From the Hagen campaign:
PAUL HAGEN ENDORSED BY AFSCME LOCAL 1684
District Attorney candidate Paul Hagen has been endorsed by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 1684.
“The Executive Board of AFSCME Local 1684, The Humboldt County Public Employee’s Association is pleased to announce the endorsement of Paul Hagen for District Attorney,” said the union in a written statement. “After consideration in a race which has strong candidates, it was felt that Paul fit best with the ideas and beliefs of the working families. His stance for a fair and equal playing field and willingness to consider the rights of the employee and management made him a good choice. We expect fair treatment from his office under his leadership.”
AFSCME Local 1684 is affiliated with the AFL-CIO and AFSCME District Council 57. The union represents more than 600 public employees in Humboldt and Del Norte Counties.
“Earning the endorsement of AFSCME is a great honor for me,” said Hagen. “My deceased dad was in the UAW for 32 years. The good wages and benefits he received while I grew up gave our family a solid middle class life, and my mom still receives those benefits. I understand the value of union representation and remain grateful for what they do.”
Hagen served as a prosecutor for more than eleven years in four North Coast District Attorney offices and has successfully prosecuted a wide variety of criminal and civil cases.
More information about Paul Hagen is available at www.hagenforda.com.
11 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 10, 2010 at 12:42 pm
Anonymous
Is Gallegos the centrist candidate now?
May 10, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Eric Kirk
How do you mean?
May 10, 2010 at 2:21 pm
the reasonable anonymous
“How do you mean?”
Don’t afsc me.
May 10, 2010 at 3:02 pm
Anon
I’m a member of AFMSCE and, for what it’s worth, the general membership did not vote on this endorsement (or any others).
May 10, 2010 at 4:22 pm
Eric Kirk
Did you give your leadership your input?
May 10, 2010 at 4:33 pm
ED Denson
Did the leadership ask you for your input?
May 10, 2010 at 4:41 pm
Eric Kirk
That’s a good question Ed. I’ve been a member of two unions, the Teamsters (working for UPS) and the San Francisco Teachers Union. Neither allowed the membership to vote on endorsements, which is why the Teamsters were the only union to endorse Ronald Reagan in 1984. Fortunately that leadership was booted out a few years later. Neither solicited my input to my knowledge, though I have heard of unions holding meetings for that purpose even though the controlling board itself makes the final decision.
May 10, 2010 at 5:46 pm
the reasonable anonymous
In the past I’ve been a member of UAW and of SEIU. I don’t remember any formal process for getting the members’ approval for political endorsements or contributions. We did have a chance to vote on the leadership of the union local and the national union leadership. And in my case I ususally approved of their endorsements, but not always.
As far as AFSCME goes, and public employee unions in general, in my experience they are rather bloated institutions, full of mediocre staff who protect their careers in the union bureaucracy by reliably supporting their superiors and the center-left version of conventional wisdom, and by not rocking the boat. In any event, I don’t see that AFSCME’s support means much in this race, other than the possible connection between an organization based on mediocrity and a candidate with a mediocre record of accomplishment.
To the tune of “Solidarity Forever:”
Mediocrity forever,
Mediocrity forever,
Mediocrity forever,
The Union Keep Us Safe!
May 10, 2010 at 7:14 pm
Anon
The answer to both Ed and Erik’s questions: No. I never gave my input to the leadership of AFSCME nor did they ask for it. I didn’t know “we” were considering endorsing, therefore, I didn’t know I should provide input (much less have an opportunity to vote).
May 10, 2010 at 9:32 pm
Eric Kirk
Anon – well, they’ve done so pretty much every election. How long have you been a member?
May 19, 2010 at 5:18 pm
Another unhappy AFSCME member
I think it’s very important for the public to know that AFSCME 1684 did not allow the members to vote on endorsements for any of the candidates. The guidelines were written during campaign season and in-between candidate interviews. AFSCME members sit on completely different ends of the politcal spectrum and have very different needs, yet this was not considered by the Executive Board when THEY chose who to endorse. Unions were developed to ensure fairness and equality in the work place- Can we try some in the actual union!