Letters to the Editor

What You Say

Purple Reign

I am writing to clarify issues raised in [News, "Allied Affront," Doron Taussig, Aug. 30, 2007], which is very critical of SEIU International for leaving the Philadelphia AlliedBarton organizing campaign. I am not writing to excuse anything the union did. Many of our student, community and worker members are still angry. Many worker activists who stuck their necks out during the campaign were moved off contracts, had their hours cut or were suspiciously fired after the union campaign ended.However, I feel that the article does not give sufficient detail about how SEIU does support Jobs with Justice and security guards in general. Without important distinctions being made, the article ends up painting all of SEIU, and perhaps unions in general, with the same broad, grimy brush.

The average person on the street may not know there is a difference between SEIU International, the group that left the Philadelphia campaign, and the SEIU that they see raising hell on the streets every day, SEIU Local 32BJ District 36.Though SEIU 32BJ does not directly support our efforts on this campaign, they support Philadelphia Jobs with Justice in general through financial contributions and by mobilizing their members for other workers that we are supporting.Additionally, it should be noted that SEIU 32BJ has raised the living standards for hundreds of guards (companies other than AlliedBarton) in our city.I also think that it is important for readers to know that, though SEIU International's actions in Philadelphia are questionable, they have brought thousands of AlliedBarton guards in other cities into the union and have won millions of dollars worth of wage and benefit concessions.

I also would like to remind readers that the Philadelphia market is exceptional in the eyes of AlliedBarton. Philadelphia is the company's largest market and they enjoy 85 percent market share. AlliedBarton is based in King of Prussia and its largest shareholder is billionaire financier and native Philadelphian Ronald O. Perelman. Despite the conflict of interests, Perelman is on the Board of Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, and is a major donor to both Penn and Temple, all while serving on the Board of Allied Holdings Company.The Temple Board of Trustees has at least one member who is also on the Board of Directors of AlliedBarton. Perelman's donations to the campuses may or may not have a bearing on the company's multimillion-dollar contracts, but the net result is that the campus administrations are more than happy to ignore our pleas for justice rather than bite the hand that feeds them.

Fabricio Rodriguez
Executive director, Philadelphia-area Jobs with Justice

I realize that you are stretched during the Live Arts Festival and limitations of space make quick capsule reviews a necessity. But, I was disappointed to see a review posted by a writer who was so embarrassed by the content of a show to the point that she had to "divert her eyes" [Citypaper.net, Online Reviews, "BATCH: An American Bachelor/ette Party Spectacle," Deidre Wengen]. This is not the way you treated other performances with transgressive content — the Pig Iron performance of Isabella, for instance, which was performed almost entirely in the nude.

BATCH was commissioned by the Humana Festival of New American Plays — a fact that was not commented on in any of the writings about the piece — and was the result of more than two years of careful, meticulous and serious work. It has been reviewed, favorably and sometimes unfavorably, in more than 30 national and international newspapers. I feel insulted to have to state it here, but there was much more to the piece than "shouting," "dildos" and a "condom corsage." None of this was mentioned in your writer's reductive "criticism." How would your writer have known what was in BATCH if she felt so compelled to avert her eyes?

An OBIE-winning company that has made an 11-year contribution to culture in Philadelphia and has a reputation as an innovator throughout the American Theatre deserves better than this sophomoric and insulting lack of consideration. I fear that I would prefer no review to the censorious response we received.

Whit MacLaughlin
Artistic director, New Paradise Laboratories

Life and Death

I was amused at Michael Washburn's defense of capital punishment [Feedback, "Slammed, Washburn Responds," Aug. 30, 2007] as "a way to strike at those who prey on minorities." I can't make the assumption that Washburn is, like the majority of American conservatives, a self-proclaimed "Christian" who selectively ignores aspects of the Bible such as the commandments, the teachings of Jesus, etc., on the subject of taking life,and goes for the ever-popular medieval hit single, "Eye For an Eye." But I was struck by the irony of using this phrase in regard to the black community — if "striking back" with death is a viable means to justice, can he really refute every justification that'sever been given for it in "the 'hood"? After all, the distrust of the legal system there is no less anecdotal than the belief that legalized murder is a deterrent to crime.

Even if you choose not to believe the statistics in this regard, the notion that those who live in a culture where death is literally just around the corner will suddenly be cowed by its distant, sterile administration by anonymous authority figures is laughably naive. And if it is "in blacks' best interest" to at least get to witness the death of a bloodthirsty coward (which, after all, anyone can emotionally relate to), I submit this: What is it about a life of being caged like an animal and sodomized every night that seems less fitting a punishment than falling peacefully asleep?! To use Washburn's reaction: incredible.

Paul Derren
Cherry Hill, N.J.

Driving Rage

I'm amazed at how aggressive people are when driving and how typically incompetent this city is in implementing common-sense measures that can, for example, alleviate having to wait a full five minutes at one light just to make a turn because not a single ignoramus will stop and let you go — but they're the same ones who get mad when they have to wait [Slant, "(Good) Drivers Wanted," Steve Conn, Aug. 30, 2007]. And yes, the poorer the neighborhood, the more ignorant the driver. Why should they care, anyway? Three-quarters aren't licensed drivers, let alone insured. Another group of drivers that get me every time are those from Jersey. I notice when they're in Jersey, they don't run stop signs and red lights, or weave in and out of traffic as if they're in the Indy 500 the way they do in Philly. A good 95 percent of people on the road shouldn't be on it.

Donna Di Giacomo
Germantown