UPDATE: Although I have not changed my mind on the issue with Jeff Gaudette, a quick reminder of my own personal issues with boycotts is that I will not lead one. That is for the supporters of Jeff Gaudette to decide.

What has been done to date

After speaking with Jeff a few times as well as one of his campaign supporters and a variety of others this is what has happened as well as my thoughts.

• This is definitely a case where termination is not called for and is heavy handed
• I’ve written the Labour council, Jeff reminded me that they did not actually support candidates (although I’m pretty sure CUPE endorsed him). My old friend there from my Rustshield days when I was on the other side of the table responded that they would be closely watching this case and appreciated the concerns that I had. They said that there was no other course of action except the grievance procedure at this time because the employer has rejected any other method of resolving this complaint.
• I have submitted a letter to the editor, look for it
• I submitted a quick email to Jeff’s (Former) supporters at the tabloid blog thingy who apparently don’t seem to think this is “News Worth Knowing”

Also as a final note. There are some who think this is only about Jeff and whether they like him or not.
This is about how a candidate for council gets treated now and in the future. No offense Jeff but this is not just about you.

New final note: Jeff has tried to correct me several times in my assertions that he was a so called “labour candidate”. Sanja Maric had that title and Jeff repeatedly drives home the point that he would have always represented every resident in his ward.

Where I stand by my statements is that I do not doubt Jeff but because of his being a working man, because of his being a safety steward at his place of work, the firing still sends a message to all future potential candidates who work for others that they may be putting their livelihood on the line. This is a threat to all of our democracy, and should incite all of us. I still believe that whatever merits exist on this case they are overshadowed by how this is viewed by all of us.

P.S. I haven’t even inquired about the Bridge’s side and would assume they would not discuss the details of their case as per every lawyer’s recommendation on such matters.

My main point is that having this termination reduced to a penalty of suspension/probation due to special circumstances would not hamper the Bridge’s right to discipline others for the same offence in the future and send a strong message deterring others who think about. (how many discipline cases are municipal candidates?) I’m sure Jeff would and still could grieve that penalty but that penalty would not send out such a chilling deterrence to the community and workers thinking about running

Letter to editor I wrote in Saturday’s, October 30’s paper