Update: Mark Mitchell was reinstated as executive director, pending an investigation, by the VSEA board of trustees. For more details, click here.
Unions exist to protect members from management excesses and unfair labor practices. That’s why the news that the Vermont State Employees Association summarily fired its executive director on Wednesday without a cited cause, without an opportunity to refute accusations and without severance pay has perplexed union members and led to questions about whether Mark Mitchell’s ouster was a “palace coup.”
The rumors swirling around the meeting in which two union lawyers, Abigail Winters and Michael Casey, accused Mitchell of knowingly allowing the union to violate labor laws, have continued unabated. Specifics about just what laws were violated and how have not been forthcoming.
The management infighting at the Vermont State Employees Association will likely take a few more nasty turns in the coming days, as the union’s higher-ups attempt to resolve what has become a crisis over the executive director’s sudden dismissal.
Casey, in an interview, said the reason for Mitchell’s firing is “crystal clear from my perspective.”
“Tomorrow, I suspect we will have much more information available,” Casey said.
The board voted 10-5 to oust Mitchell, after a seven-hour executive session on Wednesday in which Casey and Winters are said to have relentlessly assailed Mitchell. No other staff, including the executive director, were allowed into the meeting. At 5 p.m., when Mitchell was asked to resign, he refused. Later a vague statement about the nature of the attorneys’ allegations came to light in an email Casey sent to board members in which he accused Mitchell of “exposing the VSEA to liability.” He alleged in an email that Mitchell withheld “clear and willful violations of the law” from the board.
Mitchell maintains he has nothing to hide, and he holds out hope that the decision will be reconsidered in a board meeting Monday or at a council meeting on Tuesday.
“My conscience is clear,” Mitchell says. “I didn’t do anything wrong, and I don’t feel my return would be difficult.”
John Reese, board president, said in a previous report that some of the allegations, if proven true, could be substantive. None of the allegations were criminal, egregious or malicious in nature, he said.
“A lot of the allegations were personal things. It was clear it was more of a personal attack rather than, ‘oh, gee, we’ve got to save our organization from doom,’” Reese said.
In an interview, Casey declined to comment about what labor laws might have been violated, nor was he willing to reveal any specifics about the nature of the allegations. Casey said he and Winters conducted an internal investigation into the matter that consisted of an extensive review of records and email correspondence, staff interviews and correspondence and conversations with Mitchell.
Mitchell says neither attorney presented the board with concerns about union policies or practices in previous meetings that would have led him to believe there was a problem. Sources say that in the daylong executive session, the two lawyers cited technical misinterpretations of labor laws, including an allegation that the union wasn’t paying overtime to salaried union field representatives. In 2003, the union determined that field reps were exempted from overtime pay because they are professionals who hold bachelor’s degrees in labor relations or public administration.
Mitchell says there are no lawsuits pending against the union, and the U.S. Department of Labor has not issued any judgments against the VSEA during his tenure.
Casey said while there are no pending lawsuits or judgments against the union, he couldn’t confirm or deny the threat of an impending lawsuit.
Mitchell is consulting with an employment lawyer to address what he calls an attempt by board members to “impugn” his reputation in recent remarks to Seven Days reporter Paul Heintz that echo Casey’s email allegations. Mitchell, who was hired in December 2011, is 18 months into a three-year contract.
“In my opinion, if Mitchell’s reputation has been impugned, he has no one to blame but himself,” Casey said.
Word leaked out about the firing Thursday, and within hours, Casey, general counsel for VSEA, issued a gag order via email to the union’s 19-member staff, routing all press inquiries to the communications director, Doug Gibson. A day later, after Reese told Heintz the firing was “crazy” and “unfair,” Casey issued an email to the board expressing his dismay that Reese had publicly mischaracterized what happened in a confidential executive session. Casey urged board members to use the following explanation to the press: “The accurate response to the press will be that Mark Mitchell was dismissed because the Board of Trustees, after extensive review of information and discussion, concluded that he knowingly allowed the organization to violate numerous laws, exposing VSEA to liability.”
Former board president Bob Hooper who lost his bid for the ED post has criticized Mitchell’s performance in the media, and Hooper, sources say, is waiting in the wings to take over should Mitchell fail to be reinstated. Casey, the general counsel for the union, who led the charge to fire Mitchell, is running the union’s day-to-day operations.
The battle over who will lead the union comes at a crucial time. The board, which hires the ED, is in the middle of a re-election that will take place next month and turnover is likely. The VSEA is also engaged in initial collective bargaining meetings with the Shumlin administration. Negotiations begin in August. Several sources affiliated with the union said the sudden, controversial departure of Mitchell will weaken the VSEA’s position going into collective bargaining.
At issue is whether cooperation or conflict is more effective in the delicate negotiations between the administration and the union. Mitchell, an outsider who has extensive organizing experience in other states, is widely seen as having a less conciliatory approach to the governor than previous union leaders. Sources question whether Mitchell’s somewhat pushier style will help the union overcome its reputation among some members as a weak institution that doesn’t do enough to fight for higher wages and better benefits or whether it will backfire and make negotiations with the Shumlin administration more difficult. The union, during the recession, under former executive director Jes Kraus, agreed to job cuts, hiring freezes and 3 percent pay cuts.
Whatever the outcome of the union meetings this week, there is no question that Mitchell has been a controversial leader. Less than a year after he came on board in December 2011, a third of the staff quit, including several prominent longtime employees such as Conor Casey, the former government relations director, and Lucinda Kirk, a field organizer who circulated a letter last fall calling for Mitchell’s firing.
Mitchell downplayed the departures in an interview and said it was the result of his commitment to the board’s No. 1 priority, which he said is to transform the union from a top-down, staff-oriented association into a grassroots, “member-led” organization.
He released the following letter to VSEA members on Saturday:
Dear VSEA Union Sisters and Brothers,
It has been an honor to serve as the Executive Director of your union for the last 18 months. I have met hundreds of you at Chapter meetings, Council meetings, committee meetings, and at the over 100 worksite meetings in which I have participated in during my tenure. What I heard from you was a collective desire for a more effective, democratic, transparent and participatory union. It was your vision for VSEA that guided my day-to-day work as your Executive Director.
Like many of you, I was shocked, confused and saddened when certain members of your Board of Trustees voted to terminate my employment last Wednesday. This decision has come at a time when your union is steadily growing its power and credibility in both the workplace and in the political arena. Your strong collective desire for change within your Union has led to unprecedented levels of activism and involvement in worksites across the state. Over 100 new members have joined VSEA in the last 45 days alone. Enhanced communication to the membership; a highly successful legislative session, and a very talented and hard-working newly assembled staff have aided your desire for change.
I was hired by you, tasked by you, and supervised and supported by your President John Reese to move VSEA in a new direction to be a more effective Union. I feel confident that I have done the job you tasked me with as the Executive Director, and that the evidence of this is clear in your Union’s increased power.
I, along with many of your fellow members, see the decision to terminate my employment as an unnecessary and destructive diversion from the real work at hand; building a stronger member-run organization. I still have not been apprised of a reason for the decision of those Board members who voted to end my employment, nor have my employee evaluations indicated a performance deficiency.
Instead of this controversy being about me personally, it is really a continuation of a long running debate about the direction of your union. On one side of the issue are those who support the status quo and the service model, which is what VSEA has been since its inception. On the other side is a group who support member empowerment through organizing, educating and engaging the membership. The outcome of this debate will set the tone for your union’s work going forward and it will make a statement about your right as members to have a say in the direction of your union.
I have immensely enjoyed the privilege of working for Vermont’s state workers who provide exceptional service to their communities for low pay, modest benefits and under increasingly difficult working conditions. VSEA’s members deserve the right to have a say in decisions that affect their union. Ultimately, of course, this includes the decision about the direction of your union and what kind of Executive Director it should employ. Please remain involved and engaged to ensure that your voice is heard in the debates that are sure to come. A union is nothing without its members.
In solidarity,
Mark Erwin Mitchell
Barre, Vermont
