Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Fresno is Ground Zero in Labor Struggle
Fresno is ground zero of an epic battle for the heart and soul of the union movement. Will 10,000+ Fresno homecare workers be represented by a union run by unelected, out-of-town bureaucrats who negotiate sweetheart deals behind closed doors with corporate CEOs? OR, will workers support the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) who is a member-driven organization that fights for better pay and benefits for their members?
Fresno is Ground Zero in Labor Struggle
By Mike Rhodes
Local healthcare union activists charge that the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is run by unelected, out-of-town bureaucrats who negotiate sweetheart deals behind closed doors with corporate CEOs. Organizers and members of the National Union for Healthcare Workers (NUHW) believe labor unions should be militant, member-driven organizations that fight for better pay and benefits for their members. They are in a David & Goliath–like struggle with SEIU (aka Goliath), which has everything money can buy, but NUHW (aka David) has a secret weapon—the support of the workers.
Fresno is ground zero in this struggle over the future of the union movement because more than 10,000 home care workers will vote this month (June 2009) to decide which union will represent them. This is the first major election in the country where workers will get to chose between NUHW and SEIU. The outcome of this election will determine whether home care workers will have a grassroots democratically elected union or one that imposes leadership from the top down.
SEIU, which is based in Washington D.C., took over the local home care workers union in a trusteeship that took place on Jan. 27, 2009. As a result of the trusteeship, the elected leadership of SEIU-United Healthcare Workers-West (SEIU-UHW) was removed, members and their supporters were forced out of their own union hall and SEIU appointed new “leaders” for SEIU-UHW. When the takeover happened, most of the staff of SEIU-UHW left and, along with thousands of healthcare workers, formed NUHW.
Kaiser workers in Fresno and throughout the state were affected by the hostile takeover of SEIU-UHW. Within a month of the takeover, a majority of the 60,000 statewide Kaiser workers petitioned to leave SEIU-UHW and join NUHW. Kaiser members said that the new union was more democratically run and would be successful at winning better contracts at the bargaining table.
“We want to stay united in NUHW with the leaders we elected,” said Janet Shepherd, a respiratory therapist at Northridge Hospital Medical Center. “They helped us build our union and win the best healthcare contract standards in the country. Why would we want to be part of an SEIU union run by unelected staff we’ve never heard of?”
SEIU’s response to the majority of workers at Kaiser, who wanted to be represented by NUHW, might have been to support the democratic will of the workers. SEIU is currently lobbying Congress to support the Employee Free Choice Act, which would recognize workers as a collective bargaining unit if a majority of them sign a union card. The irony is that SEIU’s response to the Kaiser workers was to send in their attorneys to argue that workers did not have the right to a card check or even a democratic election to determine which union they wanted to represent them. SEIU has stalled elections at Kaiser facilities, but their legal posturing is being challenged by NUHW.
SEIU has threatened workers, saying that they can be fired from their jobs or removed as shop stewards for union activity in support of NUHW. Maria Garcia, a union steward and certified nursing assistant at Bay Point Healthcare Center in Hayward, was fired for circulating a petition to join NUHW.
“I’ve circulated union petitions for years with no problem,” Garcia said.
“But this time my boss said he was going to call SEIU Trustee Eliseo Medina and if he didn’t like the petition, I would be removed. After he called SEIU, he fired me, and now the union won’t respond when I call them for help. Union leaders should be on our side, not team up with administrators against us.”
Recently revealed papers, filed in federal court, show that SEIU ran up a $2.2 million bill with the OSO Group, which is just one of several security companies hired by SEIU to carry out the trusteeship of UHW. OSO Group deployed off-duty and retired police officers—at $110 per hour—to conduct surveillance of UHW’s offices and intimidate, photograph and videotape members and staff. SEIU directed the OSO Group to spy on meetings where UHW members discussed SEIU plans to move 65,000 workers to a new union without a democratic vote on the matter. The OSO Group has also been providing “protection services” for out-of-state SEIU brass visiting California.
The takeover of the union happened when SEIU demanded that California’s healthcare union force home care and nursing home workers to join a separate union that would be run by SEIU staff from Washington, D.C. Home care workers’ elected local leaders said they would only comply if workers were allowed to vote on the transfer. Instead of allowing a vote, SEIU seized control of the local union in a hostile takeover.
Since then, healthcare workers have been organizing to stay united in NUHW. Nearly 100,000 workers at more than 360 facilities have petitioned to hold elections, including nearly every facility in Fresno County where workers are represented by SEIU.
Disability advocates support the caregivers’ decision to change unions.
“These caregivers have been working together for years and raising quality standards for the seniors and people with disabilities who depend on their care,” said John Wilkins, an advocate for home care services in Fresno. “But their old union was spending too much time and money fighting against them.”
When the takeover took place, most of the union staff left to work/volunteer for NUHW. SEIU responded by bringing in replacement workers to take over the union. Those replacement workers, who are being brought in from all over the country, are now pouring into Fresno and are expected to visit home care workers at their homes in groups of 4–5 to intimidate them into voting for SEIU. Reliable sources say they are bringing in 300–500 replacement workers to Fresno to work on this campaign, an indication of both their resources and the importance of this election.
The outcome of the home care workers’ election will have a profound impact both on the workers and the progressive community of Fresno. For home care workers, an NUHW victory would mean being represented by a union that is willing to fight on their behalf. For example, NUHW organized more than 100 Fresno home care workers to attend the Fresno County Board of Supervisors in April and oppose an agenda item that would reduce their wages and benefits to $9.50 an hour. But they weren’t just there to protest the wage cuts; they also pointed to the repeated failure of their union, SEIU, to support them in stopping the cuts.
“SEIU just failed to stop a different set of cuts last week,” said Flo Furlow, a home care worker. “Now the county wants to cut our wages even more, and this time SEIU isn’t even going to take it to arbitration. How many times can we let this happen?”
Providers’ wages are paid by In-Home Supportive Services, a service that saves tax dollars by allowing people with long-term medical needs to receive care in their own homes rather than in more costly nursing homes. It is funded jointly by the county, state and federal governments.
Despite pleas from home care providers and their consumers, the Fresno County Board of Supervisors voted 3 to 2 to submit a “rate request” packet to the California Department of Social Services—an administrative step that would allow the cuts to take effect starting July 1.
When Fresno County began seeking cuts in September, home care workers and their elected union leaders successfully organized to stop the cuts from taking effect. That work ground to a halt in January, when national SEIU officials took over California’s healthcare union.
“Before SEIU took over, home care workers stood strong and protected our contract against these cuts,” said Furlow, who was a member of the elected bargaining team that negotiated the contract in 2006. “Now SEIU is throwing it all away. We’re joining NUHW to take back our union and protect our families and our home care consumers.”
The stake for the progressive community in this struggle can’t be understated. Having a union like NUHW in Fresno will mean having the resources to help elect progressive candidates to the City Council and Board of Supervisors. Progressive unions are one of the few organizations on the left that have the resources to move a political agenda, whether it is support for a candidate or lobbying for clean air and water or better public transportation.
The rank-and-file union members and staff that originally organized home care workers sent a “wake-up call” to employers throughout Fresno County when they won salary increases and secured healthcare benefits for these low-income workers. The symbolism and reality of thousands of minimum-wage earning workers uniting and joining a union to improve their working conditions sent a shiver up the spine of the bosses who enrich themselves off our labor. The bosses know that the example of what these workers accomplished goes beyond the healthcare sector. The message was clear: If low-income home care workers can unite and win, other groups of workers can do it too.
NUHW, on its Web site at http://www.nuhw.org, states a goal to provide “a principled and powerful, vibrant and democratic movement of healthcare workers, dedicated to the achievement of dignity and justice for all healthcare workers and quality, affordable healthcare for all.” It is the goal of providing a living wage, a democratic union and dignity to low-income workers that is driving NUHW in this David & Goliath–like struggle with SEIU. Ballots for the home care workers’ election will be mailed out on June 1. Home care workers will have until June 15 to return the ballot.
You can help:
Send donations to:
The Fund for Union democracy
465 California Street , Ste 1600
San Francisco, California 94104
Contact : donations [at] fundforuniondemocracy.org
http://www.fundforuniondemocracy.org
###
Mike Rhodes is the editor of the Community Alliance newspaper. He can be contacted by e-mail at editor [at] fresnoalliance.com.
By Mike Rhodes
Local healthcare union activists charge that the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is run by unelected, out-of-town bureaucrats who negotiate sweetheart deals behind closed doors with corporate CEOs. Organizers and members of the National Union for Healthcare Workers (NUHW) believe labor unions should be militant, member-driven organizations that fight for better pay and benefits for their members. They are in a David & Goliath–like struggle with SEIU (aka Goliath), which has everything money can buy, but NUHW (aka David) has a secret weapon—the support of the workers.
Fresno is ground zero in this struggle over the future of the union movement because more than 10,000 home care workers will vote this month (June 2009) to decide which union will represent them. This is the first major election in the country where workers will get to chose between NUHW and SEIU. The outcome of this election will determine whether home care workers will have a grassroots democratically elected union or one that imposes leadership from the top down.
SEIU, which is based in Washington D.C., took over the local home care workers union in a trusteeship that took place on Jan. 27, 2009. As a result of the trusteeship, the elected leadership of SEIU-United Healthcare Workers-West (SEIU-UHW) was removed, members and their supporters were forced out of their own union hall and SEIU appointed new “leaders” for SEIU-UHW. When the takeover happened, most of the staff of SEIU-UHW left and, along with thousands of healthcare workers, formed NUHW.
Kaiser workers in Fresno and throughout the state were affected by the hostile takeover of SEIU-UHW. Within a month of the takeover, a majority of the 60,000 statewide Kaiser workers petitioned to leave SEIU-UHW and join NUHW. Kaiser members said that the new union was more democratically run and would be successful at winning better contracts at the bargaining table.
“We want to stay united in NUHW with the leaders we elected,” said Janet Shepherd, a respiratory therapist at Northridge Hospital Medical Center. “They helped us build our union and win the best healthcare contract standards in the country. Why would we want to be part of an SEIU union run by unelected staff we’ve never heard of?”
SEIU’s response to the majority of workers at Kaiser, who wanted to be represented by NUHW, might have been to support the democratic will of the workers. SEIU is currently lobbying Congress to support the Employee Free Choice Act, which would recognize workers as a collective bargaining unit if a majority of them sign a union card. The irony is that SEIU’s response to the Kaiser workers was to send in their attorneys to argue that workers did not have the right to a card check or even a democratic election to determine which union they wanted to represent them. SEIU has stalled elections at Kaiser facilities, but their legal posturing is being challenged by NUHW.
SEIU has threatened workers, saying that they can be fired from their jobs or removed as shop stewards for union activity in support of NUHW. Maria Garcia, a union steward and certified nursing assistant at Bay Point Healthcare Center in Hayward, was fired for circulating a petition to join NUHW.
“I’ve circulated union petitions for years with no problem,” Garcia said.
“But this time my boss said he was going to call SEIU Trustee Eliseo Medina and if he didn’t like the petition, I would be removed. After he called SEIU, he fired me, and now the union won’t respond when I call them for help. Union leaders should be on our side, not team up with administrators against us.”
Recently revealed papers, filed in federal court, show that SEIU ran up a $2.2 million bill with the OSO Group, which is just one of several security companies hired by SEIU to carry out the trusteeship of UHW. OSO Group deployed off-duty and retired police officers—at $110 per hour—to conduct surveillance of UHW’s offices and intimidate, photograph and videotape members and staff. SEIU directed the OSO Group to spy on meetings where UHW members discussed SEIU plans to move 65,000 workers to a new union without a democratic vote on the matter. The OSO Group has also been providing “protection services” for out-of-state SEIU brass visiting California.
The takeover of the union happened when SEIU demanded that California’s healthcare union force home care and nursing home workers to join a separate union that would be run by SEIU staff from Washington, D.C. Home care workers’ elected local leaders said they would only comply if workers were allowed to vote on the transfer. Instead of allowing a vote, SEIU seized control of the local union in a hostile takeover.
Since then, healthcare workers have been organizing to stay united in NUHW. Nearly 100,000 workers at more than 360 facilities have petitioned to hold elections, including nearly every facility in Fresno County where workers are represented by SEIU.
Disability advocates support the caregivers’ decision to change unions.
“These caregivers have been working together for years and raising quality standards for the seniors and people with disabilities who depend on their care,” said John Wilkins, an advocate for home care services in Fresno. “But their old union was spending too much time and money fighting against them.”
When the takeover took place, most of the union staff left to work/volunteer for NUHW. SEIU responded by bringing in replacement workers to take over the union. Those replacement workers, who are being brought in from all over the country, are now pouring into Fresno and are expected to visit home care workers at their homes in groups of 4–5 to intimidate them into voting for SEIU. Reliable sources say they are bringing in 300–500 replacement workers to Fresno to work on this campaign, an indication of both their resources and the importance of this election.
The outcome of the home care workers’ election will have a profound impact both on the workers and the progressive community of Fresno. For home care workers, an NUHW victory would mean being represented by a union that is willing to fight on their behalf. For example, NUHW organized more than 100 Fresno home care workers to attend the Fresno County Board of Supervisors in April and oppose an agenda item that would reduce their wages and benefits to $9.50 an hour. But they weren’t just there to protest the wage cuts; they also pointed to the repeated failure of their union, SEIU, to support them in stopping the cuts.
“SEIU just failed to stop a different set of cuts last week,” said Flo Furlow, a home care worker. “Now the county wants to cut our wages even more, and this time SEIU isn’t even going to take it to arbitration. How many times can we let this happen?”
Providers’ wages are paid by In-Home Supportive Services, a service that saves tax dollars by allowing people with long-term medical needs to receive care in their own homes rather than in more costly nursing homes. It is funded jointly by the county, state and federal governments.
Despite pleas from home care providers and their consumers, the Fresno County Board of Supervisors voted 3 to 2 to submit a “rate request” packet to the California Department of Social Services—an administrative step that would allow the cuts to take effect starting July 1.
When Fresno County began seeking cuts in September, home care workers and their elected union leaders successfully organized to stop the cuts from taking effect. That work ground to a halt in January, when national SEIU officials took over California’s healthcare union.
“Before SEIU took over, home care workers stood strong and protected our contract against these cuts,” said Furlow, who was a member of the elected bargaining team that negotiated the contract in 2006. “Now SEIU is throwing it all away. We’re joining NUHW to take back our union and protect our families and our home care consumers.”
The stake for the progressive community in this struggle can’t be understated. Having a union like NUHW in Fresno will mean having the resources to help elect progressive candidates to the City Council and Board of Supervisors. Progressive unions are one of the few organizations on the left that have the resources to move a political agenda, whether it is support for a candidate or lobbying for clean air and water or better public transportation.
The rank-and-file union members and staff that originally organized home care workers sent a “wake-up call” to employers throughout Fresno County when they won salary increases and secured healthcare benefits for these low-income workers. The symbolism and reality of thousands of minimum-wage earning workers uniting and joining a union to improve their working conditions sent a shiver up the spine of the bosses who enrich themselves off our labor. The bosses know that the example of what these workers accomplished goes beyond the healthcare sector. The message was clear: If low-income home care workers can unite and win, other groups of workers can do it too.
NUHW, on its Web site at http://www.nuhw.org, states a goal to provide “a principled and powerful, vibrant and democratic movement of healthcare workers, dedicated to the achievement of dignity and justice for all healthcare workers and quality, affordable healthcare for all.” It is the goal of providing a living wage, a democratic union and dignity to low-income workers that is driving NUHW in this David & Goliath–like struggle with SEIU. Ballots for the home care workers’ election will be mailed out on June 1. Home care workers will have until June 15 to return the ballot.
You can help:
Send donations to:
The Fund for Union democracy
465 California Street , Ste 1600
San Francisco, California 94104
Contact : donations [at] fundforuniondemocracy.org
http://www.fundforuniondemocracy.org
###
Mike Rhodes is the editor of the Community Alliance newspaper. He can be contacted by e-mail at editor [at] fresnoalliance.com.
For more information:
http://www.nuhw.org/
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Unfortunately, this article paints a very forgiving and fantasy vision of the old-UHW leadership that is now NUHW. Not all SEIU-UHW workers want to be part in the NUHW. But yes, ALL SEIU-UHW workers do want a better Union. What Union in the country doesn’t have members like this?
There is actually a reform movement http://www.seiusmart.org within the SEIU to make and keep all elements of their Union democratic and members-led. The Rosselli old-UHW leadership (not the democratic base of members) made a decision to bail out of SEIU-UHW and form NUHW once they realized they would be trusteed because they refused to merge with another SEIU Local made up of healthcare workers in SoCal. Rosselli and the old-UHW decided to bail entirely without putting up a fight and formed NUHW, completely dismissing SEIU entirely. Not all SEIU members feel this way, and many SEIU members wanted to actually put up a HUGE fight to save UHW from being trusteed. That fight NEVER happened, and now there is the phenomenon known as NUHW.
The voting for NUHW or SEIU-UHW in Fresno is very concerning because if neither side gets enough votes, the workers could be locked out of having a Union for an entire year. This is super risky. DE-CERT campaigns are not generally good for the workers. But all workers have the right to De-Cert. They just don’t have the right to De-Cert and still claim themselves as part of the SEIU-UHW while actively undermining it. Please. Of course they are getting kicked out and targeted for Union membership termination. What Union would allow some of their members to De-Cert and let them keep voting and member power still? Lets get real.
There is actually a reform movement http://www.seiusmart.org within the SEIU to make and keep all elements of their Union democratic and members-led. The Rosselli old-UHW leadership (not the democratic base of members) made a decision to bail out of SEIU-UHW and form NUHW once they realized they would be trusteed because they refused to merge with another SEIU Local made up of healthcare workers in SoCal. Rosselli and the old-UHW decided to bail entirely without putting up a fight and formed NUHW, completely dismissing SEIU entirely. Not all SEIU members feel this way, and many SEIU members wanted to actually put up a HUGE fight to save UHW from being trusteed. That fight NEVER happened, and now there is the phenomenon known as NUHW.
The voting for NUHW or SEIU-UHW in Fresno is very concerning because if neither side gets enough votes, the workers could be locked out of having a Union for an entire year. This is super risky. DE-CERT campaigns are not generally good for the workers. But all workers have the right to De-Cert. They just don’t have the right to De-Cert and still claim themselves as part of the SEIU-UHW while actively undermining it. Please. Of course they are getting kicked out and targeted for Union membership termination. What Union would allow some of their members to De-Cert and let them keep voting and member power still? Lets get real.
I'm a member of a Blue Collar union with no ties with either SEIU or the new NUHW . After checking out all the respective claims and counter claims i have decided to donate time and energy to the Fesno drive . More later
Maybe the now NUHW should have stayed and fought within the SEIU .
I have heard arguments pro and con from SEIU and (former ) UHW activists .
But this can't be reduced to a ''pissing contest ''between Stern and Rosseli , as some , especially officials from other unions , would have it .
THe issues are great . Stern would impose a total top down dictatorship .
Rosseli has made major concessions for democracy
I have heard arguments pro and con from SEIU and (former ) UHW activists .
But this can't be reduced to a ''pissing contest ''between Stern and Rosseli , as some , especially officials from other unions , would have it .
THe issues are great . Stern would impose a total top down dictatorship .
Rosseli has made major concessions for democracy
SEIU's proposal was not to merge UHW and 6434 (the other local you refer to) but to take 65,000 members (including these members in Fresno) out of UHW and put them into 6434 (who had only recently rid themselves of a certain Tyrone Freeman) without a democratic vote. In fact, UHW members had already held a referendum opposing this transfer of membership. When the order from SEIU came down to transfer the 65,000 members, over 5,000 rank and file UHW members gathered to formulate a response that the only way they would agree to be moved is if a majority of the 65,000 voted to approve it. SEIU trusteed UHW a few days later.
To say that UHW never tried to fight from within SEIU ignores at least two years of public struggle (surely you saw SEIUvoice.org). Once the trusteeship came down, there really was no other option than to secede entirely. To attempt to fight inside the trusteeship in an effort to take back UHW, would be to ignore SEIU's practice of merging insurgent locals to appoint new leadership (for three years, instead of the legally limited 18 months allowed in a trusteeship).
Organizing with NUHW is the ONLY way for UHW members to take back their union.
To say that UHW never tried to fight from within SEIU ignores at least two years of public struggle (surely you saw SEIUvoice.org). Once the trusteeship came down, there really was no other option than to secede entirely. To attempt to fight inside the trusteeship in an effort to take back UHW, would be to ignore SEIU's practice of merging insurgent locals to appoint new leadership (for three years, instead of the legally limited 18 months allowed in a trusteeship).
Organizing with NUHW is the ONLY way for UHW members to take back their union.
Peter,
Thanks for clarifying between merger and transfer of members in regards to old-UHW and Local 6434. Beyond the deal with the 65,000 members, Andy Stern & Co. were trying to maneuver a lot of undemocratic decisions over UHW. Those of us STILL in SEIU were aware of it and were opposed to it. We supported the UHW membership every step of the way against the transfers and trusteeship. And we were ready to fight it to the teeth because we don't want the same to happen to other SEIU locals.
Unfortunately, Old-UHW was spending money and putting resources into abandoning SEIU before the trusteeship. Old-UHW wasn't planning a big fight against Stern and Co. This is the disappointment many of us in SEIU felt, and to an extent, the betrayal to member reformers. But who knows, maybe old-UHW never had the member power for such a fight!?
But you want to claim that leaving UHW to NUHW is the only option? You can joke yourself on that one, but not the rest of us. I've known UHW members over the years and am well-aware that many of them ain't looking to go back to having Roselli & Co. with the NUHW now. Old-UHW and their governing staff (Rosselli & Co.) was never ahead of the rest of SEIU Locals like they make themselves out to be. Old-UHW had the same issues the average SEIU local has. And now the old-UHW leadership thinks they are creating something better with NUHW? That's a gamble de-certifying members and the NUHW are taking, and good luck.
What you are missing in your argument is that the decision to secede from SEIU-UHW was democratic. It was not. And just as that decision was undemocratic, so was the one to NOT fight Stern & Co. Believe me, many of us in allied SEIU locals were ready to put up a big fight for the old-UHW leadership. Now you think you're better than us with the NUHW.
Even if you disagree with me, the divide is there between SEIU members and NUHW. Get used to it, as we all ain't ready to de-cert.
Thanks for clarifying between merger and transfer of members in regards to old-UHW and Local 6434. Beyond the deal with the 65,000 members, Andy Stern & Co. were trying to maneuver a lot of undemocratic decisions over UHW. Those of us STILL in SEIU were aware of it and were opposed to it. We supported the UHW membership every step of the way against the transfers and trusteeship. And we were ready to fight it to the teeth because we don't want the same to happen to other SEIU locals.
Unfortunately, Old-UHW was spending money and putting resources into abandoning SEIU before the trusteeship. Old-UHW wasn't planning a big fight against Stern and Co. This is the disappointment many of us in SEIU felt, and to an extent, the betrayal to member reformers. But who knows, maybe old-UHW never had the member power for such a fight!?
But you want to claim that leaving UHW to NUHW is the only option? You can joke yourself on that one, but not the rest of us. I've known UHW members over the years and am well-aware that many of them ain't looking to go back to having Roselli & Co. with the NUHW now. Old-UHW and their governing staff (Rosselli & Co.) was never ahead of the rest of SEIU Locals like they make themselves out to be. Old-UHW had the same issues the average SEIU local has. And now the old-UHW leadership thinks they are creating something better with NUHW? That's a gamble de-certifying members and the NUHW are taking, and good luck.
What you are missing in your argument is that the decision to secede from SEIU-UHW was democratic. It was not. And just as that decision was undemocratic, so was the one to NOT fight Stern & Co. Believe me, many of us in allied SEIU locals were ready to put up a big fight for the old-UHW leadership. Now you think you're better than us with the NUHW.
Even if you disagree with me, the divide is there between SEIU members and NUHW. Get used to it, as we all ain't ready to de-cert.
For the last two years I was one of many of the real UHW members who kept asking why we weren't leaving SEIU. What did we need them for?
The irony here is that Roselli et al worked hard to keep us in SEIU against a lot of members' desires. Why do you think so many thousands of signatures were gathered so quickly? Because so many of us had been chomping at the bit to leave years before the trusteeship.
Many of us had wanted to get out of SEIU a loooong time ago and Stern threw out the people who wanted to stay. Hah!
The irony here is that Roselli et al worked hard to keep us in SEIU against a lot of members' desires. Why do you think so many thousands of signatures were gathered so quickly? Because so many of us had been chomping at the bit to leave years before the trusteeship.
Many of us had wanted to get out of SEIU a loooong time ago and Stern threw out the people who wanted to stay. Hah!
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$75.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network