Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 84

Thread: Jaworski and Italian comments

  1. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    92
    While driving around our city this weekend i have noticed Jaorwski has alot of lawn signs up. Seems he still has alot of support not matter what comes out of his mouth... Even in Geoff's own ward there are alot of jaworski signs everywhere...He really might have a shot of pulling this off without the endorcement.. It is going to be an interesting primary to say the least... I have also noticed alot of Geoff signs are comming down and being replaced with either Chuck Or Pat's signs.... Is Geoff really loosing support left and right or am i just seeing things????????

  2. #62
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    406
    Hey, JA WO RS KI, seen your new sign on Abbott Road. 6ft plus long, come on. Thank god its not Susan Bokan Staniszewski, hers would stretch over to the Abbott road plaza. LOL

  3. #63
    Member cath829's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    881
    I have a very important question here.... How does Chuck Jaworski as Mayoral candidate, walk in the AFL-CIO parade with his voting record as Council President, on contract awards to NON-UNION contractors for city work? Talk about being a hypocrite!!

  4. #64
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by cath829 View Post
    I have a very important question here.... How does Chuck Jaworski as Mayoral candidate, walk in the AFL-CIO parade with his voting record as Council President, on contract awards to NON-UNION contractors for city work? Talk about being a hypocrite!!
    too bad that wasn't pointed out while he was at the parade. the teamsterrs, operating engineers, and other union members could have had fun with that......maybe his tires on his float would have been slashed before he finished the parade.

  5. #65
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    212
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you referring to the street paving by the NON-UNION contractors?

  6. #66
    Member cath829's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    881
    You are not wrong Caz....no correction needed!

  7. #67
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,947
    Quote Originally Posted by Caz5 View Post
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you referring to the street paving by the NON-UNION contractors?
    What is wrong with having people street paving that don't belong to a union. They might have a better way of doing the work and they pass the savings onto the community.

  8. #68
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by WNYresident View Post
    What is wrong with having people street paving that don't belong to a union. They might have a better way of doing the work and they pass the savings onto the community.
    not belonging to a union and preforming quality work is not the issue here. jaworski touts his uaw membership, has seeked out union support for his campaign, marches in the afl-cio parade. he voted to award contracts to non union companies without batting an eye. under federal law (davis-bacon, not to be confused with mavis-beacon)the wages are the same for union or non union workers. the conflict comes in when someoen wants to bring up their union membership when it is convenient, then not support unions members when it suites him. szymanski has voted teh same way, yet mentions that he is a union member. to some it is the same as being elected on a stance against gay marriage, then changing his vote to pass teh gay marriage law. it somes down to what you support or don't support. stop flipping switches, stand up for what you believe in.

  9. #69
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,947
    It goes by bid correct? It really is not anyone's say who goes the work, union versus non-union. It's who ever can complete the bid at the price quoted correct?

  10. #70
    Member andreahaxton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,586

    Post The Key Word is " Responsible Bidder " and ALL MUST PAY Employees Prevailing Wages!

    Quote Originally Posted by WNYresident View Post
    It goes by bid correct? It really is not anyone's say who goes the work, union versus non-union. It's who ever can complete the bid at the price quoted correct?

    § 43-1 Purpose.
    Goods and services which are not required by law to be procured pursuant to competitive bidding must be procured in a manner so as to assure the prudent and economical use of public money , in the best interests of the taxpayers, to facilitate the acquisition of goods and services of maximum quality at the lowest possible cost under the circumstances and to guard against favoritism, improvidence, extravagance, fraud and corruption. To further these objectives, the Lackawanna City Council is adopting internal policies and procedures governing all procurements of goods and services which are not required to be made pursuant to the competitive bidding requirements of General Municipal Law § 103, or of any other general, special or local law

    § 43-6 Requests for proposals.
    A.
    An effective way to award contracts for some professional services is to award them only after a minimum number of professionals are contacted and asked to submit written proposals. Requests for proposals (RFPs) are traditionally used as a means of obtaining all types of professional services. RFPs are used to obtain the services of architects, engineers, accountants, underwriters, fiscal consultants, and other professionals.
    B.
    A request for proposals and evaluation of proposals can consider price plus other factors, like experience, staffing and suitability for needs, and may include negotiations on a fair and equal basis. The award should be the most advantageous to the City.
    C.
    The process involves making a request for proposals from various firms or professionals, and then evaluating the proposals received.

    § 43-11 Procurements from other than "lowest responsible dollar offerer."
    A.
    Anytime a purchase is made from other than the lowest responsible vendor or contractor submitting a quotation or proposal, there must be justification and documentation of the reason why the purchase was in the best interest of the City and otherwise furthers the purposes of § 104-b.

    B.
    For example, if a vendor submitting the lowest proposal has a history of not making deliveries on time or of delivering goods of inferior quality, such facts might be justification for taking other than the lowest offer, but such decision must be documented with facts.


    § 43-14 Guidelines for responsibility determinations.
    In deliberating upon the responsibility of a bidder or a subcontractor, all contracting agencies shall give due consideration to any credible evidence or reliable information that the past or current record of a bidder or proposed subcontractor includes any of the following:

    A.
    Lack of adequate expertise, prior experience with comparable projects, or financial resources to perform the work of the contract or subcontract in a timely, competent and acceptable manner. Evidence of such a lack of ability to perform may include, but shall not be limited to, evidence of suspension or revocation for cause of any professional license of any director or officer, or any holder of 5% or more of the bidder's proposed subcontractor's stock or equity; failure to submit satisfactory evidence of insurance, surety bonds or financial responsibility; or a history of termination of prior contracts for cause.

    B.
    Criminal conduct in connection with government contracts or the conduct of business activities involving: a) the infliction, attempted infliction, or threat of death, intentional personal injury, or intentional property damage, in connection with involvement in a pattern of racketeering, labor racketeering, extortion, obstruction of justice, or other comparable crimes; b) bribery, fraud, bid-rigging, embezzlement, or other comparable crimes; or c) serious moral turpitude, fundamental lack of integrity, or knowing disregard for the law. Evidence of such conduct may include a judgment of conviction, pending criminal indictment, or formal grant of immunity in connection with a criminal prosecution, of the bidder or proposed subcontractor, any director or officer, or any holder of 5% or more of the shares or equity of the bidder or proposed subcontractor, or any affiliate of the bidder or proposed subcontractor.

    C.
    Grave disregard for the personal safety of employees, state personnel, or members of the public. Due consideration shall be given to whether available evidence concerning the training of employees, equipment actually in use at the work site, and company practices for identifying and addressing deficiencies and securing employee compliance, demonstrates a genuine commitment to safety or lack of same.

    D.
    Willful noncompliance with the prevailing wage and supplements payment requirements of the Labor Law, including consideration of any pending violations of the bidder or proposed subcontractor, or any affiliate of the bidder or proposed subcontractor.

    E.
    Any other significant Labor Law violations, including but not limited to child labor violations, failure to pay wages, or unemployment insurance tax delinquencies.

    F.
    Any significant violation of the Workers' Compensation Law, including but not limited to the failure of a bidder or proposed subcontractor to provide proof of workers' compensation or disability benefits coverage.

    G.
    Any criminal conduct involving violations of the Environmental Conservation Law or other federal or state environmental statutes, or repeated or significant civil violations for federal or state environmental statutes or regulations.

    H.
    The failure of a bidder or contractor to demonstrate good faith efforts to comply with applicable federal or state statutes and regulations requiring efforts to solicit and utilize minority-owned and women-owned business enterprises and disadvantaged business enterprises as potential subcontractors, in connection with a pending bid for the performance of a federal-aid or state funded or assisted project subject to such statutory and regulatory requirements.

    I.
    The failure of a bidder, contractor, or proposed subcontractor to comply with federal or state statutes or regulations requiring the hiring, training and employment of persons presumed to be disadvantaged in accordance with federal and state definitions to meet federal and state equal employment opportunity requirements.

    J.
    The submission of a bid which is mathematically or materially unbalanced.

    K.
    The submission of a bid which is so much lower than the agency's confidential engineers' estimate of the cost of, or anticipated bids for, the contract, that it appears unlikely that the bidder will be able to perform the contract satisfactorily at the price bid.

    L.
    Any other cause of so serious or compelling a nature that it raises questions about the present responsibility of a contractor or subcontractor, including but not limited to submission to a contracting agency of a false or misleading statement on a uniform questionnaire, or in some other form, in connection with a bid for or award of a contract or a request for approval of a subcontractor.

    ********************************
    Sorry it is so long......the point is that a contract, etc. does NOT always have to go to the LOWEST BIDDER, BUT, to the " Responsible Bidder ".
    Do I think that the Council/CEO follows the law the way they are mandated to protect Public Funds?---ABSOLUTELY NOT! :mad::mad:

  11. #71
    Member andreahaxton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,586
    If bids are close and one company is Union and the other non......I certainly hope they Buy American and select the Union shop company!

  12. #72
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,947
    Quote Originally Posted by andreahaxton View Post
    If bids are close and one company is Union and the other non......I certainly hope they Buy American and select the Union shop company!
    This comment makes no sense.

    What is wrong with the Americans that work for the company that isn't union?

    Or are you pandering to "union-labor" andrea

  13. #73
    Member andreahaxton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,586

    Post Just a comment WNY.....I feel for BOTH sides of the coin!

    Not at all!
    I feel Unions have caused a lot of unnecessary costs onto consumer goods---and when I worked for the County I put in a grievance over an important promotion and they never even got back to me!
    There are pluses and minuses for both sides of the coin........I am more about Buy American and preserve jobs at any cost!
    I would never pander for anything......Unions are good but they can cause problems too. I often wondered how much a car would really cost if there were not all the layers of union costs added on.
    I am all about fair competition and I HATE it that the big shot union reps, etc. sit around in their offices and don't even have to work along with their co-workers once they get elected.
    And the trips they take to Vegas, etc., when their poor co-worker is sweating away to pay their dues. Shame. Closed Shops can cause some problems too.

    I just said that if there were no other factors between two good companies......that could be a determining factor.

  14. #74
    Member andreahaxton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,586

    Post To answer the rest of your question......

    Quote Originally Posted by WNYresident View Post
    This comment makes no sense.

    What is wrong with the Americans that work for the company that isn't union?

    Or are you pandering to "union-labor" andrea



    Absolutely NOTHING is wrong with " the Americans that work for a company that isn't union ", WNYresident!

    I used to own a small business too and understand the outside/governmental pressures--mandates put on us quite well. We need to be protected from scammers, but the big guys have sadly ate up the little guys in our capitalistic economy. Aside from mis-management, many small businesses fold because they just can't keep up with all the regulations--fees--ect., every time they turn around. It all eats into your profit and when you are working 80+ hrs./wk and never see your family, to end up with .......not much, they are forced to close their doors. And the Walmarts march on and American jobs are lost. I hate it.
    Again, I see the argument on both sides of the union--non-union coin. Thanks for letting me clarify my feelings!

  15. #75
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lackawanna
    Posts
    20
    The residents and elected officials better be careful of what they are saying about one another, we already have more than 47 investigations going on in our little city.. 47 thats such a large number for only a city that stretches a few miles. Lets again work together, stop the discrimination and think of our children, the federal government does not take these allegations lightly especially when media gets a hold of such allegations. There will be a wake up call coming soon to all those who have caused issues within our city elections. Everyone that holds power in our city will soon hold indictments. Just a hint beware of the company you keep, you think they are helping when in fact they will destroy everything you have worked hard for. You know who you are so just some advise from someone who can forecast the future of our city.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •