Spin, spin, spin

One of the things that has been most difficult for a lot of people living here in Artspace is going from an intentional community that can only function properly through open communication, volunteerism and honesty, to dealing with an organization that takes things and spins them around to mean something completely different than they really do.  Like when AUPE non-lawyer, William Rigutto, ranted outside the high rise for some 2 hours, during which he, and others, yelled in the street about financial information shared in confidence during negotiations and made all sorts of wild accusations.  During this time, he questioned why SAIL has a contingency fund which, over time, he re-defined as a profit, and even claimed that SAIL thought of this as profit. 

Because apparently he knows what a company thinks?  Or that he knows what a volunteer board of half a dozen people thinks? 

Some of us were told that, if the audit of SAIL's finances confirmed the numbers board members had been trying to tell AUPE all along, this strike would be over.  There would be no reason for the labour dispute to continue.

Well, the audit did confirm SAIL's finances, and AUPE is still here.  Not only that, but they've gone and tried to spin things to make it sound like the audit confirmed what AUPE has been claiming, instead, then making more accusations against SAIL.

Look.  We may be mostly people on low incomes, but we do understand budgeting, and we do understand financial responsibility.  We certainly know what it's like to live with all the rules and regulations that come with public funding.  We're living in a co-op, for crying out loud.  Everything about living in a co-op is determined by rules and regulations set by others that we must meet.

Instead of accepting what the audit has shown, AUPE has instead released another flier, making claims against SAIL.

Honestly, AUPE.  Do you really think we're stupid?

You guys couldn't even get it right in the headline.

"Financials released, SAIL mislead Artspace and its caregivers."

Hey!  AUPE!  "Artspace" doesn't have any caregivers.  Artspace has SAIL user-members.  About 30 of them.  SAIL hires the care givers, not Artspace.

You know this.  You've been told this repeatedly.  If you're going to accuse SAIL of misleading people, maybe you shouldn't do it by making erroneous statements right in your headline!

Unless this is just a bad use of sentence structure, at which point, get a better editor.  

Then the flier claims that SAIL does have "the ability to provide caregivers with a fair collective agreement."

Well... that's misleading.  Of course they have the ability to provide a collective agreement.  The problem is what AUPE considers a "fair" agreement.

Ah, but then they go on about how SAIL has "gathered" money by "hoarding public funds."  Surplus dollars.  They've got money in the bank, people!  The horror!

Well, first off, I have to say I'm really disappointed that the number is so low.  Unlike the general public, we are aware of the operating costs for SAIL, because we asked.  You know; what AUPE kept yelling at us to do, except most of us had already done it. 

Then they complain about things like how much money was used for paying security, which would never have been needed if AUPE hadn't been so aggressive outside of our homes.  Oh, and then they complained about "professional fees." 

Of course there's going to be professional fees.  They have to pay for accountants and lawyers and auditors and all those other people to do things that a volunteer board can't do themselves.

It's called "the cost of doing business" and is part of running a company responsibly.

Ah, now let's see how else this got spun.  This money, AUPE tells us, is "intended to fund care."

Well guess what, AUPE.  We know full well that for user members to get care, that involves expenses and administration and fees and rent and supplies and yes, hiring professionals and, if necessary, security to protect the people coming in to provide the individual care they need.  Wages are just part of what the funding is supposed to pay for. 

AUPE would have us believe that somehow, SAIL is supposed to negotiate wages on one time (we hope) events like hiring necessary security, and on any "surplus" they might have. 

You can't budget based on "surplus."  Anyone who manages a simple household income knows this. 

Oh, and they're still pushing that "industry standard" line, when 1) there is no industry standard and 2) the SAIL staff were already being paid more than equivalent home care workers.

No, AUPE.  It's not SAIL that has mislead anyone.  Spin things all you want; it doesn't change the fact that the audit confirmed what SAIL had been saying all along.

So why are you still here?