Parents fighting for kids; SEIU fighting for more money

June 5, 2013

By Katy Grimes


SACRAMENTO — A modest rally at the Capitol this morning supporting a state audit of Child Protective Services competed with a humongous rally held by the SEIU.

On the South steps of the Capitol, the CPS audit rally was made up of parents and families who are victims of overly aggressive Child Protective Services divisions.

On the West steps of the Capitol, the SEIU rally was made up of thousands of purple t-shirt-wearing SEIU members demanding raises. Their t-shirts were made up for today’s rally and said “2013 CONTRACT TOUR.” The back of the t-shirt said “YOUR CONTRACT STARTS WITH YOU,” and listed the cities for the SEIU “Townhall Circuit” for 2013 contract negotiations.

Yet what should have overshadowed the small gathering of emotional parents, did not. Although, the contrast was stark.

It was mothers and fathers who said their children had been stolen from them by Child Protective Services, versus well-compensated state employees balking at Gov. Jerry Brown telling SEIU and other labor unions currently embroiled in bargaining talks, that new labor contracts need to be “cost-neutral.”


SEIU members walking al around the Capitol said “we do not lead ‘cost-neutral’ lives, and we will not end this contract without money.” Apparently they were regurgitating what SEIU Local 1000 president Yvonne Walker just said this morning in a press release.

Walker said that Brown rejected a proposed pay increase across the board for Local 1000 members and nine other union proposals.

“It is clearer than ever that the most important thing members can do to win a better contract is to project power at our June 5 rally at the Capitol,” the local SEIU website says about today’s rally for the 2013 contract.

“Most of our bargaining team spent the afternoon visiting worksites in the Sacramento area to encourage members to attend our June 5 ‘I’m All In’ rally on the west steps of the state Capitol,” the SEIU website said.” Our bargaining team is making it a priority to go out to talk to members so they know how important it is to attend. If you haven’t already signed up, we need you to make it a priority to be at the June 5 ‘I’m All In’ rally.”

From big labor to big families

At the CPS rally, mothers cried as they told the growing crowd about having their babies snatched from their arms by CPS workers for no apparent reason.


I recently wrote a story about Anna and Alex Nikolayev who ran up against CPS — Sacramento family fights seizure of child by CPS.

Only a few weeks ago in Sacramento, the Nikolayev’s (pictured at right) took baby Samuel Nikolayev to Sutter Memorial Hospital with a high fever, and were told they couldn’t leave until they agreed to allow the hospital do open heart surgery on Samuel. The doctors and nurses became hostile and threatened to call CPS when the Nikolayev’s requested a second opinion. Samuel was born with a heart murmur, and may need surgery, but the fever had nothing to do with his condition, according to Anna.

Instead, after taking him to a second hospital and receiving a clean bill of health from another doctor, CPS and the police showed up at the Nikolayev’s home the following day and forcibly took Samuel from Anna Nikolayev, after assaulting her husband Alex.

Other horrific stories like the Nikolayev’s were told, before the rally moved into a hearing inside the Capitol.


And while the hearing was going on, the SEIU rally boomed through Capitol windows as speakers ginned up the crowd.

“Teachers understand not being respected,” Dean Vogel, President of the California Teachers Association, told the cheering crowd.

“We demand these freedoms, dignity and respect!” Yvonne Walker, president of the SEIU Local 1000, yelled to the crowd. “The fight is on!”

Around the corner on the South Steps of the Capitol, Assemblyman Tim Donnelly said the purpose of the CPS audit request was to ask the agency, “What are you doing with the power we have given you?”


Write a comment
  1. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 5 June, 2013, 15:46

    How come the purple t-shirts in pictures only come in XXXL size?

    Reply this comment
  2. jimmydeeoc
    jimmydeeoc 5 June, 2013, 15:51

    LOL……GD you, Ulysses!

    I looked at the top pic and thought something very similar. Maybe morea long the lines of “I have yet to see a svelte purple-shirted SEIU member”

    Reply this comment
  3. jimmydeeoc
    jimmydeeoc 5 June, 2013, 16:37

    Though it’s quite predictable, if you think about it. In the main, what career goals and ambitions do government SEIU members have? Probably not much more than “Just show up. No additional effort needed.”

    It translates to their approach to life in general, I am sure. Just show up. No added effort needed. So when many of them develop a prominent dickie-doo (as in: “My belly sticks out farther than my dickie do”…LOL LOL) I guess we shouldn’t be surprised.

    Reply this comment
  4. us citizen
    us citizen 5 June, 2013, 17:08


    Reply this comment
  5. Broke State Worker
    Broke State Worker 5 June, 2013, 20:18

    You people are IGNORANT!!! State workers have not had a simple cost of living increase in over 12 years and have been hardest hit with cuts and furloughs! Several of my coworkers (living in higher cost of living) technically qualify for HOUSING ASSISTANCE on this pay! Even McDonald’s workers have received cost of living increases … Even Republican Controlled States have granted cost of living! California should be ashamed!!! I have a college degree and can’t afford to have my child on the states medical plan. Our workloads are out of control. And by the way, people don’t have their children taken away for no reason without cause!!

    Reply this comment
  6. SkippingDog
    SkippingDog 5 June, 2013, 22:59

    Katy – When you describe the turnout as “a modest rally,” does that mean only two or three people showed up? That’s sure what your photo looks like.

    Reply this comment
  7. alan
    alan 6 June, 2013, 07:18

    I have heard an argument being made that teachers teach better when they are not worried about their retirement so in fact it does benefit the kids. I dont agree but expect that to be floated..

    Reply this comment
  8. Steve Mehlman
    Steve Mehlman 6 June, 2013, 08:43

    Pretty slick, Katy, taking two rallies dealing with two completely different issues and trying to juxtapose them to make it seem that state workers don’t care about kids. Of course, it’s total BS.

    Maybe you can explain to me how not giving rank-and-file state workers a raise in more than a decade, forcing them to take furloughs and cutting their benefits “helps” children, especially their own.

    The sad thing is that you righties refuse to acknowledge that public employees are “real” people with real families to support; that they pay taxes like the rest of us and support their local economies. You would have us believe that when a public employee loses his or her job, it doesn’t add to the numbers of unemployed and doesn’t hurt the local economy.

    Reply this comment
  9. jimmydeeoc
    jimmydeeoc 6 June, 2013, 10:17

    The sad thing you lefties fail to understand is that when a public employee loses his or her job it DOES NOT hurt the local economy, as the marginal income retained by the taxpayer is used for an extra dinner at a local restaurant, or to help pay for a car for the taxpayer’s high schooler, or to buy a few extra shares of Apple stock perhaps.

    The sheer ignorance of the Left on basic economic principles is staggering (recall the former House Speaker’s comment on unemployment). Maybe it’s because so few of you took any economics in college but instead immersed yourselves in the “therapy curriculum” as Victor Davis Hanson puts it (After all…..math is hard…

    Forget about beating you people over the head with a 2×4 to pound some sense into you……we need a sledgehammer.

    Reply this comment
  10. Another Broke State Worker
    Another Broke State Worker 6 June, 2013, 15:15

    Jimmy – I have 2 college degrees … One in political science, the other in economics, therefore I can honestly say, you’re [wrong]!!! State employees including those that guard your prisons and those that sell 4 Billion dollars at the CA State Lottery to help our communities have not had cost of living pay increases. I can earn Much more working in private sector – but am not driven by much money, just a fair amount to live on and support my family.

    Reply this comment
  11. Kathy
    Kathy 6 June, 2013, 15:35

    Real abuse takes place because there is no oversight even the police have oversight . They must have a case with cps all you have to be is accused or suspected it is run by money . We are bankrupting ourselves and not serving kids that are abused. You want to know where your union can get money have govt spend it correctly

    Reply this comment
  12. Tough Love
    Tough Love 6 June, 2013, 15:35

    What we should do … Step-By-Step:

    (A) —- The State should do a side-by-side comparison of the pensions promised these SEIU workers and those of typical Private sector workers assuming the SAME pay, the SAME years of service and the SAME age at retirement. Then deduct the accumulated value (with investment earnings) of any REAL employee contributions for both the Public and Private Sector worker to get he net EMPLOYER-PAID pension cost.

    When one realizes the VERY high cost of

    (a) the much richer formula,
    (b) the MUCH younger full (unreduced) retirement age,
    (c) the inclusion of post retirement COLA increases,
    (d) the MUCH more liberal definition of “pensionable compensation”,
    (e) etc. etc, etc

    it’s not hare to see how the Public Sector worker’s pension ALWAYS comes out 2-4 times (5+ times for safety workers) greater in value at retirement than that of the comparable Private Sector worker.

    (B) — Next, we should do a similar analysis for any Retire heathcare subsidies promised the Public and Private Sector workers, noting that

    (a) While such subsidies are virtually universal, and often a high (even 100% in some cases) percentage of the total cost in the Public Sector, VERY few Private Sector employers subsidize retiree healthcare any longer, and of the diminishing number that still do, most often, they pay a very modest share of the costs.
    (b) Healthcare costs grow rapidly with attained age, and 55-64 year olds use MUCH more healthcare services than say 30-39 year olds. Therefore, pre-age-65 (and not Medicare-eligible) retirees have VERY high costs. Since it is VERY common for Public Sector workers to retire in the 50’s, their pre-Medicare health costs are very expensive ….. and typically hundreds of thousands of dollars (and often doubling it if other family members are covered as well) … vs almost ZERO for the Private sector worker (who rarely gets any employer subsidy).

    (C) — Next we should determine the value of any miscellaneous benefits, life insurance subsidies, disability insurance subsidies, transportation allowances, etc.

    (D) — Next we should determine “cash pay.”

    (E) — Next, we should (separately for the Public and Private worker) express each of the pensions/benefits in (A), (B), and (C) as a level annual percentage of “cash pay” (the item in (D)) sufficient to fund that pension/benefit over the working career of the employee, using reasonable but conservative assumptions (so as to have a high probability that the pension/benefit is FULLY funded by the time that employee retires).

    (F) — Since a reasonable (i.e., intelligent, non-greedy) person should agree that EQUAL Public and Private Sector “Total Compensation” (“cash pay”, plus pensions, plus benefits) in comparable jobs (or jobs with comparable risks, educational requirements, knowledge, and skill sets if not directly comparable) is a fair and appropriate goal, we should …. separately for the Public and Private Sector worker ….. add to “cash pay” from item (D), the level annual % of pay values for pensions and benefits from item (E). The result is “Total Compensation” separately, for the comparable Public and Private Sector worker.

    (G) —- If the SEIU worker’s “Total Compensation” from (F) is lower than that of comparable Private Sector workers, it should indeed be raised to that level. Under the same (very FAIR) logic, If the SEIU worker’s “Total Compensation” from (F) is greater than that of comparable Private Sector workers, it should be lowered to that level. In the latter case, it’s clear that doing so (actually LOWERING their compensation) is, shall we say “complicated”. In that situation the Public Sector worker’s “cash pay” should be frozen until (with the expected growth in Private Sector “Total Compensation” over time) the Public Sector “Total Compensation” equals that of the comparable Private Sector worker.

    Readers …… For WHICH (the Public or Private Sector) worker do you think “Total Compensation” (as determined by my above-outlined steps) will come out higher, and by how much (expressed as a level % of “cash pay”) ?

    Reply this comment
  13. eatingdogfood
    eatingdogfood 6 June, 2013, 18:05

    If The Democrats Didn’t Give ” Sweetheart Deals ” To Your Public Service Union.
    Goon Employees To Get Reelected; You Would Have Plenty Of Money and The.
    Taxpayer would have Some Spare Change in His Pockets! Democratic Hustler
    Politicians + Corrupt Union Goons = BANKRUPTCY BABY! Time To Bring.
    RICO Conspiracy Charges Against The Hustler Corrupt Democrats and the.
    Criminal Unions!

    Reply this comment
  14. Donkey
    Donkey 6 June, 2013, 18:21

    TL, do you really think the RAGWUS feeders can even absorb the information you just posted? You lost them with the first (A).

    I however appreciate the post and the knowledge it contains. 🙂

    Reply this comment
  15. Steve Mehlman
    Steve Mehlman 6 June, 2013, 20:02

    jimmydeeoc, Not only are you heartless, you probably flunked high school math.

    When a public employee is working, he and his family spend most of their income in the local community, at shops, stores, gas stations, restaurants, etc. When they get laid off or furloughed, local merchants lose that money because the family no longer has it to spend.

    As usual, you only think of yourself. The minute amount of money the taxpayer saves by throwing a public employee out of work will hardly pay for a burger at a fast food joint. But you don’t mind screwing a public employee and his family so you can get that extra burger. That’s the definition of greedy.

    Reply this comment
  16. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 6 June, 2013, 20:55

    Frankly….the ruling class could care less what Californians face, think, do. Epistles are soothing for writers. Keep feeling good….just pay your fees and taxes.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Fresh evidence that Jerry Brown’s pension fix fixed little

July 10, 2013 By Chris Reed The aura of self-congratulation surrounding the governor’s office is particularly intense when it comes

Despite strong profits, Farmer Bros. gives up on CA

A highly profitable coffee distribution and production company with deep roots in Los Angeles County and a national clientele is

LAO raises doubts about teachers’ pension bailout

A new report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office is raising questions about the long-term effectiveness of the Legislature’s 2014