(#2) Former SJ CM: Ortiz & Torres & Candelas out of line intimidating local business to unionize

Continuing our annual tradition of listing our most popular stories of the year, here’s #2 (first posted 7.15): A quick quiz: if you were a local businessperson, and you received a letter on city stationery saying you should unionize, would you feel a little, you know, coerced? Former CM Pete Constant weighed in on the hijinks of Ortiz, Torres, and Candelas in their efforts to bully local business Premier Recycle Company into unionizing earlier this year. An Opp Now exclusive.

{Editors' background: On March 23, 2023 and again on April 27, 2023, letters from three councilmembers (Peter Ortiz, Omar Torres, and Domingo Candelas—none of whom represent the business' district), were hand-delivered to the owner of a family business, Premier Recycle Company, that has been in San Jose for generations. The business says union leaders accompanied the CMs' hand-delivery of the missives. The letters were on City of San Jose letterhead. All three of the councilmembers entered the picket line outside the business, some with bullhorns, to encourage a strike. And the councilmembers offered their services in the labor negotiations.

The letters themselves mentioned what the business says are false and anonymous charges of: wage theft and falsification of votes, among other unfair labor practices.

When the owner asked the SJ City Attorney if the letterhead use was ethical, the reply was that they shouldn’t have used city letterhead, but there was simply a misunderstanding. The owner disagrees, and believes there is a clear and intentional pattern of intimidation and that the owner was being threatened by the three councilmembers, as well as by the City as a whole.}

Opportunity Now: Look, CM’s have First Amendment rights just like anybody else; they can be in favor of businesses unionizing and can say it to the high heavens. But don't they have to make it clear they're speaking as individuals, not with the authority of the City behind them?

Pete Constant: I don't doubt for a minute that the way they used city letterhead was intentional. The city's attorney played it off like they didn't know better, they're new councilmembers—all that. That’s not surprising given the city attorney’s job is to protect the mayor, council, and the city. But everybody knows that every councilmember has their own stationery; they did this to make it look like the city was pushing the business to unionize.

It's one thing to do things in your own individual capacity, but it seems as though they were trying to show to those who got them elected that they will do their bidding.

ON: It doesn't seem like it's rocket science to be able to figure out how to clarify which hat you're wearing when you communicate in public.

PC: The CM's have an obligation to clarify that. I'm on the school board where I live, and I always am super clear if I'm speaking for myself or in my board capacity. It's not that hard to do: It can be a simple phrase like "Personally, I believe." Or, "I'm not speaking in my official capacity."

ON: So if the CM's want to send a letter, what letterhead should they use if they don't want to suggest they have the power of the City behind them?

PC: They can use council stationery or political stationery from their campaigns. They all have it. When you are acting as a CM or in that capacity, you are obliged to frame your comments within a policy perspective and the jurisdiction you have as a councilmember. These CM's didn't. They conflated their personal feelings with their council official role and public/city policy. That's a no-no.

ON: Does the City even have a role in advocating for unions? Is that a policy in their jurisdiction?

PC: Other than prevailing wage or PLA's and like issues that affect the city directly, the city doesn't historically engage in businesses being unionized or not. In fact, I believe the city and councilmembers should not in any way interfere in the employment relationships of private businesses and their employees.

Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.

Jax OliverComment