Epstein questions TWU on CBA and benefits, defends stable visit
Epstein responds to criticism from Dr. Cook about his stable visit, defends his right to disagree, and questions whether there's a collective bargaining agreement (none) and medical insurance (none beyond dental/optical). He expresses concern about the adversarial approach.
Thank you, Chair Shulman.
And yeah, I did visit and I raised concerns there.
And you say I crucified you because I disagreed with you.
You know, we have a right to disagree about issues.
You know, I'd want to, you know, again, like I said, I made an offer to visit and I did and made a decision that I think is an important bill.
I want to thank Councilmember Marte for sponsoring it.
And I just want to reiterate with the speakers that we've talked a lot about e-bikes and we had a hearing on the last mile bill about the Amazon trucks on the street.
We already did a lot of things you're referencing to talk about these issues.
So I think the council, in the short month, the six months that this speaker's been speaker, we've taken a lot of these issues on.
This is a hearing about getting feedback from people, and I don't, I mean, it's important, you know, that we hear what your perspective is.
We're allowed to have perspectives based on the information we have, and, you know, I think the characterization, I feel deeply troubling the way you've characterized this as we're not willing to visit, we're crucifying you, we're not talking to the union.
I met with Sam Newsom myself, and I talked to him about this issue.
So I think, you know, I really take issue with this, the way you all are talking about us.
I want to talk about the people who are working in the industry.
I'm understanding.
So there's no CBA in effect, right?
They have no CBA, right?
Who are you talking to?
Anyone, whoever, you or the person who's your delegate.
So, as I stated earlier, there is no CBA.
Right.
That's why we're here speaking with you because, you know.
Right.
No, there's CBA and you said there's no medical insurance, right?
When you say medical insurance provided by Local 100?
Yes.
No, there's no medical insurance other than we have the ability to offer them dental and optical because that's what's under our purview.
And do they pay the dental and optical or does it come through their dues?
So I don't have that information in front of me and I don't know how many people are in the dental and optical plan and I quite honestly don't know why it would concern you.
I just want to know the benefits that people have of being a member of the union.
They're paying dues.
So the benefits of being a member of a union is what I'm doing right now and advocating for them.
Great.
That's what unions are.
Okay, I appreciate that saying that.
If the crowd doesn't like it, I'm sorry, but this is what we do.
So my father, you know, actually, it is a respectful way.
My father was...
I was just clapping.
Yeah, my father was a president of the union.
I was a shop steward when I was in the union.
I respect the unions.
I'm a chair of a committee that works on you.
Were you a part of?
I was a legal aid lawyer and legal services lawyer, local 2320, UAW.
Okay.
Did you have benefits?
I did have benefits, and I worked full-time.
Did you?
You pay for them?
I pay through my dues.
Listen, wait.
I want to stop this right now.
The panelists are not to ask questions of the council members.
I am telling you now.
If you do, you'll be asked to leave.
So let me just finish this.
Let me just finish this so I can ask questions, actually.
Yes, yes.
So I want to be clear.
How many of these members do you have in total?
How many members do I have in total?
I represent 150.
150.
How many of those are full-time, work full-time versus part-time?
I do not have that information in front of me.
I'm just asking a question.
If I represented one of them, I would be here today.
So I really view your approach to be deeply troubling and adversarial in a way.
You have your opinion.
I'm just asking you a question.
You know, you can just say whatever.
I'm allowed to speak.
You can answer the question any way you want.
I'm happy to talk to you after the fact.
But I'm just explaining that this, you know, oppositional adversarial approach is maybe not the ideal situation in a hearing.
So 150 members, you don't know how many are full or part-time.
And what are the dues that the people who are the members pay versus the owners of the stores?
How much time is Councilmember Epstein going to get?
He's finishing up a question.
So, again, as I stated earlier, I don't have the treasury report in front of me.
I don't see the relevance of how many people are paying or what they're paying or what they're doing.
So you may call it adversarial.
I don't see the point in anything you're saying at all.
Chair, I really appreciate the time.
Thank you very much.
All right.
Thank you.