Sam Sullivan's strike strategy
The Georgia Straight has learned that Sam Sullivan tapes all of his conversations. The goal: a future blockbuster that he will write with the help of Allen Garr. The Straight has obtained one tape; we print a transcription here in its entirety.
Sullivan: What is CUPE's slogan?
Lackey 1: Pardon, sir?
Sullivan: Is it "Protecting the lazy and incompetent since 1963"?
Lackey 1: Er, I don't think so, sir.
Sullivan: Maybe I could copyright it! And when you copyright it, register that for each year from 1963 to 2007. I could "own" a lot of union slogans. By the way, also register UnionDensity and EcoGar bage–in my name, of course. And let's do a poll on how happy Vancouverites are with EcoGarbage.
Lackey 1: Yes, sir.
Sullivan: Now, today is the day we crush the union. What have you got?
Lackey 2: Well, your honour”¦
Sullivan: Never mind. How about this? As you know, I'm very tight with Wal-Mart. Let's get them to ban CUPE members from their stores. That'd hurt them, especially on strike pay! And Wal-Mart hates unions, so I'm sure it will work.
Lackey 1: Brilliant, my liege.
Sullivan: Okay, then we get all the Chinese grocery stores to ban CUPE members. It'll be a lockout! They hate unions, and I own them because I speak Chinese. Did you know I can even tell jokes in Chinese? Want to hear one?
Lackey 1: Neither of us understand Chinese, your worship.
Sullivan: Okay, let me give you the English version. Three union workers walk into a bar and sit down. The first guy says to the other two, "One of you get the drinks; I'm on disability." The second guy says, "It's not in my job description." The third guy says, "Not me, I've got seniority." So they walk out of the bar sober, which is a good thing because they are all alcoholics, like most union members.
Lackeys 1 and 2: Hilarious, sir.
Sullivan: Put that in a news release and send it to all the media. That will help crush their spirits. Here's another one: what's the difference between outside CUPE members at work and on strike? When they are on strike they stand around, hold picket signs, and do nothing. And when they are working, they stand around, hold stop signs, and do nothing.
Here the tape has uncontrollable laughter from Sullivan.
Sullivan: Either of you guys have a handkerchief to wipe away my tears? God, that's funny.
Overheard on the tape: one of the lackeys whispers to the other, "Ladner wasn't kidding; he really is insane."
Sullivan: Hey, I've got another great idea. Sometimes I just can't stop them. Copyright–in my name, of course–"Doing a half-day's work for a full day's pay since 1963."
Lackey 2: Your honour, these copyright registrations cost a lot of money, and you've just asked me to register more than 40.
Sullivan: Don't worry, we're saving a fortune on the strike! If I didn't want to crush them so much, I'd say let it go on until December. Just bill the registrations to the mayor's strike-strategy discussions, and make sure you register them in my name.
Lackey 3: Yes, sir.
Sullivan: Make no mistake. I will win this struggle against the forces of laziness and greed. And I'm not just referring to the NPA executive. I've crushed Peter Ladner, Jim Green, Falun Gong, Wal-Mart opponents, the other Olympic city contenders, everyone who opposed my will and my power.
Lackeys 1 and 2: Yes, sir.
Sullivan: Don't forget that. Even though this strike is my lowest priority, send out a news release saying I'm challenging that CUPE union president, whatever his name is, to a duel.
Lackey 1: Pardon?
Sullivan: He has to get into a wheelchair and we meet on a city street and race toward each other. He'll probably tip over first because the streets are so bad–but if he doesn't, I will crush him!
The tape ends here, but the strike continues.
Comments
3 Comments
Jim Van Rassel
Sep 19, 2007 at 1:38pm
Was the Vancouver civic strike by design? 09/18/2007
Sometimes the obvious is something most of us don't want to look at.
The Vancouver civic strike in my opinion was by design. If you look at the other municipalities in the
lower mainland there is no other explanation. Vancouver is up to it's eyeballs in dept, and more come.
With the Olympics upon us this was an easy way to save millions of dollar in wages on the backs of
Vancouver's civic employees. If you take 6000 worker off the payroll I come up with roughly
$36,000,000.00 + and that is on the low side. This was base on 40 working days. Our politicians and
head bureaucrats of Vancouver are as morally bankrupt as the city of Vancouver is on it's way of being
(before during or after the Olympics) if the path they are on does not change.
In the future I cannot see Vancouver being a very happy place, but a very bitter one in it's place.
The only two people to blame for this are Sam Sullivan and of course Gordon Campbell.
Sam for being so rapped up in his own self importance, and that mouth wash he likes so much,
and Mr Gordon Campbell demonstrating his inability it lead, like usual.
Jim Van Rassel
Coquitlam BC
sleepswithangels
Sep 26, 2007 at 12:28pm
I find this all quite confusing...Charlie Smith endorsed the SS for mayor in 2005 and now provides space for Harvey McKinnon to give hizzoner a well deserved skewering while printing a letter from a reader which also attempts to skewer the SS but undermines the whole exercise with its poor grammar and spelling. Are we to believe that this letter was the most articulate and thought provoking response to McKinnons' hilarious burn of the SS that the GS editors could find to post?
John Burns
Sep 26, 2007 at 12:36pm
<p>Well, we try not to hold the world to our spelling/grammar standards - it would just make our off-hours all the more vexing.</p>
<p>But on the subject of the endorsement, you're right, Sleepswithangels, that we did endorse His Washup in the last civic election.</p>
<p>If you can call <a href="/article/voters-face-tricky-choice" target="_self">this</a> an endorsement...</p>
<p><div class="blogcomment">Pity the voters of Vancouver. In electing their next mayor, citizens must choose between two fairly dismal front-runners: veteran Non-Partisan Association Coun. Sam Sullivan, who has presented few new ideas during the campaign and who has accomplished very little on council over the past 12 years; and Vision Vancouver Coun. Jim Green, a sometimes litigious bully and spendthrift with a predilection for making backroom deals with senior levels of government...</p>
<p>Sullivan has plenty of shortcomings. He almost always caves to the wishes of senior bureaucrats, leaving them in charge of the city. When senior staff refused to offer fair treatment to hundreds of South False Creek leaseholders, including seniors, there was nary a peep from Sullivan...</p>
<p>Given the choice between Sullivan and Green, it's tempting to recommend Ben West of the Work Less Party. West is bright and articulate. But he has no chance of winning, and in this election, the stakes are too high to waste a vote...</p>
<p>For all of Sullivan's political limitations-and there are many-he is far more likely than Green to vote to save downtown Vancouver's major hospital from the wrecking ball. Because the NPA mayoral candidate has been vocal on this issue over a long period of time, we're recommending a vote for Sam Sullivan as Vancouver's next mayor on Saturday. The fate of the hospital should not be left in the hands of Jim Green.</div></p>
<p>Oh God, is the strike all our fault?!</p>