July 12, 2011

Dear Sisters and Brothers:

We are writing to all UWUA members at American Water to respond to the letter distributed on July 5 by top corporate management. We also want to bring you up-to-date on management’s assault on union workers, as well as on our continuing efforts to oppose those unfair attacks.

In their letter, these top managers falsely claim that the UWUA has somehow criticized the quality of services delivered every day by American Water employees. Nothing could be further from the truth. The skill, training, and dedication of union employees at American Water are beyond question, and have always been crucial to the success of this Company.

The problems at American Water have been caused not by hourly workers, but instead by the complete disrespect shown by top management toward dedicated union workers. In fact, the corporate officials who signed the July 5 letter are part of the same management team that has launched a wide-ranging assault on hourly employees throughout the Company:

• Over recent years, management has routinely demanded painful concessions in local contract negotiations, including the unlimited subcontracting of union jobs and slashing sick leave benefits, while offering nothing more than minimal pay increases for hourly employees.
• At least nine UWUA contracts have gone past their expiration dates, in some cases for more than a year, because of management’s demands for big givebacks from union workers. These include contracts in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Missouri.
• In Missouri, management recently announced plans to unilaterally implement its last contract offer, even though UWUA members there have overwhelmingly rejected management’s proposals. Among other concessions, management is demanding the right to destroy every single UWUA job in the St. Louis area through unlimited subcontracting.
• In Florida, management has refused for years to bring Pensacola call center workers up to the same pay levels as their sisters and brothers performing the same work in Alton, illinois — in effect imposing unequal pay for the predominantly minority workforce in Pensacola.
• In West Virginia, American Water recently announced plans to lay off 10% of its entire workforce statewide because top management said that a 4.4% rate hike approved by the state Public Service Commission wasn’t big enough. On May 31, the UWUA won an order blocking management’s scheme to lay off these workers, until the PSC can conduct an investigation into the harmful effects the cutbacks could have on customer service.
• Earlier this year, management unilaterally imposed huge concessions in healthcare benefits for union workers at American Water, including a 52% hike in employee premiums for family coverage and big cuts in benefit levels. We believe that action was illegal, and the UWUA has filed an unfair labor practice charge challenging management’s conduct.
• Management imposed these cuts on union workers, even while top bosses continued to collect fat bonuses and huge salaries.

Now, the same management team waging this unfair assault on UWUA members wants us to believe they are our best friends. We refuse to be fooled!

Management’s July 5 letter is nothing more than a shameful attempt to undermine UWUA members’ support for the Union. Management doesn’t just want to take away union workers’ hard-earned benefits and job security. In addition, management is desperately trying to find a way to stop the UWUA’s continuing efforts to stand up for our rights.

We also assume the July 5 letter was a result of management’s stunned reaction to a recent decision by the City Council in Rialto, California to reject the Company’s bid for a 30-year contract to operate Rialto’s water system. We are enclosing a copy of the press release issued by the UWUA National Union concerning the Rialto City Council decision.

As you can see, nothing in the UWUA press release supports management’s false claim that the press release somehow criticized the dedicated service of hourly employees at American Water.

Instead of sending out misleading letters, we believe management should have recognized the Rialto decision as a wake-up call that padding corporate profits and top executives’ enormous paychecks at the expense of workers and consumers is a bad way to run a public utility.

UWUA National and Local leaders stand ready to build a productive relationship with American Water, as soon as top management begins to treat hourly workers with genuine respect. We will know that management is prepared to make that commitment when it begins to offer workers fair local contracts and a new National Benefits Agreement with no concessions.

In the meantime, it is urgent that every UWUA member continue to demonstrate your continued solidarity and support for your Local and National Unions. We will keep you informed about other developments in this critical struggle.

In solidarity,

American Water reacts as expected to the Rialto Water position that the UWUA took, sending a letter to employee’s homes that is mostly speculation and conjecture. The response from UWUA Local 537 is below.

Each of us has engaged in hundreds of conversations with members who have similar perspectives on everything from how the Company wishes to grow their business to how the Company wishes to teach us how much health care costs in America. The similarity in thought is overwhelming, as is the confidence our members have shown not only in the Union leadership, but in voicing their opinions to the leadership of this Union. These conversations are reassuring because they are proof positive of just how much our members care for their Union, and the customers they serve; however, today, we are taking a moment to confirm the above, by responding to American Water’s corporate attack on the Union that we belong to, which we feel is unfair and unwarranted.

We have read the communication from the Utility Workers Union of America, (UWUA) and agree that it is a huge victory for the Rialto ratepayers. Turning over their water system to American Water at this time is clearly not a wise choice. Those of us that work for American Water and know the history of the Company know these are the worst of times. American Water executives have interpreted the UWUA message as negative towards our members. We do not. It is in fact our members that enable this Company to be as productive as it is, and earn the profits that they do. We don’t find this message to be “bragging” that they will help block American Water’s efforts to expand water services, but a clear message that we not only care about our members, but we are also consumer advocates. It is our members that directly deal with the consumer every day. We think our members perform at a stellar level, in spite of hearing many negative comments from lower level management.

It should come as no surprise to upper management, especially Mr. Lynch, as he had a discussion with the President of the UWUA, Local 537 after a heated group discussion in Philadelphia where negotiations were taking place for National Health and Pension. During that discussion he was advised of the dissatisfaction that the members in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Maryland had with the management of the Company. He was provided a card and an invitation to come to Pittsburgh to further discuss the issues maintained by the members of this Local. He has not done so. Do you think that is an accurate reflection for the lack of regard this membership feels that this management team has for its employees? We do!

Union leaders do represent our members, and we do it well; from the smallest Local to the top of the National Union. We are proud Union members, officers, and hardworking employees. We take exception to the response written by a few corporate officers that are only speculating on the sentiments of their employees, and our members. In 2008, PAWC went through a PUC Management audit wherein finding VII-4 determined that employees had not been surveyed since 2003, and the Company had no current data on employee attitudes, management practices, and other key elements of corporate culture. We certainly don’t recall a rush to formally evaluate the above on any regular frequency, if at all.

If it were true that the financial well-being of each of us as employees is in a way tied to the well-being of American Water, we would not be seeing our benefits cut, and our wages in some cases frozen, while the stockholders continue to realize increases in dividends quarter after quarter. We don’t however begrudge them of that, they are investors. Our members are also investors. They invest the majority of their lives working for a Company that has decided to reward the very employees that make the dividends and increasing profits possible, by raping them of their benefits. It is again our members that enable the Company to continue to achieve the customer satisfaction and compliance records that they do. American Water is profitable in spite of itself…

We do not believe that the statement “…private profiteering” can and should be interpreted as meaning that the Company should not exist; but what benefit do the customers and employees realize from the top 7 executives receiving 12.5 million dollars? We work next to water and waste water authorities in many areas that provide a similar if not equal service without the corporate greed attached. Perhaps the customers in West Virginia should react as negatively as Mr. Sterba does in his response to the UWUA. It was Mr. Sterba that said during the annual meeting that American would invest their money in States that are willing to provide him and his Company a more favorable rate increase. They recently were quoted in the paper as saying they are not sure they will even continue with previously promised “Public-Private partnership money that some Counties were counting on. If this Company doesn’t follow through with its commitments to government entities, how can the consumers or employees trust American Water? West Virginia American still sends 7 Million dollars in dividends to American Water; who grows here? West Virginia American Water paid out $630,000.00 in bonuses, and then laid off 10 percent of the work force in in the State. Will the bonus recipients return the cash? Apparently they didn’t really earn it! The Company is failing. It seems as if this group of executives is a little hypersensitive when receiving criticism. They want to hear from you, but only when you agree with them. Recently, a County Commissioner in West Virginia wrote these words to the West Virginia Public Service Commission. “I am extremely concerned that the Company’s decision to layoff thirty-one (31) West Virginian workers represents an unquestionable retaliatory response to this Commission’s refusal to grant all or most of the Company’s recently-requested rate increase”. The author of that statement, Mr. Kent Carper, is not a Union member, or employee, but he is an observant outsider that views this Company as do so many others. Greedy!

Part of the long term strategy of American Water is to grow their business, which has a number of effects on labor. They state that when they grow their business, they create jobs. They are however doing more work now with less people. In fact, it is a common Company demand across the Country for the Company to be able to contract out your work, thus creating work for others, not you. Putting pipe in the ground does mean the contractors are getting fat, nearly as fat as the top seven. Some of the smartest executives absorb the comments of their employees even if perceived to be negative, and learn from them. That doesn’t seem to be the case here at American.

They state that they are committed to work on relationship building and good faith efforts to partner with us, yet they strive to seek out the most anti-union management they can buy. For instance, the most recent addition to the PAWC Human Resource “fleet” prides himself on LinkedIn as having experience in “union avoidance campaigns”. How can they make the statement, “These partnerships would generate jobs for other union members and could ultimately strengthen job security for those already employed at American Water”. Who were they writing to? Do you believe them? We don’t. Do they sound genuine to you? They don’t to us!

We understand that the undersigned in the Company response, “American Water Is Your Company” take exception to the actions of the UWUA, however, we do not! We take exception to the abhorrent behavior of American Water, Pennsylvania-American Water, and West Virginia American Water. As stewards of a commodity that is precious to life, we strive to make a fair living and earn decent benefits while providing a safe and reliable product to the customers that we respect.

We welcome and look forward to the day that American Water can earn the respect that its predecessor RWE had so deservingly earned and garnered. Only then will the relationships begin to heal, and the employees again are proud to say what company they work for.

Sincerely,

J. Kevin Booth
President UWUA, Local 537

Michael Kennedy
Vice-President UWUA, Local 537

Gregory R. Lanham
Vice-President UWUA, Local 537

David Rowland
Recording Secretary UWUA, Local 537

Marei J. Burnfield
President, Elizabeth District

Christopher Koschock
President, Uniontown District

Dirk Finley
President, Warren District

Mark Wise
President, McMurray District

Michael Olek, Sr.
President, Wilkes-Barre Scranton

Christopher M. Lawrence
President, Indiana District

John Adams
President, New Castle District

Robert Hutcheson
President, Brownsville District

Bill Kelvington reacts as expected to the National Labor Relations Board's position. President Booth's response to Bill Kelvington's "Dear employee" letter is below.

July 13, 2011

Dear Brothers and Sisters:

You no doubt have received Bill Kelvington's July 11 letter discussing the various labor board charges that were filed over the primary picketing that went on earlier this year. I am writing to you to correct the incorrect spin in Bill's letter.

While Bill tries to make it look like the Union lost the Labor Board proceedings, actually the company was the loser. Here are the labor board charges that were filed:

1. The Union filed 2 labor board charges, one in Pittsburgh and one in Philadelphia, stating that the company illegally threatened union members in a letter sent by Carole Dascani stating that refusing to cross the primary picket lines that the Union set up could lead to discipline. The Labor Board found in both cases that the company's letter was a threat to employees under the National Labor Relations Act, that the picket lines were lawful primary picket lines and that a complaint will be filed against the company and it will be scheduled for a trial before a judge.

2. The Union filed a labor board charge stating that when Kent Shronz, a plant operator in New Castle and the step-son of a Pittsburgh supervisor (Greg Tokar), approached a primary picket line in New Castle and asked a supervisor what he should do, what the supervisor told him was an illegal threat. The Labor Board found that what was said to Kent Shrontz was an illegal threat under the National Labor Relations Act and that a complaint will be filed against the company and it will be scheduled for a trial before a judge.

3. The Union filed a labor board charge stating that the company's failure to pay people who refused to cross the picket lines was a violation of the National Labor Relations Act. The Labor Board found that while the company's conduct may be a violation of the company-union labor contract, it was not a violation of the National Labor Relations Act. The Labor Board asked the Union to withdraw that labor charge since the question of payment to the employees can be decided in the grievance procedure. The Union agreed to withdraw the labor charge since the grievances cover this matter. This is the matter hammered on by Bill in his letter. Bill must not be aware of Susan Caruso's responses to every single grievance filed over our members not being paid. She states they were not paid because the picket lines were not legal primary picket lines. The National Labor Relations Board disagrees with her. The Company has stated their position in this matter repeatedly, and unless they now change their position, I believe every one of the members that honored those picket lines will be paid.

4. The Union filed 2 labor board charges stating that when it tried to post letters in New Castle and White Deer rebutting what Dan Hufton, a company supervisor, said about whether or not plant operators could leave the plant if pickets showed up, supervisors either tore the letters down or refused to allow them to be posted. The Union stated that tearing the letters down or refusing to let them be posted was a violation of the National Labor Relations Act. The Labor Board found that what the company did was a violation of the Act and that a complaint will be filed against the company and it will be scheduled for a trial before a judge.

5. The company filed a labor board charge against the Union stating that the primary picket lines were illegal and that what was said to an employee who actually crossed a picket line was a violation of the National Labor Relations Act. The labor board dismissed that part of the charge that stated that the picket lines were illegal and decided to let a judge decide if what was said to the employee was a violation of the National Labor Relations Act. Bill apparently forgot that part. Basically, Bill failed to tell you that out of six labor charges filed by the Union, the Labor Board found that five of them have merit and will be heard by a judge and that the sixth can be resolved by the contract grievance procedure. The most important part of the company's labor charge (that the picketing was illegal), was thrown out, and the other part of it (were improper statements made to an employee who crossed the picket line), related only to one employee and a judge will decide that question.

Bill also discusses what happened in 1992 when there was a strike in the Outside Districts. The labor charge filed by the Union then was also to obtain pay for people who refused to cross the picket lines that were set up then, and the Labor Board did dismiss those charges because the matter could have been handled in the grievance procedure. As a part of that strike settlement, the grievances were settled as well. What Bill did not tell you is that in 1992, the company did not file any charges against the Union contending that the picket lines back then were illegal-it must have thought then that they were legal since they did not file anything.

I guess the company thinks you are so gullible that if it tells you it won on one issue when it lost on 5 of 6 filed against it, you will believe that it actually won something. The truth is that the Labor Board has found that our primary picket lines were legal and is bringing the company before a judge to decide that matter.

Bill states that when the Labor Board is confident that there is no merit in a labor charge, it dismisses it without a hearing. Funny, he did not tell you that when the Labor Board is confident that there IS merit in a charge, it files a complaint and has a trial, which is what it did in 5 of the 6 labor charges that we filed against the company.

Bill also says that he wants you to have the latest information on whether you will be paid if you do not cross a picket line. If that is the case, we wonder why he did not tell you that in the Pittsburgh strike in 1980, people from the Outside Districts refused to cross a Pittsburgh picket line and when the company did not pay them, the Union took the matter to arbitration and won the case and the people got paid. What Bill really is doing is what the company is so good at, spinning a story by leaving out the parts that don't help the company. Bill's last paragraph really says it all. He knows how strong our members are, and is horrified that they will honor any future picket lines. The only other reason that I can think of as to why Bill is communicating with our members in an effort to "keep them informed" is that after he fails miserably in the pending rate case and gets fired, he may consider running for Union President. You go Bill! But keep in mind if running for office, our members prefer truthful candidates.

In Solidarity,

J. Kevin Booth
President, UWUA Local 537 

_______________________________________________________________________________________

 UNITED WE ARE A STRONG UNION!!Members in 6 of our 6 Pennsylvania-American Water Districts have been unable to negotiate a fair contract with the Company in some cases for as long as 17 months. Our members have also been unable to come to terms for a successor contract in Huntington, WV as well. American Water has also implemented a sub standard health plan which will cost the members 52% more for the coverage. A $1,500.00 doctor bill will result in a 2000% increase in some cases.

Local 537 members are committed in their fight to secure fair contracts with Pennsylvania-American Water. The camaraderie is unique to the Union Movement. We have members sending letters to politicians, making phone calls, and asking when they will be asked to participate in Labor Actions.

Charging that the American Water Company is demanding huge rate hikes from customers and steep concessions from employees – while showering top executives with lucrative pay packages – dozens of workers and community members rallied outside the nation’s largest for-profit water utility in Alexandria yesterday morning to demand an end to American Water’s “unfair attacks” on working families.

“American Water is trying to increase water rates and give their CEOs millions of dollars" out of the pockets of their workers through increased health costs, Gary Ruffner (below, reading letter), National Secretary-Treasurer for the Utility Workers Union of America (UWUA), told Union City. “It’s always the case that greedy people want to make profit off of the back of the workers, but it’s not fair to trample on the workers and community like that. We’re here to bring attention to corporate greed and the practices that are going on within corporate America all over this country.”

After leafleting morning commuters outside the King Street Metro station for several hours, the demonstrators – which included members of the UWUA, the AFL-CIO and SEIU 32BJ – chanted “Rate hikes for you- bonuses for bosses!” as they marched to American Water’s office on Duke Street to rally and deliver their message. “Having CEO’s get huge bonuses and benefits while making employees pay double their rate for health care is ridiculous,” said SEIU 32BJ Political Coordinator Kevin Hills.

“We don’t want all their money- we just want a fair share for the workers and our community.” Before leaving, the demonstrators delivered letters from Virginia Congressman Jim Moran and the Northern Virginia Labor Federation urging William Walsh – the President of Virginia American Water Company – to be “mindful of the difficult conditions facing working families in Virginia and across the country” and to stop “the painful cost shifts to those families.”

The UWUA urges people to email CEO Jeff Sterba at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it or call 856-346-8200 to let him know that “American Water’s demands for concessions in healthcare and retirement benefits are unacceptable,” and that “management should immediately return to good faith negotiations for a fair labor agreement.” – report/photos by Adam Wright

BY DAVID FALCHEK (STAFF WRITER)

Pennsylvania American Water has proposed double-digit hikes in water rates and customer charges, which would push customers' bills up 13 percent or more - a portion of which would be used to expand the utility's profit margin.

The Hershey-based company petitioned the state Public Utility Commission for the hike, which would cost the average customer using 4,100 gallons per month $6.42 more. The request also includes a 10 percent increase in the utility's allowed profits, or rate of return, for its shareholders, from 8.11 to 8.88 percent. Last year, the utility's parent company, Voorhees, N.J.-based American Water Works Co. Inc. reported net profits of $268 million.

The controversial part of the request is the increase in profits, said state Consumer Advocate Irwin "Sonny" Popowsky.

"Sure, they have to spend money to maintain the system," he said. "But how much of a return is necessary? Consider that this is a monopoly and look around. Who is getting that sort of a return?"

Pennsylvania American Water has a good track record in maintaining water systems, Mr. Popowsky said, particularly when acquiring other smaller systems that need investment.

The Hershey-based Pennsylvania unit of the company says it needs the increase to help maintain and upgrade its aging infrastructure. The company maintains a 9,200-mile network of water lines and treatment plants and many are in need of ongoing repair and replacement, said utility Chief Executive Officer Kathy Pape in a statement.

The rate Pennsylvania American customers pay for 100 gallons, now 78.9 cents, would go to 94.9 cents, a 20.2 percent increase.

The monthly service charge, a flat rate that covers the utility's cost of customer service and billing, would go from $13 to $15.50 per month, a 19.2 percent hike.

The company says the increased revenue would cover $533 million it invested in upgrades and repairs since its last rate case in 2009, which includes upgrades to water treatment facilities, storage tanks, wells and pumping stations. During that time, about $70 million was invested in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre area, said Pennsylvania American spokesman Terry Maenza, including new mains in the Bellview section of Scranton,

and parts of Abington Twp. and Olyphant. The company will have replaced approximately 177 miles of aging water main statewide by the time the rate hikes would kick in.

The company typically requests increases in the low- to mid-teens every three to four years, with regulators eventually approving less. In 2007, a rate hike drove the average bill up 9.4 percent. In 2009, the rate hike increased bills by 6.6 percent.

The PUC typically puts a stay on proposed increases and schedules public hearings and an investigation into the need for the additional revenue and profit. Mr. Popowsky said his office would file a formal complaint.

"It's a big increase and we need to take a good look at it," Mr. Popowsky said.

Published: May 4, 2011

Pennsylvania American Water has proposed double-Digit hikes in water rates and customer charges, which would push customers' bills up 13 percent or more- a portion of which would be used to expand the Utility's profit margin.

Read More: PA American Water Seeks Higher Rates, Greater Profits From Customers

Outrage is everywhere!

Around 100 cleansing workers at the Sita base in Kirklees are out on strike today (Wednesday) over alleged bullying and intimidation by management of such an extent that even the police have had to become involved.  The workers operate the waste tips which were outsourced out to Sita by the council.
 
The 24-hour strike, which began at midnight, is the first of three days of walkouts as exasperated workers seek to force senior managers at the company to get to grips with the culture of fear at its Kirklees operation.
 
According to the workers’ union, Unite, problems began three years ago when poor handling of personnel cases at the site indicated that proper procedures were being bypassed with the union being advised that its attempts represent members would be disregarded without any consideration.  A catalogue of similar HR abuses, including accusations of theft by a worker, the use of CCTV to harass workers, the production of allegedly falsified documentation to build cases against workers and the threat of sacking unless a grievance by a worker was withdrawn followed.
 
The workforce eventually balloted for action after one colleague had been locked into an office by his manager and had to call the police to ask to be released. One manager has also made clear to other colleagues that one of his aims was to break the union at Kirklees.
 
Regional officer Bev Clarkson explained further: “Quite clearly, management at Sita cannot manage. It is simply staggering that in this day and age one manager thought it acceptable to lock a colleague into an office in order to resolve an HR matter or that it is acceptable to falsify evidence against workers.  The commonplace use of foul language when addressing workers degrades management, the workers and the company.  These are people’s livelihoods we’re talking about – and incompetent, devious management is putting these at risk.
 
“Trust and faith in the Kirllees management have collapsed altogether. Workers have been forced into strike action just to be listened to.  Workers who have never taken a day’s sick leave in their life and would rather be fully fit doing their jobs are now going absent with work-related stress.  One colleague, accused of theft by management forced into disciplinary to clear his name, which he did, was still given a final written warning.  Understandably, he then resigned.  Another colleague was harassed to the extent that he had a breakdown and ended up in hospital.  CCTV cameras are pointed at workers’ cars all day in the hope that management may find something to attack them with.  The list goes on and on.
 
“Sita management has to understand that it cannot treat its employees like this.  It is inhumane and unproductive.”

Unite is calling for Sita to take immediate and forceful action to halt the abuses, improve management practice at the site and restore the workers’ trust in the company.

The strike today is the first of three days of action with two further days set for Wednesday, 4 May and Monday 9 May.
 
The picket lines are at Emerald Street, Huddersfield; Mab Lane, Birstall; Weaving Lane, Thornhill; Bentley Road, Meltham; Bromely Farm, Upper Cumberworth; Vine Street, Huddersfield, all in Kirklees.

As many of you may know, the UWUA represents several hundred workers at United Water facilities around the country.  A subsidiary of Suez Environnement – a multi-national French corporation - United Water has jumped into the worker-bashing mode by demanding major concessions from all our affiliated locals who bargain with them, including taking away the pension plan and post-retirement medical benefits from new employees.  We now have 3 expired contracts  with United, and a fourth on the verge.  But our members are not the only ones being exploited and abused by a Suez Environnement  affiliate and the US environment is not the only one being trashed.

Around 100 garbage workers at the Sita base in Kirklees in the north of England are out on strike this week over alleged bullying and intimidation by management of such an extent that even the police have had to become involved.  The workers operate the garbage dumps recently contracted out by the city council. The 24-hour strike, which began at midnight, is the first of three days of walkouts.

Company abuses include constant serveillance of workers with CCTV cameras, false accusations of theft, threatening workers with being fired for filing grievances and not withdrawing them, and even threatening to break the union.  The final straw that drove the workers to take strike action was when one of them was locked in a room by management and he had to call the police in order to get released.

The workers are represented by the British union, Unite, which is the largest union in the UK. Unite Regional officer Bev Clarkson, in explaining the strike action, noted that, “Sita management has to understand that it cannot treat its employees like this.  It is inhumane and unproductive.”

Maybe that is a lesson sister company United Water in the US could learn as well.

Read More: ‘Staggering’ Abuse and Culture of Fear Brings Workers Out at Sita 

As you know, we have raised a complaint through the ICEM and PSI concerning United Water’s disregard of its environmental stewardship responsibilities under the Global Framework Agreement executed by GDF SUEZ. United Water is a subsidiary of Suez Environnement.

I am now writing to bring to your attention an ongoing labor dispute between the UWUA and United Water, and to urge that all ICEM and PSI affiliates representing GDF SUEZ and Suez Environnement employees be notified about this dispute. In particular, I would be grateful if you could request that the relevant ICEM and PSI affiliates register strong complaints with Suez management about United Water’s anti-worker conduct in the U.S., and also that this matter be brought to the attention of the European Works Council for discussion with officials of the parent corporation.

This dispute involves United Water’s demands to impose severe concessions in union workers’ retirement security and benefits. The UWUA’s collective agreements with this company have expired at two locations – in Pennsylvania and New Jersey – as a direct result of these concessionary demands. United Water is demanding similar concessions in bargaining at a third location in Delaware, and we expect management to insist on the same takeaway demands when negotiations open at a fourth location in New York in April.

In particular, United Water is demanding the elimination of the existing retirement plan for all new employees, and instead to substitute a grossly inadequate “defined contribution” plan which would severely curtail the employer’s contributions to employees’ future retirement benefits. We believe this demand to cut the retirement plan for a new employee is a prelude to eventually eliminating the retirement plan for all existing employees.

United Water is also demanding the complete elimination of all post-retirement healthcare benefits for new hires.

Employees in Pennsylvania and New Jersey have overwhelmingly voted to reject management’s alleged “last, best, and final” offers, and are now working without a contract. Negotiations are continuing in all three locations, with no sign that United Water is prepared to abandon its concessionary demands.

These company proposals are completely unacceptable to the UWUA, and represent one of the worst attacks by any U.S. utility employer on the future retirement security of working families in the U.S. Indeed, it is ironic that this assault on workers’ retirement benefits is being waged by a subsidiary of a European corporation that projects an image of maintaining enlightened social and labor relations policies in the other countries in which it conducts business.

As mentioned above, the UWUA requests that our dispute with United Water be brought to the attention of all ICEM and PSI affiliates that represent GDF SUEZ and Suez Environnement employees, with an urgent request for appropriate actions in solidarity with our members at United Water.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter, and please let me know if I can provide additional information.

Sincerely,

D. Michael Langford
National President
Utility Workers Union of America