real surprise. It’s also a pay cut.
What wasn’t a surprise was McLeod’s campaign approach.
“Judges shouldn’t be for sale,” McLeod said.
San Francisco is different from other counties where races for judge can cost just a few thousand dollars.
McLeod questions his big bucks opponents? What do their thousands of dollars buy? A bit more than cardboard signs.
When politicians like Barack Obama fly in with their hand out to raise cash, donors give mightily because they believe money buys access and influence. Want to get your pet issues on the radar? Write a check, get an advocate.
What should be a donor’s expectation in a judges’ race? What equates to access to justice? We all should have access already. That’s equality, right?
But if someone gives more to a judge do you get more justice, better service? When you go before him, will the new judge quickly bang the gavel and say, “Not guilty”? (It may save in court time, but let’s hope the judge recuses himself before that happens).
Normally in hotly contested judgeship races, the victor need only promise to be tough on crime.
But Superior Court judges do civil as well as criminal cases. McLeod’s two main opponents (an assistant public defender, and an assistant D.A.), may not be as broadly experienced as McLeod, an accomplished civil litigator.
Ironically, McLeod’s experience as a downtown lawyer is hurting him. People don’t even see him as an Asian American candidate.
Race isn’t an issue here. But class is.
McLeod’s actually received backlash for being a successful trial attorney who’s running against some good, but limited, government bureaucrat lawyers. They can claim class as an issue, but they’re the ones outspending McLeod 100-fold.
When you t think of it, voting for judges in the first place is just a strange way for the public to pick a competent, fair and impartial judge. Campaign money here is really a waste.
Appointing judges on merit would make better sense. Elections tend to get away from merit, and focus on money.
If you live in San Francisco, this is a race that could send a message to other politicians brave enough to take a stand against money.
But with Meg Whitman spending millions, don’t expect change to come anytime soon. Not in big races, but maybe in the smaller district and regional races.
I asked McLeod would he spend the money if he followed conventional wisdom that believes spending money would mean victory?
“If you spent $200,000, you still wouldn’t have certainty,” McLeod said.’
Realistically, the micro-budgeted McLeod does has a chance in this race if he can finish in the top 2 and no one gets 50 percent of the vote—a real possibility for this judgeship.
And in a run-off? “I’d spend the same amount,” he said.
I wouldn’t expect any different from my old friend Rod, principled to the end.
That he can’t be bought and paid for makes him an appealing and refreshing choice as the best person for San Francisco’s Superior Court.
Emil Guillermo on the BP Spill: Don’t blame Big Government–blame the free market
Maybe we just needed a spill of such horrific proportions to come to our senses.
When stuff happens we want, we demand, that government take care of us.
But Deepwater Horizon isn’t so much a failure of Big Government to be in charge, it’s a stark realization at what de-regulation and a lax of oversight will do.
We have allowed Big Government to fail because the small government folks distrust the oversight. Leave it to the oil companies to police themselves. As I write that, why does that sound stupid?
So small g. folks allow the free market to run amok and let the likes of BP to do what it will without a net. Just a net profit, about $14 billion or so last year.
Sooo much better.
Even in crisis, the failure of the free market was colossal. BP’s efforts were unremarkable. 40 days? 20 million gallons later does it deserve to stay in business? And where were the free market resources to come together to solve the problem?
Someone could make some good money being a hero here. That’s the free market dream.
Two guys in a garage could have come up with a better “TOP KILL” sooner, maybe? Instead, we had people with those pathetic looking restraining tubes trying to herd the oil plume like stray cattle.
Maybe BP was praying for IRON MAN in full regalia to swoop in and sit on the thing?
What was the free market response? It said, “Not my problem. Especially with a 4 day weekend coming up.”
So what’s the score:
Free Market , zero. Big Government, trying.
Obama tried to cap the political hole yesterday. But his “TOP KILL” didn’t do much for me either.
Re-regulation. Moratoriums. Those are the easy solutions that should have already been in place.
We need an aggressive clean up combined with a comprehensive energy plan.
Our oil addiction is a killer. The spill, the video, “Top Kill”, just a massive wake-up call as we trudge along in our oil dependent stupor.
Emil Guillermo on the BP spill: The new “Blood for oil” begins as first “head” rolls
So far just one head, Liz Birnbaum at U.S. Minerals Management Services is the first to go, reports say. But is she even high enough the food chain to balance the wreckless destruction that has taken place as the oil flows?
Like the oil, the blame flows incrementally. Once it sinks in how this is worse than the Exxon Valdez spill, more rubber-stampers will have to be removed and replaced.
Everyone is so anxious to see this thing plugged up, that public statements are too often interpreted with a much more optimistic spin. We saw that this morning with the conflicts between the Coast Guard’s optimism, and BP’s more guarded stance.
Obama has done right to extend the moratorium on drilling, and should do it at least until the cleanup is done. That should take care of at least 100 years.
And he should know there is some relief with firing a few bureaucrats way too close to the industries they regulate. When Big oil expects payback, the people get screwed. (BTW, isn’t it funny how the “small government” folks are now blaming big government’s lack of response to the spill? Pro-business amall government tendencies are responsible for a lack of response.)
In the meantime, grease up the bicycles and fire up the candles.
Our own oil dependency plays a role in all this too.
Emil Guillermo on the BP Spill:We need Deepwater Horizon spill finale now, before the end of “American Idol” tonight. Please.
My protest over the BP spill has been muted because I’m a user.
Not of BP. But of oil in general. My outrage would be like ratting out one’s drug-dealer. (It is an oil addiction. George W. Bush told me so).
Lately, blog/twitter readers would notice I’ve chosen the escape route of dwelling on the ending of favorite television shows and the losing streak and offensive ineptitude of my favorite baseball team. Contemplating those sort of things is so much better on the soul than contemplating the end of the earth, which in truth is what the BP spill represents.
To see the constant video of the oil streaming and the damage to the Gulf, the wetlands, the animals is too much to bear.
We need to say f-you to the profiteers and the government that enables them. We’ve already saved Wall Street and the car industry. When we save Big Oil at times like this you can see the trade off.
At least BP isn’t in the nuclear game. That’s the only thing that makes the time to end spill slightly more bearable. Oil is less forever than nuclear. But a screwup is a screwup, and no one seems to be prepared for these worse case events.
Go to the video. See the oil flow. Let’s see a BP spill finale now.
In the meantime, let’s vote BP off the Island. And hope Obama, and Sec. Chu and Sec. Salazar stop dancing with the oily.
-
-
You are currently browsing the archives for the politics category.
Subscribe
