It was with profound disappointment that I read Archbishop Sartain’s final reply to my third letter begging him to consider “unemployment” insurance for his employees.
In addition to the letters I wrote the Archbishop I have had numerous phone conversations with Archdiocese employees, written other officials in the Archdiocese and appeared on television requesting the Archbishop review this policy. A number of newspapers and national blogs have posted and printed articles on this plea for social justice for employees.
I wasn’t surprised by his stance, as he had responded in a similar fashion twice before dismissing all the arguments that were presented.
My final hope was that he would review the facts, and the human miseries created by such a policy, and at a minimum, consider a review of his present “no unemployment” coverage for employee’s policy.
That the Archbishop offered unemployment coverage to his employees in Illinois did not persuade him to consider the same to his employees in Washington.
In my request to the Archbishop I shared individual cases of people struggling with no income, trying to stay afloat, and how desperate they were without any safety net to shelter them. These poor souls are unable to continue their medical coverage, life insurance, and long-term disability without unemployment income.
The Archdiocese has refused to comment on these realities.
I shared with the Archbishop that there is an unemployment plan available to all employees of the Catholic Church across the country. I suggested the Seattle Archdiocese review the following as an alternative to the Washington state unemployment scheme if saving money was at the crux of their reluctance.
The program is called the “Church Unemployment Pay Program, Inc. ” administered by Larry Smith, (608-273-8300), who assured me that all dioceses across the country were invited to participate years ago, though few took advantage of the unique benefits as follows;
#1 Limited to 26 weeks of coverage. No extensions allowed. No cost to the employee.
#2 Employee may be let go for “religious reasons” which may not be allowable under a state program.
#3 Should an employee quit they do not receive any coverage.
#4 Offered to all employees working 20 or more hours a week.
#5 Maximum of 50% of weekly wages topping at $363.00 per week or a gross payout of $9,400.00.
In the Archbishops response he immediately pivots to financial justifications for his policy rather than honing in on the human suffering this policy is having on people who had dedicated themselves to serving the children, the church, the schools, and the community in Washington, and across America. He offers no concern, empathy, suggestions to ameliorate the plight he has fostered on the unsuspecting employees who had no idea they had no safety net beneath them.
Where is the concern for the heartache, financial damage, desperation that is nurtured when a person has nothing to shore up their financial situation? The Archbishop shows no concern for the people impacted by his callous decision to let money be the determinate on all things-
Where in the New Testament does it say to create a business and protect the system at all costs?
Poor Jesus must be crying over how these people have warped his teachings-
Over the last three years the Archdiocese has received various business plans, suggestions, paradigms offering solutions to the present business model that is unable to offer its worker the basics, allow schools to achieve excellence, discontinue slashing of salaries, hours of teachers and develop an atmosphere that is not driven by fear- All have been ignored-
Not once did the previous two bishops acknowledge any of the suggestions or show any courtesy to discuss anything other than the status quo that has clearly weakened the church, the schools and the community.
The Taoiseach, (Prime Minister) of Ireland, Enda Kenny, gave a speech this week to the Dáil on the Cloyne report, which unmasked the church for what it has allowed itself to become through conscious choices.
In his speech he tore away the Band-Aid the church has shown the public for so many years.
His statement about the Vatican is accurate to the way the Seattle Archdiocese functions.
He said,
“…And in doing so, the Cloyne Report excavates the dysfunction, disconnection, elitism…. the narcissism. …that dominate the culture of the Vatican to this day…”
Archbishop Sartain-your employees deserve better!!
Archbishop Sartain has only been in Seattle for 9 months, yet you place the blame for this lack of an unemployment program entirely on him. You claim he has rejected your suggestion three times now, but even if he had taken it up, that would not have covered those employees who had already lost their jobs. In fact, it would take a while to get the program going. So you’re blaming the new kid on the block for something that his “liberal” predecessors failed to do. Why is the headline, then, about Archbishop Sartain and not about Brunett, Murphy and especially Hunthausen? Does it not strike you as odd that those three who claimed to be “liberal” were so willing to leave their employees in the lurch? Put the blame for this where it belongs, not on the new kid.
Sartain is following the lead of his predecessors. Neither Burnett, Murphy or Tyson would respond at all. None of them could be considered as liberals. Can’t speak to Hunthausen, as I just don’t know.
Archbishop Sartain has said a “listening survey” was done 6-7 years ago that concluded the coverage was not needed/wanted. I have been unable to find anyone who knows anything about that survey.
He could make this happen with a phone call to the parish priests that oversee the schools.
It is the right thing to do and should be done.
That they have dug themselves into a financial hole due to defense funds and settlements calls loudly for a reorganization that allows them to offer fair benefits to employees-
They need to stand up and do the right thing, though their legacy is to delay everything always…
Was this piece written by two different people? Until the end of the section on the Church Unemployment Pay Program, the writing is straightforward and written in the past tense. After that, it suddenly switches to present tense and becomes almost maudlin in its appeal. Just sayin’.
None of those bishops claimed to be liberal. Get your facts straight. And Brunett is politically quite conservative. Whenever I hear the word “liberal” used to discredit someone, I assume the discreditor is troubled and angry in some way.
I always assume every liberal is troubled as well. How else can you explain it.
I wrote the whole piece. You recognized the maudlin angst when I moved towards what is happening to actual people and what has transpired in Ireland. While living there the abuse and lies were being deflected by attacking those who brought up any allegations. You’ll recall Sinead and what happened to her. That she and others have been exonerated is a great moment in Irish politics/history. Sad that so many had to be damaged-
Same thing is happening here to any who dare speak up.
The point of the article is to ask that the right thing be done for employees who are trying their best working with/for an organization that might be imploding. They, the employees, deserve to be offered benefit packages that follow the tenets of the social justice teachings the church enjoys touting…..the fear in the ranks about losing their job with no financial security could easily dealt with if the Archbishop wanted to approach the human consequences of this, and other , decisions. Keep in mind that 76% of all Catholic school teachers are women working at around 70% of secular salaries. The more you look into it the more it screams for change.
Making cracks about liberals etc. doesn’t invite intelligent discourse-
Employers provide their employees with wages in exchange for work. When the employees are no longer employees, they no longer provide the employer with work, and the employer no longer provides them with wages. Simple as that. Why should the Archdiocese pay insurance premiums so that people who are not their employees receive money specifically for not being Archdiocesan employees? You criticize the Archbishop for relying on financial arguments, but at least finances are grounded in numbers (i.e., objective reality). The structure of your arguments is nothing but an appeal to emotion. If these employees were as truly concerned about having a “safety net,” as you call it, they should have purchased their own unemployment insurance. Basically, you want person A to get the benefit while having person B pay for it.
Finance is actually the manipulation of numbers to serve a purpose. Hardly objective reality.
I used to work for him and used to to hold him in high regard because of the humble demeanor of the articles he wrote. I had for the duration of his tour here in Joliet had considered him to be a role model for Catholics. Others felt that he was more career minded than pastoral…that he hid behind human shields…I defended him. When he moved to Seattle, I was sad to see him go. No more! I recently made several attempts to communicate with him about abuse events that occured in his former diocese. I was ignored each time. I am sure I am not the first person to say how demoralizing it is to be treated as such. In Catholic teaching an omission is a failure to do something one can and ought to do. If this happens advertently and freely, it is considered a sin.
The degree of guilt incurred by an omission is measured like that attaching to sins of commission, by the dignity of the virtue and the magnitude of the precept to which the omission is opposed as well as the amount of deliberation.
James the Just more exactly defines this sin when he states, “Whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.” (James 4:17)
To Bishop Sartain, We understand it is your practice to hide behind human shields in order not to impose any potential of dispute towards your reputation. As convenient as this may seem, keep in mind that Jesus spoke for himself and never used human shields to protect his reputation for the sake of advancing himself. He sacrificed himself in the name of our most vulnerable and the most hurt. Peter denied Jesus for the same reason you do the same. I guess it is no coincidence that you share the same name as the one who could not stand up for the sake of an innocent. It is unfortunate that we wasted time holding you up in high esteem. We though you practiced God’s love without fear of risking your own reputation. A true practitioner of Peace and Justice is someone who can defend on any issue–even those that may touch him/her.
Abuse is unacceptable always!
Take your Lady GaGa costume off and learn some humility!
Jesus was raised to the right hand of Our Father BECAUSE he did not stand behind human shields!
Once a Fan…
While it appears to me in my first hand contact with Archbishop Sartain that he is a good honest person and likes to be square with people there is always something you don’t know about anyone you meet.
However, my main point here is that people should keep in mind that there are about 4 maybe 6 people who “run” the corporation that IS the Catholic Church around here.
As far as I can tell they are corrupt. They are isolating the new bishop, just as they isolated the last 2 bishops, from things they wanted control over and didn’t want to “bother” the boss with.
So, to some extent, Sartain is in the dark about certain things. Eventually this will cost the archdiocese money because when they “wrong” you the only way you can bust their heads is to have had a breached contract and punish them by taking their money away.
This is a tragedy because taking the money away hurts the good things the Church does. I am saying that Sartain needs to fire these 6 people NOW before they cost him a million bucks or more.
Arrogance, corruption, stupidity, greed, and narcissism are all alive and well inside this corporation, not unlike any other corporation you could name that has lost it’s true allegiance to its defined mission.
Is Angela Kristen one of them? I have been trying to communicate to him through her, and have gotten nowhere.
“Finance is actually the manipulation of numbers to serve a purpose. Hardly objective reality.”
That is not a definition of finance but a description of manipulation. Finance is not manipulated unless someone manipulates. The author of this comment presented a rational argument.
Moreover, even if the archbishop had financial resources to offer unemployment insurance in his previous diocese, it is probably the case that it simply cannot be afforded in his new diocese; if the diocese could afford, his decisions in his previous diocese suggest strongly that he would offer it. It would seem that the diocese is simply unable financially to offer unemployment insurance to all who would be eligible.
Get real
I don’t think the author is blaming Archbishop Sartain for the policy; he is holding Archbishop Sartain accountable for not making more of an attempt to examine this issue. It doesn’t matter that he had only been here 9 months. It doesn’t. What matters is that there are people who are in dire straights. The Church teaches we must do our best to help those who are in need of help. Archbishop Sartain has a responsibility to role model this for our Roman Catholic Community. He may not be able to change the present policy. There are forces in place he may not have control over. But he needs to do his best to respond to those cries for help. Do not lump Archbishop Hunthausen into any character attacks or debates. He is the most saintly bishop I have ever known and will know in this life. But it’s not a holy thing to assassinate anyone’s character – so let’s not do this to anyone, including Archbishop Sartain. But as members of the laity, not only is it our right to confront him if he is dropping the ball with regard to this issue it is our duty to do so. Remember he is called to serve this Community. And whether you sir, admit this or not, the sad truth is this: there is manifest corruption within our Church, which is the Church which Jesus Himself started. We are all a part of this system, and we must confront evil that take place within the Church. I am not saying at all that Archbishop Sartain is evil – he’s not – so don’t misread what I am saying. But I am saying this: there is corruption within the Church’s walls. This is no secret. It is well known that Pope Benedict has been trying to address corruption within the Vatican – among high ranking clergy as a matter of fact, in how money is laundered and deals that have been and are being made. This is not new news. So I can understand the author’s concerns regarding employees of the Archdiocese not being entitled to unemployment insurance. And there does need to be dialogue concerning this – and I believe this was what the author was hoping for, with some direction in solving this problem. It is easy for any of us to turn our heads the other way when we have full bellies and our electricity is still on and our water has not been shut off, and that we have not lost our homes because we could no longer pay our mortgages. I have spoken with thousands of people in this situation when working for the Crisis Clinic in Seattle on the 211 Community Information Line. I had to talk with people who were living in their cars and who could not afford needed medical care, and even people who could afford to only eat one meal a day and sometimes they had to go all day hungry because they lost their jobs due to the recession. The Archdiocese does not pay competitive salaries in many cases when compared to the private sector – and if an Archdiocesan employee is laid off they may lose their homes and end up in the soup lines because they were living from paycheck to paycheck in supporting their families on a shoestring budget. Archbishop Sartain does not have to face those people – he is sheltered from having intimate close quarters contact with them — but when I worked at the 211 Call Center I did not have that luxury – I had to be present to people becoming hysterical on the phone and feeling at times so distraught they felt like giving up on life. Yes. That is where Jesus is truly present – and Archbishop Sartain and all those who represent the Archdiocese in such matters need to be responsive. If a person is experiencing them as not being so, that person has the right and the obligation morally to confront this. It does not mean the Archbishop is immoral – it means that he needs our help to make these needs clearly known.