False History & Current Myths

about KPFA & Its Union
by Clique Watch

JANUARY 14, 2011

“SaveKPFA”/Concerned Listener apologists for the insider clique at KPFA continue to haul out bucket loads of disinformation and spin in discussing the history and current state of the station and its union.

In criticizing Isis Feral’s “KPFA's Working Majority Gets Screwed by CWA Job Trust,”
an insider clique apologist commented:

>>“Don't you remember your basic Pacifica history? Pacifica management ‘busted’ the UE in the 90s by bringing a case to the NLRB to get the unpaid staff removed from the bargaining unit. They won. Unfortunately, the result of that legal decision was that unpaid staff no longer have any collective bargaining rights. It's been that way for over a decade.”

Pacifica management in 2010-11 is not the same as Pacifica management in the 90s, and this is not 1999. The Pat Scott/Mary Frances Berry regimes of the 90s were intent on NPRizing Pacifica and acted without regard for the concerns of local constituencies. By contrast, Arlene Engelhardt and LaVarn Williams have intervened at the last possible minute to save KPFA from bankruptcy after CL-dominated KPFA management did nothing for 3 years to deal with the economics of declining revenues.

As for the NLRB decision, the commenter conveniently leaves out the fact that KPFA paid staff were, with a few exceptions, willing to abandon unpaid staff’s collective bargaining rights even before the NLRB decision came down in 1999. WBAI switched to AFTRA only after unpaid staff had already been removed from the collective bargaining unit. KPFA’s move to CWA was made two years earlier, before such a move was necessary. That says a lot about the kind of top-down union culture that exists at KPFA.


>>“CWA is one of the most democratic unions in the labor movement, and represents many media workers across the nation.”

I guess that at KPFA, “democratic” and “many” translates to 20%, the other 80% consisting of staff without a grievance procedure, benefits or training.

>>“And far from ‘dismantling community oversight,’ SaveKPFA is a broad coalition rooted in the community. Thousands of its supporters have written, demonstrated, and pledged their backing for change at Pacifica, and voiced their outrage at what the current Pacifica administration, embodied by executive director Arlene Engelhardt, is doing to the station.”

Those listeners who have protested the layoffs have done so because they are being disinformed by an incessant, slick, and well-organized PR machine. But people may be starting to catch on. The first “SaveKPFA” mass rally on Nov 4 drew 150 supporters, the 2nd rally on Nov 19 brought out about 50, and exactly 17 attended the third rally on Dec 3. That doesn't sound like massive support to me.

>>“...click on ‘FACTS ON KPFA'S CRISIS’...”

In fact, the “SaveKPFA” and kpfaworker websites are full of disinformation and lies attacking Pacifica (the only remaining national progressive media outlet in the US let’s remember) while serving the narrow interests of the small insider clique at KPFA who run the websites. For those who prefer to rely on true facts in trying to understand what’s going on, check out United for Community Radio.

“SaveKPFA”/CL avoids public discussion, debate, or dialogue like vampires shrink from sunlight.

>>“‘[Isis Feral] states, ‘Many people now refer to the managing faction of the still unionized workers as the “entrenched staff”, and some call the CWA a “scab union”. From the start the CWA played the divisive role of an elitist private club, rather than that of a union.’ Nope, 'afraid not. The only people who use these kinds of nasty, union-busting terms are this author and a few friends who are pissed the lost a majority on KPFA's board.”

It’s true that some of us are disturbed and saddened that people we thought were progressive and principled could resort to such underhanded tactics to ensure they got a factional majority on the board (see Local and National Election Supervisors’ reports for descriptions of “SaveKPFA”’s many 2010 election violations). We fought hard in 1999 to democratize the station, and it is awful to see a small handful of people putting so much energy into trying to destroy the station’s moves toward a democratic, transparent and accountable governance structure. If freed from an environment of attack and obstruction and given a chance to flourish, democratic governance could bring the station closer to the communities it serves and return it to a state of vibrancy and health.

>>“Managers are not part of the [bargaining] unit.”

That really misses the point; CWA Local 9415 works hand in glove with managers and other allies outside the bargaining unit to achieve their ends (see Brian Edwards-Tiekert’s infamous “how do we make our enemies own the problems that are to come ” memo from 2005). What kind of union strategizes with non-union members? A management union.

>>“‘Unpaid staff represented by the UE were entitled to such benefits as travel expenses and childcare.’ Yes, before Pacifica took its case to the NLRB and busted the UE, that was true. However, did you know the childcare reimbursement was only about 10 cents an hour? Wow, hate to lose that benefit! The travel reimbursement still applies; any unpaid staffer can get it.”

It’s telling that the author of the paragraph above makes light of what was lost by unpaid staff, who have no grievance procedure and must rely on the largesse of politicized management to receive training or access to other means of advancement within the station.

The fact is that entrenched gatekeeper culture at KPFA doesn't support worker rights or even labor programming. The station used to run a mere 20 minutes on labor out of the 168-hour week. Now, preferring to score political points by "boycotting" the new morning show over a trumped up union issue, the gatekeepers have ironically taken even this minuscule bit of labor programming away.


>>“As far as UPSO being ‘the closest thing to a union for volunteering workers,’ well maybe, theoretically, if it actually had participation from a broad range of unpaid staff. It doesn't. UPSO's leadership has been so poor they could not even run a proper election for years. Three or four people making decisions in the name of 150 unpaid staffers isn't acceptable, which is why management de-recognized it at one point.”

Station management never liked the idea of an organized unpaid staff and did whatever it could to disable it, including obstructing and delegitimizing UPSO, just as it did with the Program Council and as management tends to do with un-unionized workers everywhere. In this case, though, the union is joined at the hip with management and is all about protecting its own and, more particularly, the preferred within its own. As essentially a management union, CWA Local 9415’s interest is to defend its power base in KPFA's unionized decision-makers, first making it impossible for UPSO to function and then having a management shill claim there’s no interest among unpaid staff to organize for bargaining rights.

And let’s bring some perspective: Hundreds of AT&T workers have been laid off in the Bay Area in the past few years, and Local 9415 has shrunk from 6000 to about 1800 in the last decade. Yet we have all this noise about two people laid off in accordance with the union contract?


>>“There is no union contract for unpaid staff, and there hasn't been for over a decade. Pacifica ensured that when it engaged in union busting in the 1990s and took its case to toss the unpaid staff out of its bargaining units and won at the NLRB. CWA asked at the bargaining table to have unpaid rights included; management refused. CWA also held a series of meetings unpaid staff and welcomed them to organize back in the 90s. Unpaid staff decided the interest was not there.”

People there at the time (see Maria Gilardin’s “Why Did the Staff not Prevent the 10-Year Corporate Raid?") refute this. Back in the late 90s, workers at WBAI under UE fought to retain union representation even as KPFA’s paid staff (again, with some exceptions) hung unpaid staff out to dry by moving to CWA without a fight. There were ongoing attempts to persuade KPFA paid staff (many of the same people who bogusly yell about “union busting” and “scabs” today) to remain in solidarity with WBAI’s struggle but to no avail.

>>“The ‘deep division within KPFA’ this author dreams up doesn't exist...The ‘deep division at KPFA’ has nothing to do with the union, it has to do with ignorant outsiders like this writer tossing around ridiculous accusations and rhetoric for their own political purposes, with no knowledge of the KPFA situation or its history.”

How nice that someone can speak for all of KPFA’s workers in assuring us that there’s no division within the station. If this person had been at the 11/11 rally in front of KPFA, organized by unpaid staff, he or she would have seen a large, loud, impassioned refutation of that notion. There’s a clear system of patronage operating in which some are rewarded, some punished, and some are left alone as long as they never object to the existing station power structure in which decisions are made with no process or transparency and benefits are bestowed and punishments meted out politically. And how typical of someone speaking from an elite position of power within KPFA to dismiss someone as an “ignorant outsider.” It’s all about “community” until someone from the community calls them on their shit.

>>“As far as being ‘entrenched’ -- what a loaded term -- there are tons of unpaid staff who have been at KPFA for decades. Aren't they ‘entrenched’? How come Dennis Bernstein -- rather ‘entrenched’ no matter how you define it -- is never accused of such by his admirers?”

“Entrenched” doesn’t refer to how long people have been working at the station so much as the degree of power they have and use to further their agendas and defend their territory. Sasha Lilley (former Interim Program Director and many would say de facto GM during Lemlem Rijio’s tenure), Mark Mericle (head of the news dept and also vice president of the CWA local), Philip Maldari (union steward), Brian Edwards-Tiekert all hold large amounts of power behind the scenes with which they reward friends (e.g., Mitch Jeserich) and penalize enemies (e.g., Dennis Bernstein, Nora Barrows Friedman, those unpaid staff members who have been working at KPFA for years while being denied opportunities for training or paid positions). The entrenched are also good at installing figurehead GMs such as Lemlem and vilifying GMs who aren’t willing to get with the program and do what they’re told (e.g., Roy Campanella Jr).

That the new GM, Amit Pendyal, has gone through the proper bylaws-mandated hiring process and is on the job brings cause for hope and optimism. I very much hope that KPFA’s entrenched staff will stop trying to undermine any GM unwilling to do their bidding. At a time when the station and the network are on the brink, it would be great if they would work with the new GM as he tries to get the station back on track.

JANUARY 14, 2011



*** *** ***
KPFA's Working Majority Gets Screwed by CWA Job Trust by Isis Feral

*** *** ***
10 Years of KPFA Finances in TABLE FORMAT

and, presented as a GRAPH, the same data:
10 Years of KPFA Finances GRAPH



*** *** ***
*** *** ***

for updates, reports & essays on KPFA/Pacifica,
please visit these websites:

UNITED FOR COMMUNITY RADIO

PACIFICA IN EXILE

ANN GARRISON, A KPFA REPORTER

LORDS & LADIES vs. the PEASANTS at KPFA


*** *** ***

KPFA 94.1 FM is one of five stations of the Pacifica radio network which are located in major cities across the country. The other stations are WBAI 99.5 in New York, WPFW 89.3 in Washington DC, KPFT 90.1 in Houston, and KPFK 90.7 in Los Angeles. There are also about 160 affiliate stations.
















.

Labels: , , , , , ,

NLRB finds CWA complaints without merit

Below is the memo from the National Labor Relations Board issued on April 18th. It finds the claims of the Communication Workers of America against the Pacifica Foundation regarding the layoffs of November 8th, 2010 to be completely without merit and advises the union to withdraw the complaint.
----------------------------------------------------------

United States Government
National Labor Relations Board

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL

Advice Memorandum

DATE: April 18, 2011

TO : William A. Baudler, Regional Director Region 32
FROM : Barry J. Kearney, Associate General Counsel Division of Advice
SUBJECT: Pacifica
Case 32-CA-25450

This case was submitted for advice as to whether the Employer violated Sections 8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act by:

(1) failing and refusing to comply with an obligation to meet and bargain with the Union over alternatives to employee layoffs prior to implementing any such layoffs;

(2) breaching an alleged agreement with the Union that would have allowed employees covered under the Employer's health plan to move to an equivalent Medicare plan as a cost cutting alternative to layoffs; and

(3) referring the Union's proposals to the Finance Committee of the Employer's Board of Directors, an action the Union claims was in direct contravention of the collective-bargaining agreement's delegation of bargaining authority to the Executive Director.

ACTION

For the reasons stated below, we agree with the Region that the instant charge should be dismissed, absent withdrawal, because none of the 8(a)(5) allegations have merit.

With respect to the first allegation, the Employer was not obligated to meet and bargain with the Union over alternatives to layoffs because the Union waived its right to do so in the collective bargaining agreement.(1) Article 12 of the parties' collective bargaining agreement permits the Employer to "reduce the work force due to lack of work or other reasons including economic necessity," but requires that the Employer "actively explore alternatives to the layoffs(s) before the effective date of the layoff, if so requested by the Union." This language does not create a duty to bargain about alternatives to the layoffs. What it requires is that the Employer "explore alternatives," at the request of the Union. Here, the evidence establishes that the Employer met with the Union, at the Union's request, to discuss the Union's suggestions for alternatives to layoffs, considered and investigated those alternatives and ultimately rejected the Union's suggestions by vote of the Board of Director's finance committee. After that vote, the Employer's Executive Director met with the Union to explain why the proposals had been rejected. Based on these facts, the Employer met its only contractual obligation, which was to "actively explore alternatives to the layoffs."

As to the second allegation, the evidence does not support a finding that the Employer agreed to allow employees covered under its health plans to move to an equivalent Medicare plan as a cost cutting alternative to layoffs. Thus, no agreement was breached. Initially, it is undisputed that the parties never agreed in writing to the Union's proposal. Further, the two Union witnesses themselves have conflicting recollections as to whether an agreement was reached. Thus, one bargaining unit member has notes suggesting that the Employer had orally agreed to this proposal. However, he did not record those notes until sometime after the meeting took place. On the other hand, the Union's shop steward, who was also at the meeting, did not recall that the Employer had agreed to the proposal. Rather, the steward recalled that although the Employer's Executive Director was enthusiastic about the Medicare proposal, she did not agree to it. Moreover, the Executive Director testified that although she agreed to look into the Union's proposal regarding medical benefits, ultimately the Employer rejected the suggestion because of the serious financial risk that it created. Given the absence of any written agreement, and the lack of evidentiary support that the parties verbally reached such an agreement, we conclude that no such agreement was reached and no violation of the Act has been established.(2)

The Union's final allegation is that the Employer abrogated a delegation of authority in the parties' collective bargaining agreement by submitting the Union's proposals to the Board of Director's finance committee. However, there is nothing in the parties' collective bargaining agreement that would prohibit the Employer from vetting the Union's proposals through its finance committee. Therefore, the Employer did not violate the Act by doing so.

Accordingly, the Region should dismiss the charge, absent withdrawal.

B.J.K.

---------------------------
NOTES

1 Allison Corp., 330 NLRB 1363, 1365 (2000) (finding union waived right to bargain over decision to subcontract where provision of collective bargaining agreement specifically granted the employer the right to subcontract).

2 Nothing in the Act would have prevented the parties from reaching a mid-term agreement to change the contractual provision regarding medical benefits. If the parties had reached a mid-term agreement regarding a change in medical benefits, they would have been bound by Section 8(d) not to alter that agreement. NLRB v. Local 554, Graphic Communications International Union, 991 F.2d 1302, 1306 (7th Cir. 1993) (applying Section 8(d) to mid-term collective bargaining agreement). Here, we find that no such agreement was made.









.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

The "Gag Rule"

Terry Goodman critiques an accusation that Pacifica imposed a "Gag Rule" on KPFA. The attack was made by the CL/SaveKPFA group in an article titled Pacifica censors own journalists, spends $30K on anti-union lawyers. It's on the KPFAWorker.org website; like most articles on that website, the author is anonymous


CL/SaveKPFA: Another gag rule has been handed down by KPFA's parent network Pacifica, as KPFA host Mitch Jeserich tried to bring listeners a discussion of what is happening at Free Speech Radio, reports KPFAWorker.org.

Terry Goodman: The claim of a "gag rule" seems intentionally misleading. Historically in Pacifica, a "gag rule" was a general policy applying to all programs or programmers. The reference here is to management killing a planned story and apparently placing restrictions on a single programmer and program. Restrictions on Jeserich's editorial independence may certainly be worthy of complaint, but calling it a new "gag rule" trivializes the policy declarations of the past that extended to all programs, including those produced by unpaid personnel.

KPFAWorker.org is known to manipulate facts. The word "reports" in place of "claims" in the above quoted paragraph implies a greater reliability than this particular source has earned.



CL/SaveKPFA: This comes on top of news that Pacifica has spent $30,000 of KPFA's funds on anti-union consultants.

Terry Goodman: This claim seems intentionally misleading. The term "anti-union consultants" can appropriately apply to firms hired to prevent threatened unionization or to assist in breaking or replacing a union that is in place, but it mischaracterizes the role of employer attorneys in labor law litigation just as "anti-employer consultants" would mischaracterize the role of the attorneys for any union filing a complaint with the NLRB.

That Pacifica incurs legal expenses whenever claims are filed against it isn't news, nor is the fact that such expenses are billed back to an individual station when station-related. The "anti-union consultants" claim made this a manufactured story, but that the LSB Treasurer received prompt disclosure of the details behind an expense item in KPFA's financial reporting was encouraging.



CL/SaveKPFA: In November, after illegally laying off Morning Show staff,

Terry Goodman: Pacifica disputes the claim of illegal layoffs and must protect itself against such claims. When layoffs are more expensive than anticipated due to union complaint and accompanying legal expenses, additional layoffs may be required to make up the deficit this creates.


CL/SaveKPFA: The week before, Core disciplined News co-director Mark Mericle for airing a story reporting that KPFA was laying off News anchor John Hamilton, saying that Mericle should not have used the word "layoff." Core also disciplined Hamilton and Jeserich for mention of the layoff, even as listeners called in record donations in support of the News. | KPFA News report

Terry Goodman: This claim seems very confused and/or misleading. A pitch break during the California News reported that Hamilton was being "fired" rather than laid off, and that misstatement is likely what prompted the "discipline" of correction. It was not reported that Hamilton was being bumped by Brian Edwards-Tiekert's delayed exercise of his seniority rights under the union agreement, but that detail would have revealed a net zero change in department staffing and so undercut the effectiveness of the pitch.


CL/SaveKPFA: Management's current undermining of editorial independence runs counter to KPFA's own long-standing news policy, which states the News will report "on matters regarding KPFA, Pacifica, its personnel or Board of Directors with the same vigor and candor as it would report on other institutions or individuals."

Terry Goodman: Layoffs should not be reported as firings. Such misreporting is unfair to both employer and employee. KPFA does not have any policy that endorses such blatant inaccuracy in newscasts or even pitch breaks.

The story of $30,000+ in legal fees was reported with vigor and candor on the California News Thursday evening at about 45 minutes into the newscast. It was not, however, reported that the need for these legal expenses was prompted by the KPFA union's complaint of "illegal" layoffs at the station.



CL/SaveKPFA: Attacks on KPFA journalists also have come from a group of board members affiliated with Tracy Rosenberg.

Terry Goodman: This vague and unsupported assertion seems purely malicious political spin. Defenseless KPFA journalists are not being crushed by the unprovoked assaults of rampaging board members. This "group of board members affiliated with Tracy Rosenberg" is probably a reference to the opposition Delegate slate or to the set of LSB Members or PNB Members that recognized the need for layoffs at KPFA. The "KPFA journalists" is probably a reference to the author's preferred delegate slate or to some laid off workers. The "attacks" are probably either a reference to typical Pacifica debate among slates or an attempt to blame opposition governance members for Pacifica management's implementation of KPFA's required layoffs.


CL/SaveKPFA: KPFA's own local station board passed a resolution in March 2010 defending KPFA journalists' rights to cover internal issues with "the same editorial autonomy they enjoy when reporting on external issues." The vote was 14-7, and the 7 voting against were aligned with Rosenberg's board faction -- the group at Pacifica national that hired and now protects Arlene Engelhardt.

Terry Goodman: This claim seems very confused and/or misleading. The group that hired Engelhardt is the all-volunteer (but 1/4 staff) Pacifica National Board. The Pacifica National Board is not "at Pacifica national" except on paper, since it is comprised of radio station and affiliate representative Directors from across the country (including four Directors from KPFA). "Pacifica National" normally refers to the Foundation offices in Berkeley and/or the skeleton staff still working in those offices after national layoffs several years ago. In most circumstances nowadays, "Pacifica National" is just a joint term for the Executive Director and the Chief Financial Officer, who share National Office supervisory responsibilities.

It's the PNB that can fire the Executive Director. If a PNB majority is preventing a PNB minority from driving away yet another Pacifica Executive Director without good cause, what they are probably "protecting" is the Pacifica Foundation.

March 18, 2011
*** *** ***


Terry Goodman served Pacifica in a variety of volunteer, staff, and management roles at KPFK and KPFT in the 1970's. He was elected twice to the office of KPFK Delegate following Pacifica's governance democratization, and those terms included service as Secretary of the National Finance Committee and Chair of the PNB Elections Committee, among various local positions.

Goodman is an outspoken and controversial internet list commentator on Pacifica affairs (especially Mission and Bylaws related issues), but is sufficiently recognized for fairness and personal integrity to have continued service as parliamentary advisor to some KPFK Chairs and as Teller for most KPFK area board elections. Though based in the Los Angeles area, he maintains perspective on the affairs at other stations and at Pacifica National through list participation, private correspondence, and by devouring posted documents and media files.

Goodman's opinions are sometimes informed by broad study and a variety of experiences in law, business, politics, psychology, sociology, technology, and broadcasting. He authored a rather comprehensive but admittedly biased examination of Pacifica issues in 2006, which may be found on the bottom half of the page at
Pacifica Issues

*** *** ***

Also by Terry Goodman:

The Layoffs at KPFA
by Terry Goodman

The KPFAWorker.org claim that station layoffs were somehow orchestrated by Tracy Rosenberg is fraudulent.

The current union agreement includes clauses that allow some management flexibility in the application of its seniority provisions. Pacifica Executive Director Arlene Engelhardt received legal advice from Pacifica's Counsel regarding the proper interpretation of these provisions and then discussed the layoff options available under the agreement with various members of KPFA management, staff, and governance before finally announcing her personnel decisions. KPFA's Station Representative Directors at the time were invited by the ED to participate in a private discussion of the issues, and Tracy Rosenberg was one of those Directors.

Rosenberg is an effective persuader when she has an opinion on something, but the "hit list" email claimed to exist by KPFAWorker.org in connection with this governance member consultation was never produced, so was probably pure fabrication. In any case, the Executive Director's decisions were her own. When provided the opportunity, Engelhardt has explained her rationale for specific KPFA staff cuts in detail, justifying them as best for the station given the PNB-mandated KPFA staff expense reduction and the limits to layoff flexibility imposed by the union agreement. Recognizing imbalance at KPFA compared to other Pacifica stations in the large KPFA allocation of salaries to air talent, she sought and accomplished cost-saving remedy with a minimum disruption of the KPFA broadcast schedule.

Although popular show exclusions might have been negotiated by the union if it had proposed anything of the sort during the year or more that the implementation of necessary KPFA layoffs was delayed, no such option was on the table when the Executive Director decided to intervene on an emergency basis in correction of persistent and repeated KPFA local management budgeting failures and a projected near-immediate problem in meeting the station's payroll. Any "KPFA Morning Show" exemption to staff cuts on the basis of its good fund-raising record would clearly have violated the general intent of layoff provisions in the KPFA union agreement.

In seeking reasonable compliance with its legal obligations under contract, it is perhaps worth noting that Pacifica clearly decided *not* to "target" employees for layoff on the basis of any predicted inability by them to rally listener support or to raise a stink with their allies. Certainly some staff at KPFA may see Engelhardt's or Rosenberg's continuing refusal to be bullied by smears, propaganda and distortions as a threat to their faction's continuing attempts to capture and secure perpetual local dominance at the station. So they should; but demonstrated resistance by individuals to political manipulation after the fact is surely not evidence of any earlier impropriety.

--Terry Goodman

















.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

The Layoffs

by Terry Goodman

The KPFAWorker.org claim that station layoffs were somehow orchestrated by Tracy Rosenberg is fraudulent.

The current union agreement includes clauses that allow some management flexibility in the application of its seniority provisions. Pacifica Executive Director Arlene Engelhardt received legal advice from Pacifica's Counsel regarding the proper interpretation of these provisions and then discussed the layoff options available under the agreement with various members of KPFA management, staff, and governance before finally announcing her personnel decisions. KPFA's Station Representative Directors at the time were invited by the ED to participate in a private discussion of the issues, and Tracy Rosenberg was one of those Directors.

Rosenberg is an effective persuader when she has an opinion on something, but the "hit list" email claimed to exist by KPFAWorker.org in connection with this governance member consultation was never produced, so was probably pure fabrication. In any case, the Executive Director's decisions were her own. When provided the opportunity, Engelhardt has explained her rationale for specific KPFA staff cuts in detail, justifying them as best for the station given the PNB-mandated KPFA staff expense reduction and the limits to layoff flexibility imposed by the union agreement. Recognizing imbalance at KPFA compared to other Pacifica stations in the large KPFA allocation of salaries to air talent, she sought and accomplished cost-saving remedy with a minimum disruption of the KPFA broadcast schedule.

Although popular show exclusions might have been negotiated by the union if it had proposed anything of the sort during the year or more that the implementation of necessary KPFA layoffs was delayed, no such option was on the table when the Executive Director decided to intervene on an emergency basis in correction of persistent and repeated KPFA local management budgeting failures and a projected near-immediate problem in meeting the station's payroll. Any "KPFA Morning Show" exemption to staff cuts on the basis of its good fund-raising record would clearly have violated the general intent of layoff provisions in the KPFA union agreement.

In seeking reasonable compliance with its legal obligations under contract, it is perhaps worth noting that Pacifica clearly decided *not* to "target" employees for layoff on the basis of any predicted inability by them to rally listener support or to raise a stink with their allies. Certainly some staff at KPFA may see Engelhardt's or Rosenberg's continuing refusal to be bullied by smears, propaganda and distortions as a threat to their faction's continuing attempts to capture and secure perpetual local dominance at the station. So they should; but demonstrated resistance by individuals to political manipulation after the fact is surely not evidence of any earlier impropriety.
*** *** ***


Terry Goodman served Pacifica in a variety of volunteer, staff, and management roles at KPFK and KPFT in the 1970's. He was elected twice to the office of KPFK Delegate following Pacifica's governance democratization, and those terms included service as Secretary of the National Finance Committee and Chair of the PNB Elections Committee, among various local positions.

Goodman is an outspoken and controversial internet list commentator on Pacifica affairs (especially Mission and Bylaws related issues), but is sufficiently recognized for fairness and personal integrity to have continued service as parliamentary advisor to some KPFK Chairs and as Teller for most KPFK area board elections. Though based in the Los Angeles area, he maintains perspective on the affairs at other stations and at Pacifica National through list participation, private correspondence, and by devouring posted documents and media files.

Goodman's opinions are sometimes informed by broad study and a variety of experiences in law, business, politics, psychology, sociology, technology, and broadcasting. He authored a rather comprehensive but admittedly biased examination of Pacifica issues in 2006, which may be found on the bottom half of the page at Pacifica Issues








.

Labels: , , , , , , ,