Structure and Character
The organization is largely a collaborative effort by lead organizer, IWW delegate and spokesperson Andrew Nellis, and other long time anti-poverty Ottawa activists.
Some of the main pieces of legislation which motivated activists to form the Panhandler's Union was the Safe Streets Act and a piece of legislation dubbed Brian's Law which was eventually found to be unconstitutional as it was used to pick up homeless people up off the street and put them in jail or mental institutions without due process. Other pieces of legislation objected to include the Vending on Highways Law, passed by Ottawa City Hall. Aside from one of its members, the panhandlers' union dues are paid for by the Industrial Workers of the World through donations and various organized events.
The Panhandlers' Union is not a conventional labour union in the sense that its purpose is not to bargain with a third party for a collective contract and higher wages. This misconception led to ridicule of the union, including an article critiquing the union in the Ottawa Citizen which asked if the panhandlers were fighting for "wider sidewalks?" The newspaper granted the union a chance to respond with their own op-ed piece, and their editorial, "Why Panhandlers Need a Union", appeared in the newspaper on March 20, 2006. In May 2007 union and its organizer Andrew Nellis were featured in a multi-page article in the Ottawa City Journal. The newspaper also interviewed panhandlers and the executive director of the Bank Street Business Improvement Area.
The union meets once a month at a drop-in centre in the ByWard Market area of Ottawa. The meetings are open to anyone who is interested in becoming a member of union. The standard IWW rules of membership are followed. Non-members can sign up on the spot to become card carrying members of the IWW. The meetings operate under Rusty's Rules of Order and voting is based on a consensus system.
Read more about this topic: Ottawa Panhandlers' Union
Famous quotes containing the words structure and/or character:
“Why does philosophy use concepts and why does faith use symbols if both try to express the same ultimate? The answer, of course, is that the relation to the ultimate is not the same in each case. The philosophical relation is in principle a detached description of the basic structure in which the ultimate manifests itself. The relation of faith is in principle an involved expression of concern about the meaning of the ultimate for the faithful.”
—Paul Tillich (18861965)
“When a mans feeling and character are injured, he ought to seek a speedy redress.... My character you have injured, and further you have insulted me in the presence of a court and large audience. I therefore call upon you as a gentleman to give me satisfaction for the same.”
—Andrew Jackson (17671845)