News
The truth has no defense against a fool determined to believe a lie
 – Mark Twain 

November 24, 2021
 
Dear Region 2 Members,
 
As many of you have already received, there is an email circulating with the intent to divide, create doubt, misconstrue the truth, and derail bargaining. Words of concern expressed are empty buzz words when accompanied by false information, ill intent speculation, and lack of action. The definition of anti union is to be opposed to or hostile towards labor unions. When reading these types of anti-union missives, members should always question the motive. Here are the facts not mentioned in the message:
 
VRI
 
VRI became a reality when Judicial Council adopted VRI as an appropriate vehicle to expand language access in 2018. In the current MOU that was agreed in 2017, the bargaining committee who negotiated the MOU knew and understood that VRI was imminent. In fact, the current MOU already allows for VRI (see article 19, section 9, pages 13 and 14).

In the event that the Region makes the initial decision to implement Video Remote Interpreting for spoken language, the parties agree to reopen the MOU Article 19 Assignments and Article 20 Cross Assignments. The Region shall provide CFI with not fewer than 90 days advance written notice of its decision and provide to CFI the opportunity to meet and confer regarding the impacts of the decision prior to the implementation of the decision.

Since 2018, Region 2 Courts have requested to meet and confer numerous times over VRI impacts and the Union has found every excuse possible to avoid the meet and confer. In 2019, the Union requested to reopen wage bargaining after the Region 2 Courts requested a meet and confer over VRI and threaten imposition if no dates were provides. Throughout the wage re-opener, CFI’s bargaining committee refused to engage discussions of VRI.
 
After the wage re-opener failed because the Region 2 Courts refused to bargain virtually at the onset of the pandemic, the Region 2 Courts again sent the Union a request to meet and confer over VRI impacts on August 2020. In their request, the Region 2 Courts informed the Union of their intent to imposed VRI on November 24, 2020 if no dates where provided. The Region 2 Courts offered the Union to adopt the same VRI agreement as Region 3 and 4.
 
On November 23, 2020, the Region 2 elected representative and bargaining team member, Kristina Ramsey, engaged in negotiations with the Chair of the Region 2 Courts, CEO Kim Turner, without the knowledge, authorization, and vote of the Region 2 members and the CFI Executive Board. Ramsey offered the Region 2 Courts to extend the MOU without a wage increase and delay VRI. The Board was informed of the dealings on November 24th. The Region 2 Courts responded with a willingness to extend the MOU with no wage increase and refused to delay VRI.
 
If VRI is a big concern, why did the signers of the letter, whom many were on the wage re-opener and the bargaining committee who quit, not engage in negotiating VRI impacts when they had the chance? They had plenty of opportunities. Why are they not joining the mobilization to ensure proper VRI safeguards? We all know that the only way we can get wage increases and good working conditions is by work actions. Is anger and their belief in punishing the Union more important than their concern for VRI?
 
Sabotage?
 
In September 2020, Region 2 members elected both the Region 2 Representative and the bargaining committee. The responsibility of the Representative is to represent the interest of the members before the Executive Board. However, there was never any intention to represent members in good faith. The elected Representative never called any meetings to listen to member concerns, never provided information, and never connected with stewards. The Bargaining Committee’s responsibility is to represent the members interest in bargaining. The Bargaining Committee failed to reached out to members, never held meetings, rarely provided updates, and never made any attempts to mobilize members. How is this representation in good faith?
 
In the few updates that the Bargaining Committee did provide to members, the Bargaining Committee took the opportunity to further their negativity.  Members reached out to Bonded Officers with concerns regarding the lack of representation and disconnect. The Bonded Officers asked and encouraged the Representative and Bargaining Committee numerous times to send updates, hold meetings, and connect with members only to be accused of interfering.
 
On February 22, 2021, the Bargaining Committee sent out an update to the membership. In that update, the Bargaining Committee informed members that bargaining was scheduled to start on March 22nd when in truth, bargaining was scheduled to start March 5th. The Bargaining Committee quit February 26.
 
If there is concerns that the current Bargaining Committee will be making concessions, why are they not joining mobilization? Why are they not encouraging members to be supportive? With strong work actions, we can have both, better wages and proper VRI safeguards.
 
Punishing the Union
 
Members are the Union. The individual who filed charges against the expelled members has retired. Most of the CWA leaders at the time of the charges and trials have also retired. So who is being punished? The answer is obvious, members are being punished. Why?
 
I am certain that all members will agree that we all acknowledge the hurt that was caused and the need for healing. It is in that spirit of healing that we have not closed our ears to non-member voices and their concerns have always been considered. What happen in the past, has happened. Should the membership continue paying the consequences?
 
There is a path for expelled members to come back to the Union. The path is simple. Any expelled member who wishes to come back needs to send a message to the Local requesting to come back. Upon receipt, the Board is obligated to take the issue to the membership for a vote. If the membership votes to allow expelled members to come back, the Bonded Officers will reach out to CWA and request that these individuals names be added to the CWA yearly conference agenda. At the conference, CFI delegates will present the reasons why CWA should allow members to return. Discussion on the matter will take place and a vote will follow. Expelled members will be welcomed  back once the CWA delegation votes to approve.
 
No Concessions and No Quitting
 
By nature, bargaining is a collective effort. Anyone who is has been involved in bargaining can tell you that there is lots of discussion, brainstorming, listening, and collaboration. Bargaining is always difficult and stressful. Bargaining during a pandemic has been twice as difficult. Instead of being negative, I encourage all to reach out to the Region 2 members who quickly reached out and made the commitment to step in and take the place of the Bargaining Committee who quit, and be supportive. Instead of insisting to keep the past hurts alive, let the healing begin by setting aside our differences and working together for a better future. No one wins when there is division.
 
There will be no concessions on VRI in order to get a better wage. As we have continuously said, we will not agree to any harmful VRI. Keep in mind that the Region 2 Courts can impose any bargaining  article where an agreement is not reached. If all Region 2 employees want better wages and strong VRI safeguards, pick up a sign and join the movement. Actions speak louder than words. Actions prove that concerns are sincere.
 
I have provided a timeline of events for you to be informed. If anyone would like to see supporting documentation, send an email, and we will gladly provide it.
 
In Solidarity,
 
Janet Hudec, VP
CFI Local 39000
 
 
Timeline
 
-  CFI and Region 2 courts entered into MOU for the term September 25, 2017 through September 30, 2020.  That MOU included a wage re-opener  that required the Employer to negotiate wages and other compensation with CFI at CFI’s request on or after July 1, 2019. The MOU also included language to re-open bargaining for VRI and Cross Assignments.
 
-  Between December 2018 to May 2019, the Region 2 courts requested dates to bargain VRI impacts. CFI found ways to avoid providing dates.
 
-  May 30, 2019, the Region 2 courts informed CFI that if no dates are provided to bargain VRI impacts, VRI will be imposed within 30 days. CFI avoided the imposition by requesting to re-open bargaining wages.
 
-  On August 27, 2019 CFI officially informed the Region 2 courts of their intent to re-open bargaining for wages. Attorney Laurie Burgess becomes CFI bargaining spokesperson. Region 2 Courts inform that they also want to bargain VRI. As usual, negotiations where difficult. The 2019-2020 CFI bargaining committee faced a ZERO wage increase offer and VRI. The bargaining committee said NO to negotiating VRI prior to agreeing to a wage increase. No movement in bargaining. Negotiations were going nowhere.
 
-  Covid-19 cases started appearing in the US. CFI sent out letters to all courts requesting to meet and confer regarding PPE. Executive Board members and stewards began reaching out to members and meeting with courts to discuss PPE prior to pandemic being declared.
 
-  Pandemic is declared on March 12, 2020. Region 2 courts refused to bargain virtually. Bargaining team through spokesperson Laurie informed that CFI was ready to continue bargaining virtually. Region 2 courts said no. Region 2 courts never provided dates. CFI bargaining team stop insisting, stopped bargaining, and quietly disappeared. An Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) charge was filed against the Region 2 Courts.
 
-  CFI Board and stewards focused on pandemic, stay at home orders, court closures, paid leave, PPE, interpreters working conditions, and remote work during pandemic.
 
-  June 2020, CFI President Michael Ferreira, timely notified the Region 2 Courts our intention to bargain a successor MOU. This was done to preserve retroactive pay requested in the wage re-opener ULP, keep VRI impacts within MOU bargaining, and to preserve Region 2 members rights to bargain in case Pandemic conditions improved.
 
-  In July and August call for nominations and elections were held to fill Region 2 Representative vacant position and to form a new bargaining committee.
 
-  August 24, 2020 The Region 2 courts sent CFI a letter requesting a meet and confer over VRI. The Region courts informed CFI that if no response, the Region will impose VRI on November 24th. In the letter, the Region courts offer the same VRI language as Region 3 and 4.
 
-  September 8, 2020, Kristina Ramsey is elected to be representative and elected to serve in the bargaining committee. New bargaining committee is established.
 
-  November 23, 2020 Kristina Ramsey called the Region courts chair, Kim Turner, and made an agreement to roll over the MOU for a year, keep the status quo, and not bargain VRI without a membership vote and without Board authorization. The Board was informed on Nov 24th.
 
-  In February 22, 2021. CFI bargaining committee lied to members about when bargaining starts March 22, 2021. Bargaining committee lied, bargaining was set for March 5th. Message was authored by Mary Lou Aranguren (author’s name is seen in the properties of the document).
 
-  February 26, 2021. Bargaining committee quits.
 
-  March 5, 2021. CFI starts bargaining with new committee.
 
-  July 23, 2021. Region 2 Representative quits.

 

CFI UPDATE REGARDING RETURN TO WORK ON SITE

Recently, after months of providing remote interpreting services from home, interpreters received a memorandum from LASC Administration informing them that their remote assignment would be ending on Friday, November 5, 2021, and that they were to return to work on site at their regularly assigned courthouse starting November 8, 2021. Floaters were told that the Assignment Office would contact them with their assignment.

Interpreters were also instructed to bring their court-issued cell phones “in the event that simultaneous interpretation is requested”.  They were told that it was not necessary to bring their laptops on site “until further notice”.  Subsequent to this memorandum, interpreters received another email instructing them to bring their cell phones and laptops to work in order to “provide simultaneous interpretation for litigants who are appearing remotely before the Court”.

Interpreters were advised that if they were to experience any impediment while providing these services, they were to bring those issues to the attention of the Court or their supervisor and management team so the matter could be resolved.

The intention of the Court Administration to have Court Interpreters continue to do remote interpreting from a court location is a distinct change in practice in the way we carry out our job duties and brings with it its own problems and impediments as recognized in the memorandum from Administration on November 10, 2021.  As such, under Article 18 of our MOU, the Court is required to give the Union 150 days of advance notice of its intentions.  No such notification was given. 

On Friday, November 12, 2021, CFI met with LASC Administration to discuss Management’s directive to Interpreters to bring remote equipment to work, in anticipation of being assigned to interpret remotely while on site, in person, at the Courthouses.  Michael Ferreira, CFI President, started the conversation by telling Administration that there would be no “pussyfooting around” and that CFI would get right to the point.  He stated that the Court and CFI signed a side letter agreement on July 20, 2020, because LASC had no VRI agreement which allowed interpreters to work from home during the pandemic.  This agreement gave the Court the right to request remote work in venues outside the courthouses.  CFI stated that the agreement was successful in that it allowed approximately 80 interpreters to work from home during the pandemic, thus protecting those who were high-risk and helping those interpreters with dependent care issues. The Court had asserted that when the Covid Emergency Order was lifted, things would go back to the way they were done before -- they had no intention of modifying our working conditions.

It was reiterated that this side agreement only allowed for remote interpreting FROM HOME, and if Administration wanted interpreters to work remotely on site, it was necessary to “go back to the drawing board” to draw up another agreement.

Mike explained that the equipment we have been given is not suitable for work on site, and that interpreters are being put into situations where they cannot live up to their professional oath.  Interpreters are also being blamed for slowing down Court proceedings.  Although Amy Blust sent out a memo instructing interpreters to speak up when there are impediments to carrying out their job duties, stating that indeed, it was required by our Code of Ethics to do so, Mike stated that the frequency of the obstacles and problems in performing our work has become more of the rule than the exception.

It was also brought up during our meeting that certain discriminatory practices had been observed since interpreters have returned to work on site: in the Catalina Court all staff returned to work on site while the interpreter was told to interpret remotely from the Long Beach Courthouse; in Children’s Court the opposite happened in a virtual courtroom on site where all participants appeared virtually with the interpreter being the only one present in person.

The Union also explained that some courthouses lend themselves very appropriately to the hearings being done remotely, in particular Children’s Court which generally has a large number of participants present for every case.  Victoria Rea spoke of some of the specifics of dealing with remote interpretation issues done on site.

Administration responded to CFI’s arguments by asserting that Telework and remote work are synonymous and that the July 2, 2020 agreement identifies and allows remote interpreting in the courthouses.  They contend that there is no need for another agreement allowing interpreters to do remote work on site.  They stated that at this time ALL employees must appear on site and that there are no remote assignments available.

Amy Blust said they would do a follow up on the situations reported in Catalina and Children’s Court.  She added that the expectation is that all hearings in Children’s Court will be conducted as they were before, but using laptops, headphones, and cell phones.

The point is not whether there may be some way for some form of remote interpreting from a location on site at a courthouse to be appropriate and feasible. Rather, the addition of remote interpreting to the Interpreter Unit’s work is something that must be negotiated with the Union to protect the membership from potential negative impacts such as the increased cognitive and auditory difficulties inherent in remote work, or the burden of carrying the Court’s equipment back and forth between home and workplace every day, and being responsible for the safety of this expensive equipment during daily transport and on site in locations that may not be secure from public access.  It is also essential to ascertain that any new technology added to the way interpretation is delivered is adequate to ensure that interpreters are able to provide reliable language access at the level of accuracy required by our Code of Ethics. 

Although Management rightly encourages interpreters to report any impediment to our ability to deliver a complete and accurate interpretation, working conditions for interpreters must conform to a level of standards under which the need to report an impediment would only rarely arise. Impediments should be the exception. The hit-or-miss approach Management has taken in extending this onsite remote work directive, in violation of our MOU, opens the door to a variety of ways in which the ability of interpreters to comply with our Code of Ethics in the delivery of our services is compromised. 

The triage-style remote work put in place during the pandemic to enable interpretation services to continue while protecting lives, was adequate for emergency circumstances. The technology currently in use is inadequate for routine use in a number of the contexts in which it has been employed on an emergency basis, and even for the types of event for which the current technology could be adequate, the work environment necessities and protocols have not yet been addressed through the required Meet and Confer process.

The Union has filed a Grievance (see link) and an Unfair Labor Practice charge. Nevertheless, Unit members are encouraged to comply with Management’s directive in the interim while these issues are being processed through the Grievance and the ULP. And again, please do not hesitate to speak up and report any impediment you may encounter to your ability to provide a faithful and accurate interpretation.

In Unity,

Mike Ferreira, CFI President
Kathleen Sinclair
Gabrielle Veit-Bermudez
Victoria Rea

 

Region 4 Bargaining Committee Elections Results

 Candidate                    Votes by Percentages

Alejandro Gonzalez          19%

Esther Neblina                 18%

Jacqueline Ruiz                18%

Ricardo Serur                   17%

Nancy Wilson                   14%

Silvia San Martin              13%

 The Region 4 Bargaining Committee members are: Alejandro Gonzalez, Esther Neblina, Jacqueline Ruiz, Ricardo Serur and Nancy Wilson.

 

Notice:

Candidates have requested that the below distribution be made to you via our website.   CFI does not endorse candidates for its offices. This distribution is not an endorsement of a candidate by CFI, nor is CFI responsible for the content of the candidate's campaign literature.

Questions or comments should be directed to the candidate’s email address.

Executive Board Statements

 

President Position

Begonya De Salvo

Dear Colleagues:

I am Begonya De Salvo, and I humbly ask you to vote for me as your new Union President.

Our current Union leaders have done an abysmal job.

They have kept substandard financial records, excluded members from union participation, weakened the union's bargaining position during the pandemic, and have not complied with labor election laws.

Examples:

■ The Union has not disclosed proper financial statements since 2019, and failed to issue "Income and Expense Declarations" four out of the last five years. Union President Michael Ferreira and the other union executives bear responsibility for this appalling recordkeeping. Please read the email statement of Gloria Lindemann, my running mate for Secretary-Treasurer, for more details.

■ Region 2 interpreters are up in arms over the Union's subversion of rank-and-file participation – and allege that President Ferreira and Vice President Janet Hudec excluded their elected representative from contract bargaining, "contrary to Union bylaws and past practice." These allegations are serious – and illustrate the chasm between Union leadership and rank-and-file interpreters.

 ■ President Ferreira and VP Hudec endorsed an outspoken anti-vaxer for "Lead Steward for Region 1." This person is no longer an employee and the steward position now remains unfilled. How can management take us seriously in negotiations when a main player refused to comply with the vaccine mandate and opposed widespread vaccination so critical to workplace safety? 

 ■ President Ferreira and VP Hudec entered into a temporary agreement with the administration that surrendered, until August 2022, all bargaining power during the pandemic. It has now handicapped our efforts to obtain "hero pay" for the health hazards we risked while working in court during the pandemic – even as other court and county employees receive such bonuses. The Union made this decision unilaterally, without consultation from the membership. 

 ■ President Ferreira and VP Hudec excluded me – a Union steward – from "Meet and Confer" negotiations for telework. I was an early advocate for telework – but Ferreira and Hudec claimed I was "not experienced enough" to join the bargaining. But Union leaders have shown that their "experience" doesn’t come hand in hand with good judgment.

■ Ferreira missed the deadline for filing his election statement – and then the election board (comprised of fellow executives) granted him an unwarranted extension. The Union bylaws provide no grounds for bending election rules in such a way.

■ Union leaders have illegally refused to release to me a list of all CFI members – in violation of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. § 481(c). Under this federal law, I have the right to obtain this information, to enable me to reach out to Union members and campaign. For more on how Union leaders are flouting the labor election law, see my website, www.begonyadesalvo.com.

Rank-and-file members are awakening. Members who have never voted before in a union election, or who in the past haven't paid much attention, are going to have a say in our upcoming election. 

We should no longer tolerate this terrible leadership.

Enough is enough. Use your voice and make it heard by voting them out. Vote for my slate, vote for the New Union: Gabriela Mejia for Vice President, Gloria Lindemann for Secretary-Treasurer, and me as your new President – leaders who welcome all voices and who believe in transparency and inclusion.

Very truly yours,

Begonya De Salvo
Candidate for President

 

Vice-President Position

 Janet Hudec

An Interview with Janet Hudec  

1. Why are you running for re-election?

I am running for re-election for various reasons. Primarily to be part of the solution. I want to continue fostering healing from the past, strengthen our unity, empower our stewards and rank and file members, promote teamwork, nourish and encourage new leaders. 

During these past 2 years I have served as an ambassador for our profession. I have the experience and the understanding of the history of our collective journey as interpreters. I passionately believe in this profession and I am always looking for ways to protect and improve it. I am acutely aware of the issues interpreters face at a state, regional, and local level. I am a visionary who is also cognizant of the problems that may arise in the future and know how to lead the Local into future.

2. Why do you think you are the best candidate for the job?

I am the best candidate for the Vice Presidency because I believe that through strong leadership, transparent practices, team collaboration, accountability, and a responsive Union that intelligently and effectively attends to labor representation of its members will make CFI stronger than it has ever been.

I am always willing to listen to anybody, anytime, regardless of opinion. I have a proven record of vigorously advocating, representing, and enforcing the MOU and labor law. I am servant-hearted, hard working, honest, compassionate, trustworthy, team player, and a visionary.  I will work to ensure that our members are represented at all levels. I am not afraid to take a strong stand and tell it like it is when necessary, particularly to court administrators. I bring strong determination and passion to our tireless efforts.

3. During your tenure as Vice President, what have been your accomplishments?

During my tenure I have had many accomplishments. I have prevailed in grievances, unfair labor practices, stopped furloughs, and had success in legislation advocacy. I teamed up with Carmen Ramos to negotiate Covid-19 safety protocols and the restructuring of our budget. But I have also had set backs. 

My biggest accomplishment has been helping my fellow colleague and seeing that in a small way, I was able to make a difference.

4. What is your vision for the Local?

As linguistic professionals, we make a difference, we change lives and outcomes. Although there are differences that separate us, I believe we can still achieve our common goals. Unity is not sameness. Unity is teamwork through collaboration and the respect of our diversity. Greater vigilance is always needed against the forces attacking and undermining our Labor Union and the constitutional right to equal access that jeopardize the civil rights of linguistic minorities. 

I envision a thriving Union where mutual respect among professionals coupled with the accountability that recognizes the distinct interest of each member. Regardless of our opinion, stance, or differences— we are ill-serve when short-sighted motives trumps the steadfast commitment of putting our members interest first.   

5. What are some of the issues that the Local will be facing in the future?

VRI will be an ongoing issue for years to come and I foresee that Judicial Council will be busy trying to pass laws that will allow the broader use of VRI. Courts new approach on VRI and their plan to do away with the stipend when doing VRI in-house. We have a large generation of Interpreters approaching retirement and that will affect staffing levels. Courts continued efforts to discourage employment. Outsourcing. Courts refusal to cross assign across regions. Bargaining. Interpreter Act fixes. Budget/funding. 

Vote Janet Hudec for Vice President. 

Gabriela Mejia 

Dear colleagues,

A couple of weeks ago I decided to open my HOME to a group of colleagues who were excited not just about getting together but to get to know us, the slate that is working very hard to be the NEW UNION.

I decided to open the doors of my home as a symbolism of one of our proposals, to have an Open-door policy, to be inclusive of our members regardless of them being independent or staff and most of all: TRANSPARENCY!

We will be will be absolutely transparent in each and every move and transaction we make. Everything will always be available for our members to see whenever they need or want to.

As your VP, I will support the President in making things happen, and I will continue to reach out to interpreters throughout the state to make sure that their voices are heard and that the things that are important to them are the things that the Union leadership make happen, always with our members interests’ first and with transparency.

Networking is a vital component, not only for the campaign but something that we want to implement from now on. An informed member, makes better decisions and that is why we strongly believe that a Newsletter that comes out periodically and consistently is vital. In our newsletter we will make sure to emphasize the idea of a strong and transparent communication with all our members, communication that will flow in both directions and is easy, open and transparent.

I would be honored to be a servant to the members, I will be there to make their collective ideas come to fruition and  help lead a transition to a more interactive and approachable union that they feel is their own.

Information is power! An informed person is in a much better position to get what he/she wants, I will make sure that it happens. 

Along with Presidential candidate Begonya de Salvo and Secretary Treasurer candidate Gloria Lindemann I am sure we will make the difference that all interpreters want in a Union, YOUR Union, a Union that is not just a few names, a Union that makes you feel that you belong, where you will be included, protected and will be able to give your opinion, agreements and yes, also disagreements, which together we can work on to make this concept not just an abstract one, but a reality.

Together we are better, VOTE! 

I am a person of moral integrity, honesty, transparent and most of all open to new ideas and positive criticism.

Trust me with your vote and I promise I will not disappoint you.

Respectfully,

Gabriela Mejia
VP Candidate

 Silvia San Martin

Testimonials

 “The pandemic put every aspect of our lives into perspective. Our safety was always TOP priority for Silvia. I am voting for her because I have no doubt that she will devote her relentless intensity and drive to improving our working conditions, educating the public and court staff, advocating for fair compensation, expanding support for our union, and coalescing existing members toward one common goal.” Vanessa W., member.

 “Silvia is determined and not afraid to speak her mind. An excellent interpreter who always acts with professionalism and respect.” Gaby V. 

 “Tenacious. Relentless when it comes to fighting for interpreters’ compensation, benefits and working conditions.” Ana F.

 “Silvia has brought change as well as a greater sense of unity.” Sylvia J.

I have served alongside Silvia for the past few years. Silvia is dedicated, professional, and astutely informed in regards to our member's concerns. Silvia's diplomatic approach and level-headedness has served our organization well in these challenging times. I can't think of a better candidate. 
Alejandro González, Steward – Riverside

I’m very happy that Silvia is running for VP. As R4 representative she committed to improving the working conditions of every county, even remote ones like mine where she built a relationship never before had with both membership and administration. The stewards meetings she implemented keep us informed of struggles and triumphs while creating unity. She is dedicated, trustworthy and inclusive to the voices of others. 
Esther Neblina, Steward – Imperial County

Outstanding individual, caring, professional, dedicated and very knowledgeable. I encourage everyone to vote for Silvia as our next VP.

Nancy Wilson, Steward - San Bernardino

Silvia has great insight into the issues pertaining to interpreter and language access matters. She has always been ready to build relationships and consensus with members and court administration. She is a champion for the rights of interpreters, has the ability to see things from different perspectives, and is open to dialogue and new ideas. Knowing Silvia for almost twenty years, I can say that she is not power-hungry. Silvia does not care for the spotlight and values, in fact, expects input from others in an open, democratic manner. 
Gemma Yosick, Steward – San Diego

Beyond a doubt, Silvia is the best candidate for VP. I have worked alongside Silvia for many years and have witnessed firsthand her hard work and dedication. Volunteering countless hours for the difficult and demanding positions of steward, bargaining committee member and Region 4 Representative, she has proven to be an intelligent advocate. CFI needs union officers with heart, who serve with integrity and solidarity and strive to reach consensus based on democratic processes and genuine cooperation.  
Rebeca Vera, Steward – San Diego

I worked closely with Silvia San Martín on the CFI board and wholeheartedly endorse her for Vice President. Silvia raises the bar with the education, nuanced approach based on experience, and equitable values she brings to the table. Silvia knows that truth isn’t optional. Her deeply-held democratic values not only translate into a membership-driven approach, but are essential to any functioning, successful union. Silvia is tireless in the pursuit of better working conditions and will help us preserve and elevate our profession. 
Kristina Ramsey, previous R2 Representative

I have endorsed Silvia San Martín because she´s done things with Region 4 that have never been done before. She has united stewards, increased membership, formed strong working relationships with administrators, and improved working conditions. I haven´t met anyone more dedicated than Silvia. If you want to see our profession flourish, join me and VOTE for Silvia San Martín for Vice President.   
Jackie Ruiz, upcoming R4 Representative

Because circles tend to expand 

 Secretary-Treasurer Position

Carmen Ramos

Dear Members,

I have been a steward, mobilizer and activist since 2012.  CFI achieved a substantial improvement in working conditions in Santa Clara County, including the implementation of Team Interpreting and the removal of a tyrannical Manager that harassed interpreter employees and broke the MOU routinely.  I forged strong alliances with the Santa Clara Legal and Labor Community, which eventually led to hiring our attorney, Laurie Burgess, who currently assists us in Bargaining for all Regions.  I was also able to mobilize Independent Contractors in Santa Clara Court, which led to a substantial wage increase in Region 2. I have drawn media attention to our struggles in R2 and R3.   I filed a grievances that have disclosed the enormous waste of public funds as a result of the ludicrous allocation budget implemented by the Judicial Council on July 1, 2021.

I have an “outside the box” way of strategizing all issues I have taken on, I am extremely aggressive in my approach of fighting the Courts in their Union bashing methods used to keep our wages down. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Janet Hudec, VP,  and I negotiated health and safety agreements with each of the R3 and R2 Courts.  We were able to get Administrative paid leave for IPT interpreters at the onset of the pandemic in R2, and an extension of COVID-19 extended sick leave in other courts.  

This is my first term in a position of leadership at CFI,  and I am committed to finish the projects we set out to complete, many of which got derailed because of the COVID-19 pandemic, among them:

1. Continuing to work on Legislation to reform the Interpreter Act so we can get out from under the Judicial Council's toxic grasp.

2. More training a recruitment of stewards.

3. Hiring a state wide business Representative, now that I have accomplished to have a healthy Legal Defense Fund and Strike Fund to assist us with Bargaining and enforcing our MOU.

4. Continue with providing free classes for continuing education, instead of having a costly, in person conference.

CFI needs the expertise of seasoned stewards and union officers to lead the way, and I am committed to keep training our new stewards so they have the ability to take charge of  Local in the future. We are facing serious battles are the bargaining table, and we are in the middle of negotiations in R2. A change of horses in the middle of the race, would be disastrous. 

I was the Chairperson on the R3 negotiations. Our bargaining was done in record time, 2 and a half months. We have a 25% stipend in Region 3, which has allowed the members that are performing VRI to do so under set guidelines. Our members that have consistently preformed VRI have gotten a substantial wage increase which is building on their pension. 

I have also been able to accomplish a very healthy budget: we have a strike fund, and legal defense fund, and a healthy reserve for wages and operational needs. Our Local is paying our bills timely, and is compliant with Department of Labor guidelines 100%, and is able to offer continuing education classes for our members at no cost to them.

The budget is posted in our members only section for your review, and you will see that I have turned our financials around. When I took office, I ordered a complete audit of the Local, and have steered our finances around so we can afford Attorneys at our Bargaining Table.  Pasted below, are the links to the media coverage I have accomplished for CFI.

I respectfully ask for your vote so I continue to serve our Local.

In Unity,

Carmen Ramos, current Secretary-Treasurer

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/south-bay/santa-clara-county-court-interpreters-may-strike-over-pay/2735911/  

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/court-interpreters-claim-severe-staffing-shortage-in-santa-clara-county/1995309/   

 

Gloria Lindemann

Dear colleagues,

My name is Gloria Lindemann, and I am running for the position of Secretary-Treasurer.

I believe that a true leader is one who knows the way, goes the way and shows the way. The key to successful leadership is demonstrating wisdom, dedication and motivation in every action. It is certainly not about titles and positions, flow of command or flowcharts but the ability to influence others by displaying transparencyaccountability, and inclusion.

 we have often been silent and complacent, unwilling to become involved because we believed that we were doing fine and that if it does not affect us personally, it’s not so important. But how can we aim to be better, to be the best that we can be unless we are challenged at some point. I personally enjoy a good challenge. Many great colleagues have complained and left the Union because they have felt excluded. They have felt excluded from important negotiations, they have felt excluded because they felt their voices didn’t matter. The truth is we haven’t been able to meet standards of service and expectations. However, Budgeting, forecasting, Planning, and disclosing are vital to have a financially healthy organization. I want to have an audit at least once a year, and a quarterly Profit &Loss review. 

I checked our website to look at our financial situation and was very surprised to see that we only have one-year disclosed: 2019. We are at the end of 2021, and we only have budget projections for 2020 and 2021

In my opinion, any organization with such large membership should have quarterly statements published and have available at least 3 years of financials. In our case we are missing “Income & ExpenseDeclarations” for: 2017, 2018, 2020, and 2021. This situation shows that we haven’t been able to keep up with our financials. 

When was the last audit performed? Why didn’t we get a copy? Is it because they have not been performed? Or is it because they are simply not disclosed? We have requested the Union their financials and we have only been provided guidance to look at the members only web site, and what we have in there is only one-year Income & Expense Declaration [2019]; Budget projections for 2020, and 2021, no further information has been provided.

Please take a look at our 2019 year Income and Expense declaration –

 

Some of the biggest expenses were:

Estimated income 700,000

Payroll Expenses

$288,127.38

Legal Fees

$135,700.98

**Professional Services

$31,300.91

Representation

$40,000

Bargaining Mobilizing

$25,600

Travel

$22,475

Location Expenses

$20,000

Annual Conference

$8,121

 

 

 

Would you like to have more information? Always ask questions, stay informed! Transparency and Accountability matter. 

I firmly believe that the depth and breadth of my experience makes me a worthy choice for the position of Secretary-Treasurer. A New Union is possible. 

Very truly yours,

Gloria Lindemann 

 

 

Region 4 Bargaining Committee Candidates

Alejandro Gonzalez

My name is Alejandro Gonzalez and I am an interpreter at the Indio Court in Riverside County. Although I don’t have extensive experience as a steward, I believe I have the drive and passion that is necessary to make an impact in the upcoming bargaining negotiations. If elected, I will do my best to advocate for the best interest of our members and for the advancement of our profession. 

Thank you in advance for your consideration,

Alejandro Gonzalez

------------------------------------------

Esther Neblina

Hello, my name is Esther Neblina.  I’ve been a staff interpreter in Imperial County and CFI member for over eight years, and steward since March of 2020, right before the pandemic became official.  We are a rural county with constant staffing issues and were one of the few California courts that did not implement a lockdown nor working remotely off-site in the spring or summer of 2020.  Negotiating safe working conditions, supplies and equipment as well as how to counteract our continuous understaffing issues have made for a very intense twenty months. Even before the pandemic hit, our working conditions had begun deteriorating. This in addition to the issues we’re all facing region and statewide with VRI and telephonic interpreting, as well as the perception of our position as court employees is why I am asking for your support to be part of our R4 Bargaining Committee.  

If elected to our Bargaining Committee, it would be my first time participating in that capacity.  I was able to attend as an observer once during the negotiations of our current MOU and had the privilege to see the team in action.  It is a lot of work!  But in addition to my sixteen years as a court interpreter, I’ve held a variety of positions in the last thirty years in our field, either as staff or self-employed (translator, conference and media interpreter, teacher/trainer, service coordinator, etc.).  I have a Master’s in Advanced Translation and Interpretation Studies, but more importantly, I have experience in drafting proposals, statistics for budgeting purposes, program management, record-keeping, etc., and because of my regular contact and participation in our steward calls, am up to speed with all issues faced in Region 4.  If elected to CFI R4’s bargaining committee, I’d look forward to working hard for our working conditions and the overall benefit of our region and profession.  

Thank you for your consideration.

Esther Neblina

------------------------------------------

Jacqueline Ruiz

------------------------------------------

Silvia San Martin

All counties (no matter how small) should be represented at bargaining, which means all five counties where we currently have employees (Imperial, OC, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego) should have a seat at the negotiating table—same as Admin. In my eyes, the best bargaining committee needs to be a representation of who we all are, how we got here, and what we want: our past, present, and into the future. So, the right combination of accumulated experience and innovation will likely be the key to success in our upcoming negotiations.

Many lessons have been learned in San Diego in the past two years or so, as your local CFI team which I’ve been proud to lead has been able to establish an approach that has proven quite fruitful: Solid grievances won in a row and an honest dialogue based on integrity and credibility may have triggered recent changes from management, which we welcome. It will likely help put us in a better place just in time to announce the opening of bargaining. 

I was a newcomer during the last round of negotiations, and I can tell you that for the first few weeks all I could do was watch and listen in silence (at times almost in horror), and that by the end of it all I, too, wanted to scream. Negotiations are not easy. There’s a high price for every mistake made. And everything is at stake: Our wages. Our working conditions. The recognition of our dear profession. Our future.

It will be an honor to represent San Diego´s interests in the next round of negotiations and those of R4 if I earn your vote. Having been not only a Steward but also the Regional Representative twice has given me ample opportunity to listen to different perspectives from all counties, learn from the very best, find my own voice, and strategize. I do feel ready, knowledgeable, and capable of contributing to our 2022 negotiations for a new, more perfect MOU. 

Please vote.   

Silvia San Martín

------------------------------------------

 
<< first < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > last >>

Page 1 of 58