I still have more comments on the EOI but I haven't been feeling well, mostly exhausted, and the last thing I want to do right now is a post. It can waituntil Wednes Thursday.
Last weekend a project has been started to amend the RTA so renters can have domestic pets. If anyone has comments let me know: audreylaferriere@yahoo.ca
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Friday, August 6, 2010
EOI for the DERAH towers re Resolutions
One thing I do not understand and that is the need for Resolutions for the EOIs. BC Housng wants Resolutions signed by the President. Does that mean the President signs a REsolutions without the majority approval of all the directors. This isn't what happened when DERAH decided to cave to the demands of BC Housing for the good of the residents of the DERAH buildings and signed a secret agreement terminating DERAH's interest in the buildings as there was no Resolution of the directors giving any power to the President of DERAHS to do this and not all the directors knew or even signed anything except for the President. I was in the court all that day and I was a legal director of DERAH and I did not know of the terms of the secret agreement and other directors were not there. Even if I wasn't a director nothing should be secret when the money comes from the public purse. A President's only power is to vote in case of a tie with the directors. She doesn't have any power to sign a resolution unless all the directors are aware of it. The President can't just chose a few directors in favour of a motion. I still maintain that the secret agreement signed by Sister Elizabeth Kellihier, who was the President at the court on May 18, 2010, was illegal. How BC Housing has been able to get away with it is beyond me. For expediency Broughton and Company twist/broke the law and the judge who was not interested in reading the mountain of pleadings as he instructed the parties to go out in the hall and settle the matter as this litigation is not in the public interest. I beg to differ, this litigation is in the best interest of the public. $billions are spent on social housing and yet the process is flawed.
Speaking of public interest: two weeks ago for a period of three days the elevators in the Tellier Tower were closed do lack of repairs. One of the argument by BC Housng was that the antiquated elevators had to be replaced as soon as possible
and short leave i.e. get the order of the receiver manager signed as soon as possible because it was necessary to replace the elevators with new ones. This is not true. BC Housing knew for years that the elevators had to be replaced and yet did nothing except to say that DERAH had to pay for them when in fact BC Housing knew that the reserve monies were not there. BC Housing has a lot of money for safety. This year BC Housing had a budget of $100 billion so BC Housing could have replaced the elevators and worried about what happened to the reserves later. Only one elevator is in working condition. BC Housing has put all the tenants of the ten story Tellier at risk (most are elderly and disabled) for years and still the elevators have not been replaced. BC Housing used the courts to press for the receiver-manager Order by a court short leave so that the elevators could be installed and yet the elevators have not been replaced and the tenants have not been advised if and when BC Housing will ever replace them.
I am very disappointed with the media as none of them have shown any interest in what happened to DERAH. This story isn't about DERAH alone, it is also about BC Housing and its tactics, and the failure of the Society Act.
And of course there is CUPE and it knew about the elevators being defective and it did nothing except tell their members not to walk up the ten flight of stairs to assist the elderly. Something in their Union contract not to walk up more than two stories without an elevator...and not being allowed to physically assist tenants but union members can verbally assault and threaten tenants, directors and specific employees. The entertainment one gets from reading a collective union agreement.
.
.
Speaking of public interest: two weeks ago for a period of three days the elevators in the Tellier Tower were closed do lack of repairs. One of the argument by BC Housng was that the antiquated elevators had to be replaced as soon as possible
and short leave i.e. get the order of the receiver manager signed as soon as possible because it was necessary to replace the elevators with new ones. This is not true. BC Housing knew for years that the elevators had to be replaced and yet did nothing except to say that DERAH had to pay for them when in fact BC Housing knew that the reserve monies were not there. BC Housing has a lot of money for safety. This year BC Housing had a budget of $100 billion so BC Housing could have replaced the elevators and worried about what happened to the reserves later. Only one elevator is in working condition. BC Housing has put all the tenants of the ten story Tellier at risk (most are elderly and disabled) for years and still the elevators have not been replaced. BC Housing used the courts to press for the receiver-manager Order by a court short leave so that the elevators could be installed and yet the elevators have not been replaced and the tenants have not been advised if and when BC Housing will ever replace them.
I am very disappointed with the media as none of them have shown any interest in what happened to DERAH. This story isn't about DERAH alone, it is also about BC Housing and its tactics, and the failure of the Society Act.
And of course there is CUPE and it knew about the elevators being defective and it did nothing except tell their members not to walk up the ten flight of stairs to assist the elderly. Something in their Union contract not to walk up more than two stories without an elevator...and not being allowed to physically assist tenants but union members can verbally assault and threaten tenants, directors and specific employees. The entertainment one gets from reading a collective union agreement.
.
.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
EOI for the DERAH towers re CUPE
One of the things I do not understand and that is the constant reference to survivorship of CUPE's contract with DERA and DERAH. I attended each time the application to add CUPE as an intervenor to the BC Housing's application to appoint an receiver manager and at no time in the applications was it mentioned that CUPE had survivor status.
I was also told by CUPE that the contract was made with the Board and CUPE. It was not made with the Board, BC Housing and CUPE. So why the instruction that the collective agreement is to continue.
As far as I am concerned CUPE is the majority reason why DERAH was foreclosed upon. From the very beginning of Kim Kerr's ascention to the position of Executor Director, from the very first day in 2004, he fired or constructively dismissed all the original employees of DERA and DERAH. And what does CUPE do. Relativelt nothing as it is bound by unwritten protocol. It should have advised the directors of what was happening years ago when CUPE realized that its members were being fired for just cause and no reason given. CUPE's reasoning that it only deals with the executive director only goes to show CUPE's ignorance of the law and its failure to look after its members. There is nothing in the law that says they cannot communicate with the directors. How are the directors to learn what is happening with employees if the Union only dealt with Kim Kerr and Kim Kerr made the decision that all staffing is private and confidential and this decree extended to all the directors as well. Through the years all CUPE had to do was send a copy of any dispute to all the directors: it is very simple -- use email. CUPE should have taken it upon itself to educate the directors. I assure you from talking to past board members there would have been directors who would have taken action before Kim had them constructively impeached. One employee as dismissed in November 2009 and it took CUPE to finally get her rehired through the receiver manager eight months later. Most employees that were constructively dismissed by Kim Kerr did not want a prolonged fight with the Union and took a small $severance conditional on a confidentiality agreement. None of the employees are very happy with the Union.
One of the issues I raised besides the Kim's prevailing "you are fired with just cause and he would refuse to give the just cause" while I attended the board meetings was that I wanted all employees including the Executive to submit to random drug testing. The Union was 110% opposed to this. Of course it would be as most of its members were doing weed or other substances. I also wanted all the directors, the accountant, and Kim Kerr to submit to random drug test including Sister Elizabeth Kellihier, the President. Now I would expand that to testing the auditor as well.
I learned only on Saturday that there is a resident movement in the DERAH towers to not want CUPE to be part of the new operating agreements. The residents are not happy with the attitude of the CUPE employees nor the quality of their work. They asked CUPE and BC Housing for a copy of its contract with DERA/DERAH to determine if there is survivorship and CUPE and the Receiver-Manager has refused to give it to them. The tenants group has asked Union and BC Housing for a copy of the collective agreement. No agreement was given to them.
I also asked for it via a court application this spring and CUPE hired a prestigious law firm to represent them and not give it to me. I can't remember exactly but this prestigious law firm threatened me for interference with the employees. I am a director and I can't talk to an employee. So who do the employees work for: the union or the non-profit. The way CUPE acts is that any work done in the buildings is contracting out the work to CUPE and if anyone talks to one of its members the person faces legal threats. I find this absolutely distaseful.
The order for the receiver-manager contains the following clause respecting CUPE:
23. A THIS COURT ORDERS that the Receiver is authorized to deal with the Canadian Union of Public Employees (the "Union") on labour relations matters of the Defendant Society as follows: this Order, including but not limited to paragraphs 6, 7 and 12, shall not infringe on the Union's Collective Agreement and/or statutory rights and remedies, nor shall the Order abrogate the jurisdiction of the Labour Relations Board.
From this wording my understanding and what was said in the court is that the receiver manager deals with CUPE only during the term of the Order of Mr. Justice Sigurdson granted on May 18th, 2010. It does not extend beyond that time period.
I suggest to any of the proponents for the DERA towers to get a copy of the CUPE Operating Agreement as well as the history of disputes with DERAH and try its best to get rid of CUPE. Do your due diligence. Do not trust BC Housing as I doubt that it has ever read the Operating Agreement. There must be two operating agreements: one for DERA and one for DERAH or maybe the collective agreement was only for DERA and there never was one for DERAH. If the operating agreement includes both of them then most probably the operating agreement will be invalid as each are legally separate entities. The employees of the towers do not need the union to protect their rights. We are only talking about three or four employees per building and the Board should be dealing directly with all employee disputes. CUPE has been only a hinderance to the best interests of the public i.e. you the taxpayers in your support of the social housing in the DERAH towers. Unions are a huge expense and not necessary for small organizations.
The Operating Agreements for the three towers do not mention CUPE so I question BC Housings instruction to assume the Union. The Operating Agreements were never amended.
more to come ....
... if my understanding of what I believe is incorrect (see above), please let me know.
.
I was also told by CUPE that the contract was made with the Board and CUPE. It was not made with the Board, BC Housing and CUPE. So why the instruction that the collective agreement is to continue.
As far as I am concerned CUPE is the majority reason why DERAH was foreclosed upon. From the very beginning of Kim Kerr's ascention to the position of Executor Director, from the very first day in 2004, he fired or constructively dismissed all the original employees of DERA and DERAH. And what does CUPE do. Relativelt nothing as it is bound by unwritten protocol. It should have advised the directors of what was happening years ago when CUPE realized that its members were being fired for just cause and no reason given. CUPE's reasoning that it only deals with the executive director only goes to show CUPE's ignorance of the law and its failure to look after its members. There is nothing in the law that says they cannot communicate with the directors. How are the directors to learn what is happening with employees if the Union only dealt with Kim Kerr and Kim Kerr made the decision that all staffing is private and confidential and this decree extended to all the directors as well. Through the years all CUPE had to do was send a copy of any dispute to all the directors: it is very simple -- use email. CUPE should have taken it upon itself to educate the directors. I assure you from talking to past board members there would have been directors who would have taken action before Kim had them constructively impeached. One employee as dismissed in November 2009 and it took CUPE to finally get her rehired through the receiver manager eight months later. Most employees that were constructively dismissed by Kim Kerr did not want a prolonged fight with the Union and took a small $severance conditional on a confidentiality agreement. None of the employees are very happy with the Union.
One of the issues I raised besides the Kim's prevailing "you are fired with just cause and he would refuse to give the just cause" while I attended the board meetings was that I wanted all employees including the Executive to submit to random drug testing. The Union was 110% opposed to this. Of course it would be as most of its members were doing weed or other substances. I also wanted all the directors, the accountant, and Kim Kerr to submit to random drug test including Sister Elizabeth Kellihier, the President. Now I would expand that to testing the auditor as well.
I learned only on Saturday that there is a resident movement in the DERAH towers to not want CUPE to be part of the new operating agreements. The residents are not happy with the attitude of the CUPE employees nor the quality of their work. They asked CUPE and BC Housing for a copy of its contract with DERA/DERAH to determine if there is survivorship and CUPE and the Receiver-Manager has refused to give it to them. The tenants group has asked Union and BC Housing for a copy of the collective agreement. No agreement was given to them.
I also asked for it via a court application this spring and CUPE hired a prestigious law firm to represent them and not give it to me. I can't remember exactly but this prestigious law firm threatened me for interference with the employees. I am a director and I can't talk to an employee. So who do the employees work for: the union or the non-profit. The way CUPE acts is that any work done in the buildings is contracting out the work to CUPE and if anyone talks to one of its members the person faces legal threats. I find this absolutely distaseful.
The order for the receiver-manager contains the following clause respecting CUPE:
23. A THIS COURT ORDERS that the Receiver is authorized to deal with the Canadian Union of Public Employees (the "Union") on labour relations matters of the Defendant Society as follows: this Order, including but not limited to paragraphs 6, 7 and 12, shall not infringe on the Union's Collective Agreement and/or statutory rights and remedies, nor shall the Order abrogate the jurisdiction of the Labour Relations Board.
From this wording my understanding and what was said in the court is that the receiver manager deals with CUPE only during the term of the Order of Mr. Justice Sigurdson granted on May 18th, 2010. It does not extend beyond that time period.
I suggest to any of the proponents for the DERA towers to get a copy of the CUPE Operating Agreement as well as the history of disputes with DERAH and try its best to get rid of CUPE. Do your due diligence. Do not trust BC Housing as I doubt that it has ever read the Operating Agreement. There must be two operating agreements: one for DERA and one for DERAH or maybe the collective agreement was only for DERA and there never was one for DERAH. If the operating agreement includes both of them then most probably the operating agreement will be invalid as each are legally separate entities. The employees of the towers do not need the union to protect their rights. We are only talking about three or four employees per building and the Board should be dealing directly with all employee disputes. CUPE has been only a hinderance to the best interests of the public i.e. you the taxpayers in your support of the social housing in the DERAH towers. Unions are a huge expense and not necessary for small organizations.
The Operating Agreements for the three towers do not mention CUPE so I question BC Housings instruction to assume the Union. The Operating Agreements were never amended.
more to come ....
... if my understanding of what I believe is incorrect (see above), please let me know.
.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
EOI to turn the DERAH buildings into supportive housing
Hopefully I can get my act together this weekend to critique further the EOI. It is absolutely necessary that the residents of the DTES know how the process works and voice their concerns. The residents of the DTES must have a say in what happens to the buildings. We want to know about condo development but neglect to stop the neighbourhood from getting more supportive housing. We need a variety of housing to normalize the area. Anything in the EOI which is suspect has to be looked at before a new operator is appointed.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Is the DTES becoming an insane asylum?
Cameron Gray, manager of housing for the City recently made a statement that with the number of supportive housing in the DTES that the City is making the DTES into an insane asylum.
The three buildings that DERA operated is in the process of getting new operators and from this instruction it says that BC Housing wants the buildings to convert from affordable housing to supportive housing.
In the BC Housing web page. The very first paragraph of the EOI states that ... these calls are intended for non-profit societies and/or private operators interested in partnering with BC Housing to provide housing with support services.
We do not need the 300 units of Solheim, Pendera and Tellier be made into more supportive housing. I attempted to go to the 1:30 site meeting on Tuesday at Tellier for those interested in seeing the properties to clarify this. When I arrived there no one knew of any meeting and the Tellier community room was empty.
I then went to DERAdvocay, next door, and was told that the meeting happened at 10:00a.m. that morning. Earlier I phoned Pat McSherry, a director and secretary of DERA, and told her that someone from DERA should attend this meeting and make sure that supportive housing does not happen to the former DERA buildings.
Pat McSherry told me at 1:45 p.m. that the meeting was held at 10:00 a.m. that morning. So has BC Housing already decided who the new operators will be.
Where are the housing advocates whose actions focus on wanting a National Housing Policy rather then devoting some of their resources to making sure the DTES has normalized housing.
Years ago the federal government downloaded social housing to the province (BC Housing's budget is $1billion yearly for 100,000 units) so why aren't the advocates and the NDP advocating for a provincial housing policy but then I am sure that none of them are aware of the $budget of BC Housing. They should be putting all their resources into making sure that the DTES has a diversity of housing in the DTES and not a predominance of supportive housing which housing is nothing more than a jail cell (complete with bars, locked doors, hired security, and expensive state-of-the- art securiy cameras see the LUX supportive housing run by Rain City (reception area)) for the mentally and drug addicted population of the City.
Also I am fed up with Sabrina, the E/D of DERA, saying that I was voted off the Board of Directors of DERA. DERA attempted to do so on February 12 2010 but the process was flawed (illegal). And until I get a letter from DERA's lawyer stating that the process was legal, I am still a director of DERA.
.
The three buildings that DERA operated is in the process of getting new operators and from this instruction it says that BC Housing wants the buildings to convert from affordable housing to supportive housing.
In the BC Housing web page. The very first paragraph of the EOI states that ... these calls are intended for non-profit societies and/or private operators interested in partnering with BC Housing to provide housing with support services.
We do not need the 300 units of Solheim, Pendera and Tellier be made into more supportive housing. I attempted to go to the 1:30 site meeting on Tuesday at Tellier for those interested in seeing the properties to clarify this. When I arrived there no one knew of any meeting and the Tellier community room was empty.
I then went to DERAdvocay, next door, and was told that the meeting happened at 10:00a.m. that morning. Earlier I phoned Pat McSherry, a director and secretary of DERA, and told her that someone from DERA should attend this meeting and make sure that supportive housing does not happen to the former DERA buildings.
Pat McSherry told me at 1:45 p.m. that the meeting was held at 10:00 a.m. that morning. So has BC Housing already decided who the new operators will be.
Where are the housing advocates whose actions focus on wanting a National Housing Policy rather then devoting some of their resources to making sure the DTES has normalized housing.
Years ago the federal government downloaded social housing to the province (BC Housing's budget is $1billion yearly for 100,000 units) so why aren't the advocates and the NDP advocating for a provincial housing policy but then I am sure that none of them are aware of the $budget of BC Housing. They should be putting all their resources into making sure that the DTES has a diversity of housing in the DTES and not a predominance of supportive housing which housing is nothing more than a jail cell (complete with bars, locked doors, hired security, and expensive state-of-the- art securiy cameras see the LUX supportive housing run by Rain City (reception area)) for the mentally and drug addicted population of the City.
Also I am fed up with Sabrina, the E/D of DERA, saying that I was voted off the Board of Directors of DERA. DERA attempted to do so on February 12 2010 but the process was flawed (illegal). And until I get a letter from DERA's lawyer stating that the process was legal, I am still a director of DERA.
.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
the new Oppenheimer Park
I went to the opening of the "new" Openheimer Park at 11:00 am today. I am not happy with the new design. It looks like it was designed deliberately to erase 1/3 of the green space. It took 120 years to create a heritage park and only $2.5 million and two years construction to destroy it. More on this later ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)