By Michael J. Forde Executive Secretary-Treasurer
New York City District Council of Carpenters
Many of you have contacted us at the District Council with questions and concerns, as well as feedback, in regards to the current situation at Local Union 157. We, your elected officers of the New York District Council, want to assure you that we are doing everything in our power to guarantee that the membership of Local 157 is protected. We are all in this together, as your fellow members and as your Council leaders, and we are committed to unifying this District Council.
Above all, we want to assure the membership that your local is not going to be merged. Your charter will remain in place and Local Union 157 will maintain its standing within our District Council. Local Union 157 is an important part of our organization and an asset to our Union family.
During this challenging time of reorganization, new appointments have been made to your local’s leadership to assist in facilitating this process. We are pleased to announce that Brother Lawrence D’Errico has been appointed as the new Business Manager of Local 157. Along with Brother D’Errico, we have assigned Local 157 members Anthony Pugliese and Ramadan Ibric as Business Agents. Additionally we have assigned District Council employees Richard Tuccillo and Michael Murphy as temporary Business Agents of Local 157. United in the mission to serve the members of Local 157, we are here to address any and all of your concerns. Please be assured that we are in daily contact with all of the above-mentioned Representatives and that we are back to “business as usual.”
At this time, all of Local Union 157’s bank accounts are frozen. Therefore, the District Council is currently paying all of the local union’s bills. This situation is only temporary while we work with your new accountant to reorganize the Local’s books and accounting methods. Additionally, your office staff is receiving updated computer training in order to meet the needs, demands and requirements of the new procedures being put in place. During this transition process, services to the members will continue as normal.
Specifically, Local 157’s Scholarship Fund, as well as other benefits such as the sick donation fund and accidental death & dismemberment policy, will not be affected during this time. Another positive change that you will notice is the facelift given to your union hall, with fresh paint and a few renovations.
We are all working to help Local 157 grow and once again become a Local that all can look to with pride and respect. To help with this effort, we will be offering the membership of this District Council more opportunities to help our organizing efforts expand, by hiring them as new District Council Organizers. You recently received a letter informing you of the interview process and inviting you to apply. We are looking for members who sincerely want to assist us in building and strengthening our Union, members who understand the critical nature of organizing as it relates to the health and future of our Union.
We look forward to receiving many applications and hiring the “best of the best” to join the effective, elite group of organizers already on staff in an all-out push to protect the future of your Local, our District Council and our great Union.
The outlook for Local Union 157 is very positive. Jobs are being turned, workers are being protected and your leadership is on the street working for all of you. Together we will certainly maintain the nobility and grandeur that has been and is Local 157.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
The Outlook For Local Union 157 is Very Positive
91 comments:
I would ask that if you would like to leave a comment that you think of Local 157 Blogspot as your online meeting hall and that you wouldn’t say anything on this site that you wouldn’t, say at a union meeting. Constructive criticism is welcome, as we all benefit from such advice. Obnoxious comments are not welcome.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As a member of the UBC I find it appalling that we have a UBC Constitution but it is only the members that have to abide by it. The International and in this case the NYC District Council can ignore it and violate it at will. Such is the case with the Mr. Spencer and EST Mike Forde in regards to appointing officers to fill the vacant positions at Local 157.
ReplyDeleteLocal 157 does NOT belong to Mr. Spencer and the International and it most certainly does NOT belong to Mike Forde and the NYC District Council. I raise this issue not as a slight to the integrity or competence to the members appointed but must ask why the members of Local 157 are not demanding the right to control their own Local as is guaranteed by the UBC Constitution. Why are you doing nothing while Forde and Spencer violate the UBC Constitution and illegally install people to run your local? You must challenge these actions not only for your Local but for the sake of the rest of the UBC Brotherhood whom they might try to pull this scam on in the future. The only accusation I would make against the members chosen is Mr. Deeirrico as to why he has violated his fiduciary duty and not demanded of Mr. Spencer a meeting of the members to install a Pro Tem President who according to the constitution has the right and the duty to fill the vacated positions at Local 157 . This duty is outlined in Section 32D and gives the recording Secretary of the Local the right and duty to call a meeting to order and in the absence of a President and Vice President those Present shall elect a “President Pro Tem”
While Section 6D allows for the supervision of a Local and Section 10 clearly outlines the rights of General President it also in 10M clearly sets the limitations of the General President right to appoint permanent members to fill vacancies in a local regardless of how they were vacated. The President of Local 157 resigned and the Vice President was dismissed without trial because he was found guilty when Mr. Spencer and Mr Forde claim he did not appear a move the Brother clearly has a right to challenge. Section 10M gives the General President the right to appoint interim(as in not permanent) officers in NEWLY,CONSOLIDATED and MERGED Locals . Not only can the General President or his supervisors NOT appoint permanent Officers but they may NOT appoint ANY Officers in the case of Local 157. That right as detailed in Section 32 is clearly the right and duty of the members and Pro Tem Local President. For D’Errico to state the “two supervisors appointed me, Lawrence D’Errico” is to admit that the constitution has been violated. While the supervisors have the right to oversee the accounts, finances and books of the Local during supervision at NO time are they allowed to fill vacancies. Nor can they remove members without trial. This brings us to WHY Forde was made an assistant supervisor This was clearly done to circumvent the constitution and use Fordes powers as EST to provide the services Business Representatives, Asst.Reps and organizers under Section 31B . The General President, International and Mr.Spencer are aware that they cannot fill vacancies in this case as supervisors so they are using the EST powers of Forde under Section 31 B to deny the members rights to fill the vacated positions in Local 157. That is why they are being referred to as Business Manager and Business Representatives and not President, Vice President and Financial Secretary. If this is not the case than let Mr Forde tell the members of Local 157 when the Pro Tem President will be choosen by the members. Let Mr Forde tell the members when the Pro Tem President will fill the vacancies in Local 157. Let Mr. Forde tell the members what he will do with these appointed Business Reps and Business Manager when the Vacancies are filled by the members of Local 157 as dictated by the UBC Constitution. While we are on the subject of Section 31B I would ask the Supervisors to show us the wording in 31B that allows the EST to appoint a Business Manager.
If the allegations are indeed true than the members of Local 157 have been helped by the International and should be grateful. They should not be grateful to the point that they hand over the rights of their Local as guaranteed by the UBC Constitution to Mr. Forde or Mr. Spencer . Remember that the International is getting PAID and getting paid quite well to do their duty to intervene on behalf of the rank and file of all UBC Locals. They as well as the council are being paid to serve the members and our locals. We are not here to serve them. I would hope for the sake of all the UBC Brothers that the Local 157 membership puts a stop to this attempt by the NYC District Council and Mr. Spencer as representative of the UBC International to deny the members of Local 157 their rights guaranteed under the UBC Constitution. I welcome the comments from Mr Forde or Mr. Spencer denying that my interpretation of the UBC Constitution is incorrect.
Thank you for your interpretation of the UBC Constitution. I have a question, UBC Constitution 6d says “including the removal of any or all officers” are you saying they have no right to remove an officer without a trial?
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. It is clear that the right under 6D is not given to fire Local duly elected Officers but to remove or suspend them pending trial. Each member under Section 52 is guaranteed the right to a fair and impartial trial. The charges against the Local 157 officers was defrauding the UBC which is clearly outlined in Section 51. The UBC Constitution does not make the General President king with the right to remove duly elected Officers at his whim with denial of due process to UBC Members. Also what is important is WHO removed Delacio the only officer not to resign. The District Council already illegally moved to fire him on November 19,2007 which was before the supervision was imposed which makes 6D a mute point. So who removed Delacio??
ReplyDeleteLets remember that it had already been decided to fire Kennedy,Hanley and Delacio had by the District Council on November 17,2007. This was before the supervision was imposed on November 21, 2007 . First of all the NYC District Council has no authority to fire any local Officer or demand their resignation. Nor do they have the right to require Officers to attend the so called meetings they had between November 13-19. The only one who acted properly by not attending was Delacio..They can fire Business representatives but that does not remove them from their dully elected offices. It of course prevents them from doing their job because the locals have allowed the District Councils to own everything including their buildings so they deny access to duly elected Officers. So here is a question. Why the supervision. If Handley and Kennedy resigned on November 21 and the District Council illegally removed Delacio problem is solved. Why did the International impose the supervision anyways on November 21st??The remaining Officer D’Errico is obligated and justified under the Constitution to call a meeting and the members at that meeting by vote would have appointed a new Pro Tem president pending an election. So how can the International justify supervision? Was it to get at Delacio. If the council could legally call the meetings it did from November 13-19 and fire duly elected Officers why did they need the 6D powers to get Delacio. Under 26F the Council could have brought Delacio to trial AFTER he was charged. Was it to get control of Local 157 and it books and assets? Was it so Forde and the Council could deny the Locals rights to self government and install Officers of their choice. That speaks for itself. The answer to the rest is to have a look at what has happened to the Local 157 assets after the council is done with its Restructuring. “while we work with your new accountant to reorganize the Local’s books and accounting methods” Again which the District Council has no right to do or become involved with. This right under supervision is the Internationals and Mr. Spencer and NOT Forde . Mr Forde can call himself Assistant Supervisor all he wants but unless he resigns his EST Office during supervision he is still restricted by the UBC Constitution as EST.
Now I am sure Forde is going to try to fall back on the NYC District Councils bylaws to excuse his and the councils actions. Remember that while the Council can make bylaws for its members of which the members of any Local are NOT members of but affiliated with it CANNOT write bylaws that conflict with the UBC Constitution. Also remember that Council bylaws do NOT supersede the constitution. Have a look at the NYC District Council bylaws and ask yourself why the International which has to approve all council bylaws allow the NYC District Council to have bylaws that conflict with the UBC Constitution. To open another avenue of thought let me make you aware that the General President through his attorneys has stated for the record in California District Court that: “though the subordinate bodies are link by a common constitution the International has NO LEGAL BINDING AUTHORITY over the Councils and the Councils have NO LEGAL BINDING AUTHORITY over the locals.”
A letter by Mike Forde to the membership dated December 5, 2007 explained the actions taken on November 26, by the UBC placing local 157 under supervision.
ReplyDeleteIn the letter Forde says, “All officers of the executive board and the locals delegates to the district council, as well as membership meeting have been suspended” no mention of a pending trial.
Also in an interview with Mr. Spencer http://local157.blogspot.com/2007/12/five-minutes-with-frank-spencer.html he was asked the following question in which his answers would be in violation of the constitution:
Local157 blogspot: What happens to the elected officers of a local placed under supervision?
Frank: All officers of the executive board and the locals delegates to the District Council have been suspended.
Local157 blogspot: How will replacements be selected to fill the vacated elected local positions?
Frank: General President Douglas McCarron will make all appointments with recommendations from EST Mike Forde and myself.
Unless McCarron,Forde and Spencer can come forward and prove otherwise then none of them have the right to appointment anybody. Two other questions? Why were the other delegates who were not Hanley,Kennedy or Delacio suspended. They were not accused of wrongdoing. So if they were duly elected delegates why were they suspended? If they try to tell you the LMRDA required it they are lying. Second. Why were the 157 books frozen and why was the council paying the 157 bills. There was no accusation of financial impropriety and the books and financial assets are none of the District Councils business so why are they reorganizing the 157 accounting practices. The bills of 157 as allotted by the LMRDA can continue to be paid “Legitimate expenses that are not prohibited transfers of funds include: Expenses incurred by a trustee in connection with the supervision of the subordinate union, if they would be valid if incurred by an officer of the subordinate union? Such as the normal expenses of 157. So why did Forde and the council become involved with the Local 157 accounts and where in the UBC Constitution are they allowed or directed to do so. Remember that any Trusteeships (and this IS a Trusteeship) shall be established and administered by a labor organization over a subordinate body "only in accordance with the constitution and bylaws" of the organization which has assumed trusteeship over the subordinate body. Forde and the council cannot make up the rules as they go along.
ReplyDeletePlease understand. These postings are my interpretation and opinions on the constitution. Please read the sections and decide for yourself. Mr Forde,Spencer or McCarron may come forward and make the case that these are incorrect.Then again they may not.Please read the constitution and apply it to the situation yourself to reach YOUR conclusions.
ReplyDeleteI have read the sections of the constitution and I agree with your interpretation and opinions on the constitution. I have sent John M a private email encouraging him to challenge the removal of officers and having the members vote for a new president pro tem.
ReplyDeleteJohn M. Please comment on this statement attributed to you......
ReplyDeleteOn November 26, 2007 General President McCarron placed local 157 under supervision and granted Eastern District VP Frank Spencer full supervisory authority over Local 157. Under the UBC Constitution Section 10(h, m) he has the power to assume and exercise full and complete authority over the conduct of Local 157, which would include the authority to enforce collective bargaining agreements, the authority to administer all of the locals assets, the authority to appoint conduct and cancel meetings, the authority to remove and hire any and all offices, delegates, stewards and employees.
First you say the emergency supervision was ordered on November 26. Forde is saying it took place on the 21st. Which is it. It is important because if Dilacio was DISMISSED on the 21st as Forde says then he was dismissed by Forde and not by those appointed by McCarron as supervision representatives. Forde and the council have no right to dismiss anybody. Second you clearly indicate that 10(H,M) allows McCarron "the authority to administer all of the locals assets, the authority to appoint conduct and cancel meetings, the authority to remove and hire any and all offices, delegates, stewards and employees." Why would you write such a thing when 10(H or M) says no such thing and nothing remotely close to it.Could you comment where you got such a statement?? This is not an accusation as I am sure this misinformation was supplied to you by the Council.Will Forde and the council be brought up on charges under section 51 for defrauding the members of Local 157 with this information which is clearly blatant lies??Can you point out in 10 H or M where these authority's are written to show me the error of my interpretation??
Here are my answers to your four questions:
ReplyDelete1. First you say the emergency supervision was ordered on November 26. Forde is saying it took place on the 21st. Which is it?
This was from a letter dated December 5, 2007 from EST Forde. In the letter he says “most of you have probably heard or seen by now, that on November 26, 2007, UBC General President Douglas McCarron, at the request of the executive officers placed your local under supervision”. The Forde letter also says “By letter dated November 21, 2007 McCarron acting on request, ordered a supervision be imposed on local 157.
2. Your second question about section 10H of the UBC constitution, General President McCarron sent out two letters, the first letter dated November 21, 2007 addressed to Lawrence D’Errico and the second letter addressed to Local 157 members dated December 3, 2007. Both letters constitute formal notice of further action being taken by the UBC. In both letters McCarron cites his authority under Section 10H and 6D appointing Eastern District VP Frank Spencer to immediately assume supervision.
“District Vice President Spencer was granted full supervisory authority, according to the UBC constitution and Laws, and the power to assume and exercise full and complete authority over the conduct of the local union’s affairs, including, but not limited to, the authority to enforce collective bargaining agreements, authority to administer all of local 157’s assets, authority to appoint assistance supervisors to assist him in the completion of his duties, the authority to conduct and cancel meetings, the authority to remove and hire any and all offices, delegates, stewards and employees, as may be necessary to insure the proper exercise of the supervisor’s authority.”
3. Can you point out in 10 H or M where these authority's are written to show me the error of my interpretation?
Both General President McCarron letters cite section 10H not 10M. The 10M references were communicated to me by a union source. In any event the answer to your question is no, I cannot.
Section 10H: Whenever it appears to the satisfaction of the General President that any Local Union or member thereof, or any Council is acting contrary to the welfare of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, or that supervision should be established over the conduct of the affairs of any subordinate body as set forth in Section 6D, the General President may appoint a committee to hold a hearing, after due notice to such subordinate body or member. Upon completion of the hearing, the committee shall report its findings and recommendations to the General Executive Board and to the member or subordinate body involved. The General Executive Board is empowered to take such action as is necessary and proper for the welfare of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, subject, however, to the right of appeal to the next General Convention, to the extent permitted by Section 53G. If the General President determines that an emergency situation exists, the General President may appoint a representative to assume supervision over any Local Union or Council pending the holding of a hearing and the completion of the proceedings as provided for in this Section.
Section 10M: The General President shall have authority to appoint interim officers and delegates of newly established, consolidated or merged Local Unions or Councils.
4. Will Forde and the council be brought up on charges under section 51 for defrauding the members of Local 157 with this information, which is clearly blatant lies?
I am sure there is something you are missing. I am not an constitutional expert, I will have an answer for you on Monday…Stay tuned
Thank You. While there is no question of the right to take over the Local in Trusteeship it must however be justified. That is not according to the NYC District Council or UBC but the LMRDA. If Hanley and Kennedy resigned on the 21st and DiLacio in the councils opinion LEGALLY fired why the need for supervision???They could have painted the hall with a lot less trouble than a supervision.Its funny how one says they have the right to suspend and the others say they have the right to fire. They also go back and forth between suspended and fired in their accounts of the events depending who is telling the story.
ReplyDeleteFor the record any member that wants to have a look to see what the Council and UBC is telling the feds the reasons for the trusteeship are can go to your local county clerks office. If they have done their paperwork you will find a file there on the trusteeship open to the public. Walk in the vault. Do a search on Local 157,Hanley,Kennedy or UBC and see what comes up. The trusteeship is a legal action and they file papers with the County Clerk same as a judgment,mortgage or Tax lien.They are usually quite interesting reading.
I hope when you ask on Monday you do not accept their standard answer which is "We have the right because we said so" or "How dare you ask questions" I am not a constitutional expert either but like you I can read and 6d.10H or 10m does not give McCarron,Spencer or Forde the right to replace anyone unless the Local is NEW, MERGED or Consolidated which 157 is not. Even then they can install only on an temporary basis. Forde will try to use his right to appoint Business Reps Under 31B to justify his actions. Its all he has.It says he can appoint the Reps but also says the appointments must be approved by the Executive Committee of the Council. That however is NOT possible as Fordes powers as assistant supervisor do not extend to the Executive Board of the Council. Forde is trying to act as if his powers as EST and Assistant Supervisor are combined for the purposes of installing his choices in Local 157 under Section 31B. In my opinion the Constitution however makes it clear that this is not the case and these powers are distinct and separate. Forde may NOT use the EST rights under Section 31B as Assistant Supervisor to install Reps in a Local under supervision. I ask you to show me then any place in the constitution that allows a General President,Supervisor or Assistant Supervisor the rights to install permanently Officers or Reps to a Local under Supervision/Trusteeship
Hey John,
ReplyDeleteAny luck. "I will have an answer for you on Monday…Stay tuned" Its Tuesday night and nothing. Have they chosen to ignore the issue. So what do we do next. They would have us believe that the members have no options to get answers. Not so. The issue here is whether the Constitution was violated and if Forde as EST and the Council have become involved in violation of both the UBC constitution and the LMRDA.If the membership of 157 (or just one member) feels the trusteeship is not justified or the LMRDA have been violated what can a member do.
Its quite simple and quite easy.Any member can go down to the New York District Office of the Department of Labor and ask them to have a look.
New York District Office
U.S. Department of Labor, OLMS
Ralph Gerchak, District Director
201 Varick St., Room 878
New York, NY 10014
(646) 264-3190
Members can also obtain a copy of the required LM15 here as well. Within 30 days after imposing a trusteeship over a subordinate union, the parent body must file an initial Trusteeship Report, Form LM-15, containing the following information:
* The name and address of the subordinate union;
* The date the trusteeship was established;
* Provisions of the constitution which specifically authorize imposition of the trusteeship;
* A detailed statement of the specific reason or reasons for establishing the trusteeship;
* Whether a convention met to which the trusteed labor organization sent delegates or would have sent delegates if not in trusteeship;
* Whether the labor organization imposing the trusteeship held an election of officers; and
* A full account of the assets and liabilities of the subordinate as of the time the trusteeship was established.
The rules for trusteeship in the LMRDA are quite clear. Forde used his position as EST to appoint the present members who are now running Local 157. Mr Forde can call them what he wants such as Business Manager and Business Rep but the UBC Constitution reads "Section 31A. The Officers of a Local Union shall be a President,Vice President,Recording Secretary,Financial Secretary,Treasurer,Conductor,Warden and 3 Trustees. Notice it does not say Business Manager or Business Representative. Since it is clear that the Constitution does not allow for Forde or the Council to appoint any Officer or to Dismiss any duly elected Officer The appointments are illegal and the dismissal by the Council of Dilacio was illegal. Pending Dilacios resignation or removal after trial he is still the Elected Officer of 157.The members of Local 157 STILL have a duty and right to fill these vacated positions in Local 157 caused by the suspension of the Officers by administrators of the Trusteeship.
So has the LMRDA Trusteeship regulations been violated and is the continued Trusteeship justified. I would have to absolutely the LMRDA has been violated and Unless the International in the LM15 has given others reasons for the Trusteeship than Hanley,Kennedy and DiLacio the trusteeship should have been ended already. If the problems were removed according to Fordes own statement of November 21,2007 there should be questions if a Trusteeship should have ever been imposed on November 26,2007 to start with. The LMRDA also makes it clear that Forde or the Council may not use provisions of the Council Bylaws during a Trusteeship as questioned in our my earlier post.
Section 302 of the LMRDA states:
“Trusteeships shall be established and administered by a labor organization over a subordinate body only in accordance with the constitution and bylaws of the organization which has assumed trusteeship over the subordinate body" Which means that only the UBC Constitution may be used to administer the Trusteeship. The LMRDA also states "that a trusteeship be only a temporary action and that the parent union and trustee should initiate positive action to remedy the imposition of the trusteeship as rapidly as possible." So why is the Local still under supervision. The Trusteeship must be justified. I hardly think painting the Union Hall and Fordes desire to change the Locals accounting practices will be deemed as justification under section section 302 of the LMRDA.
The rules of a Trusteeship can be found online here at the DOL website:
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/complia
nce/olms/trustreq.htm#at
Any member who has questions or concerns over Mr Spencers and Mr. Fordes actions over Local 157 and the denial of the members of Local 157 to run their own Local have options in spite of what The Council or Mr. Spencer would have you believe.If you worried about retaliation dont be."The Secretary may investigate any such complaint and upon a finding of probable cause that a violation has occurred and has not been remedied, may bring a civil action in a U.S. district court. The Secretary is prohibited from disclosing the identity of the complainant".Sections 301 and 303 of the LMRDA provide criminal penalties for willful violations of Title III. Any person who willfully violates these LMRDA trusteeship requirements may be fined and/or imprisoned. Maybe Mr Forde amd Mr Spencer will answer the members concerns then.
I am still working on getting you an answer I tried calling VP Frank Spencer and was told he is out this week on business, I tried calling the council, will call again today.
ReplyDeleteI did speak with several union sources and although section 10H in the constitution does not specifically outline the powers of the supervision I was told that this sentence in section 10H (“The General Executive Board is empowered to take such action as is necessary and proper for the welfare of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, subject, however, to the right of appeal to the next General Convention, to the extent permitted by Section 53G”) gives almost unlimited powers to the International. Stay tuned…
empowered to take such action as is necessary "gives almost unlimited powers to the International" I am sure that is what they would say But not so. That is why we have the Trusteeship regulations under the LMRDA. They were not written to give Internationals the right to play god with a local but just the opposite. The Trusteeship regulations were written to protect the locals from the Internationals because"Congress became aware that the power to impose a trusteeship was sometimes used to “milk” local treasuries and perpetuate power by controlling votes undemocratically. " The trusteeship regulations were imposed to prevent such milking or to prevent ESTs from appointing Local Officers at their discretion,
ReplyDeleteI would like Mr.Spencer to explain the situation of "Necessity for the Welfare" as your Union Soruces are quoting that allows he and Mr Forde to ignore and bypass clear and detailed sections of the UBC Constitution that dictate the procedure to fill vacated offices and the section that limits the Internationals right to fill said vacancies. The LMRDA is clear that the International must follow ALL of the bylaws in the UBC Constitution during the administration not just the ones they feel like obeying. If Mr. Spencer or Mr Forde pursues this avenue it is only fair that the DOL determines the degree of necessity and how denying the autonomy of Local 157 more than what is required is proper for the welfare of the Brotherhood.Remember that it is the autonomy of the Locals that the LMRDA Trusteeship regulations protect and NOT the right of a Council or International to violate that autonomy as Forde and Spencer have done by denying members of Local 157 their rights under Section 32.
Anonymous, why don't you stop all this bull about the supervision, do you think the international would be that stupid to violate the constitution. Of course the supervision is fully legal thats what they said, end of story. it will end in a couple of months anyway so stop it with this bull you are just stiring the pot we need to go foward not look back.
ReplyDeleteNOMINATION, ELECTION AND APPOINTMENT IN SUBORDINATE BODIES
ReplyDeleteA Section 31. The officers of a Local Union shall be a President, Vice President, Recording Secretary, Financial Secretary, Treasurer, Conductor, Warden and three Trustees. The officers shall constitute the Executive Committee of the Local Union. A Business Representative who is not a member of the Executive Committee shall attend the meetings of the Executive Committee with voice but without vote. No member may hold more than one office or be a candidate for more than one office in a regular election, in the same subordinate body, unless dispensation to combine two or more offices is or has been granted by the General President. In elections held to fill vacancies, a member who holds an office must resign said office in writing before accepting nomination as a candidate for another office in the same subordinate body (unless the offices are combined by dispensation) and all existing vacancies, including those left by such resignations, shall be filled by the same nominations and election. Neither the President, Treasurer, Financial Secretary nor Recording Secretary can act as Trustee.
B Where Local Unions are affiliated with a District, Industrial, Regional Council, the services of such full-time Business Representative and assistant Business Representatives and/or Organizers may be provided by and through such Council and such Business Representatives, Assistant Business Representatives, and Organizers shall be appointed by the Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the Council, subject to approval of the Executive Committee of the Council, and shall be employees of the Council. All Business Representatives and Assistant Business Representatives shall be
33
required to participate in any training program for Business Representatives which shall be established by the United Brotherhood, and all Organizers shall be required to participate in any training program for Organizers that may be designated by the General President. Local Union officers shall be required to participate in any training program established by the United Brotherhood for the Local Union position they hold. Council delegates shall be required to participate in any training program for Council delegates established by the United Brotherhood. An appointed Business Representative, Assistant Business Representative, or Organizer shall serve at the discretion of the District, Industrial, or Regional Council. No member may be appointed to or hold the position of Business Representative, Assistant Business Representative or Organizer while receiving a pension under the United Brotherhood of Carpenters Pension Plan.
C The regular terms of elected officers shall be three years in Local Unions and three or four years in District, Industrial and Regional Councils, or until their successors are elected, qualified and installed.
D A member cannot hold office or be nominated for office, Delegate or Committee position if receiving a pension under the United Brotherhood of Carpenters Pension Plan, or unless present at the time of nomination, except that the member is in the anteroom on authorized business or out on official business, or prevented by accident, sickness, or other substantial reason accepted by the Local Union or Council from being present; nor shall the member be eligible unless working for a livelihood in a classification within the trade autonomy of the United Brotherhood as defined in Section 7 or in employment which qualifies him or her for membership, or is depending on the trade for a livelihood, or is employed by the organization as a full-time officer or representative; provided, further, that members who are life members, apprentices, trainees or probationary employees shall not be eligible. A member
must have been twelve (12) consecutive months a member in good standing
34
immediately prior to nomination in the Local Union and a member of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America for two consecutive years immediately prior to nomination, unless the Local Union has not been in existence the time herein required, and must remain a member in good standing at all times in order to remain in the position to which he is elected or appointed. A member who retires after being elected may complete the term for which elected unless receiving a pension under the United Brotherhood of Carpenters Pension Plan. Contracting members are not eligible to hold office, nor shall a member who has been a contracting member until six months have elapsed following notification by the member to his or her Local Union in writing that he or she has ceased contracting.
E Nomination of officers, delegates, shall take place in May and the election shall take place in June. All members shall be notified by mail of the time, date and place of the nominating meeting and the notice shall specify all offices to be filled. Notice shall be by letter or postcard, or by a notice conspicuously placed on the front page of the union newsletter or newspaper, and must be sent to the members' last known address as reported to the Recording Secretary under Section 44F Notice in newspapers or similar publications shall not constitute proper notice, but may be used as a supplementary notice. Members shall receive not less than fifteen days' notice of nominations and elections, and where a combined notice is used it shall be mailed not less than thirty days prior to the date of the election. Notices of nomination and election shall be mailed not more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of such nominations and/ or election. Where District Council officers are to be elected by delegates to the Council in any year in which the affiliated Local Unions hold regular election of such delegates, the election of District Council officers shall be by the incoming delegates and not by the outgoing delegates. In Local Unions that are not affiliated with a District, Regional or Industrial Council, if Business Representatives or Assistant Business Representatives are elected, their qualifications, nomination, and election shall be governed by the provisions, of this section and the same rules which apply to Local Union offi-
35
cers shall apply to such Business Representatives.
F The election of officers and delegates shall be by secret ballot. Ballots shall be prepared in advance listing the names of all candidates nominated for election. The nominees receiving a plurality of votes shall be declared elected. Write-in votes shall neither be authorized nor permitted in the election of Officers or delegates in any Local Union, District, Industrial, Regional, State or Provincial Council.
G All Local Union elections shall be conducted by an Election Committee appointed by the President of the Local Union. For Council elections, all elections shall be conducted by an Election Committee appointed by the Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the Council or by the President of the Council if no Executive Secretary-Treasurer position exists or if such position is vacant. No nominee for office or nominee or nominee for delegate shall be eligible to serve on such Committee. The Financial Secretary shall be available with all necessary records to establish eligibility of members to be nominated for and to hold office and to vote in any election. For purposes of determining the eligibility of members to be nominated for and to hold office and to vote in any election, the UBC membership processing system shall be used to determine whether the length of membership and membership in good standing requirements have been met, along with other relevant information. If more than one polling place is used, a list of eligible members shall be available at each location. The Election Committee shall tabulate the vote and report to the Local Union or Council. The Chairperson of the Election Committee shall declare the result of the balloting and announce the name of the elected candidate. When voting machines are used the Tellers shall examine the machines before the start of the voting to see that they are properly set. A candidate, or his or her observer, may also examine the machines in conjunction with the Tellers. After the polls have closed the Tellers shall review the result of the election, fill out and sign the teller sheets giving the names of the candidates and total vote each received, which sheet shall be held in safe-keeping by the Recording Secretary. The Recording Secretary shall preserve all
36
ballots used and unused and all records pertaining to the election for one year following the date of the election.
H Where required or permitted by law, a qualified candidate for office shall be permitted to examine the membership list containing the names and addresses of all the members once within thirty days prior to the election, and a Local Union or Council shall honor reasonable requests from candidates to have their campaign literature mailed by the Union at the candidates' expense. A candidate for office may designate a member in good standing as an observer at the poll and tabulation of the ballots. More than one observer may be appointed by each candidate as needed to adequately observe the polls and tabulation. Observers must be members in good standing. The Election Committee shall determine the number of observers permitted in each election.
I The installation of Local Union officers shall take place on the first meeting in July. In case an officer does not appear for installation within two regular meetings thereafter, the office must be declared vacant. All Local Unions and Councils shall provide the United Brotherhood an accurate and current listing of their officers, Council delegates, organizers, and representatives immediately following their election or appointment by entering such information on the UBC membership processing system immediately following such changes.
J A Local Union or Council may adopt a Bylaw providing that an officer or representative duly nominated and elected in accordance with the Constitution and Laws shall, by virtue of his or her office, be a delegate to a General Convention of the United Brotherhood or any other subordinate body with which the Local Union or Council is affiliated. The notices of nominations and election, and the ballot, must advise the members that the candidate elected to the office or position will be a delegate to the General Convention of the United Brotherhood or other subordinate body.
All This Constitution Talk is so $&@*ing confusing... Don't you think it should be linked it to the Site ?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nominateducate.com/whats_new_15.html
If you had bothered to read the posts you would see nobody denied the legality of the supervision. Whats being questioned is the need considering the circumstances. Whats being challenged is the right for Forde to put officers in 157 or have his hands in the finances and books of 157.
ReplyDeleteIs the International that STUPID as you say. Well it does not take a rocket scientist to be a UBC Officer howevr the word is not stupid but Arrogant. This issue is bigger than just 157. It is an ongoing issue of the Councils control and decimation of locals in the UBC. Local 157 still has some rights due to the consent decree but most other Locals in the UBC have been reduced to mere shells subservient to the Councils. You say its time to move forward but are you. Each one of the rights you give up to the Council is another step back for the Local. The members of Local 157 had the right to and should have picked the new Officers of 157 NOT Mr. Forde. It is not for the Local to do as they are told and live with the decisions of the Council.It is for the Council to work at the discretion of the Locals they represent.
I am glad you have decided to give your rights over to people like Mr.Forde. I however have not.The next time Mr. Forde is at the Westin Resort staying in a room that your Locals money paid $431.33 a NIGHT for I am sure he will be grateful for you commitment and complacency.Thank god you allow him to send himself to Florida for 8 days at a resort and then reimburse HIMSELF (as a trustee of the NYCLMC )$7394 for the trip. Here is a man you should trust to move Local 157 forward.
VACANCIES IN LOCAL AND COUNCIL OFFICES
ReplyDeleteA
Section 32. If any officer shall fail to discharge the duties of the
office for three successive meetings, without satisfactory excuse, the
office shall be declared vacant by the President. This provision shall
also apply to the position of Business Representatives and delegates.
Failure to attend a regular or special called meeting without satisfac-
tory excuse shall constitute failure to discharge duties of the office at
that meeting.
B
When vacancies occur in any elective office of a Local Union,
the President of the Local Union may appoint a qualified member to
fill the vacancy pro tem, until such time as an election is held to fill
the vacancy. When a vacancy occurs in any elective office of a Coun-
cil, the Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the Council may appoint a
qualified member to fill the vacancy pro tem, until such time as an
election is held to Fill the vacancy. If no Executive Secretary-Trea-
surer position exists or such position is vacant, the President of the
Council may make such pro-tem appointment.
C
Any officer or Business Representative may be removed after
due trial upon charges preferred in conformity with Sections 51 and
52 of the Constitution and Laws.
D
In the absence of both the President and the Vice President, the
Recording Secretary shall call the meeting to order and those present
shall elect a President pro tem
Thanks for Linking the UBC Constitution, And as far as your website is concerned, It Looked Great, Top Notch Information !
ReplyDeleteAs Always,
In Brotherhood and In Solidarity...
Name: Charles Lezette
E-mail address: nominateducate@netzero.com
Homepage URL: http://www.nominateducate.com/
You are from?: Albany, NY
Your Union Local?: Carpenters Local 370
www.ubcnewsroom.com
www.unionreview.com
www.myspace,com/nominateducate
www.youtube.com/voc370
Hi Charles, thank you for the nice words about the website. I find the discussion very interesting; I hope to get some answers by the end of the week.
ReplyDeleteIn Brotherhood and In Solidarity
John
John, This is the FIRST TIME , in a LONG TIME that I have seen this much positive information discussed between Rank and File Carpenters, I hope you keep this thing going. I will try to encourage others in visiting your site. Please Keep Up the Great Work. I am now working partners with a former 157 guy. Very hard Worker. Thanks Again... Charles...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ubcnewsroom.com/
In reading the post it certainly sounds like Forde, Spencer and D’Errico have ignored and bypassed the constitution. How can Forde appoint a business manager and business reps to a local that is under supervision? If the local is under supervision how can he do anything? Why isnt the international led by Spencer running the local?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHi Bill, interesting discussion, don’t you think, what’s your opinion? I was unable to get in touch with Frank Spencer last week (out on business) I will call on Monday, he may make the case that the postings from the anonymous UBC member are incorrect interpretations. There is however valid questions he has about the continued need for the supervision, the District Councils involvement in the supervision and why some sections of the constitution are being bypassed that needs to be addressed. As to the “we are back to business as usual” line in Forde’s letter I too thought was a poor choice of words under the circumstances…Stay tuned and help spread the word about local157.blogspot.com…Take care.
ReplyDeleteWouldn't it be smart to have the LM 15 in your hand which they had to file giving detailed reasons for the Trusteeship. That way you can compare the excuses he is going to give you for the continued supervision to what they have told the Federal Government the justification for the trusteeship was. I am sure he is going to tell you my interpretation is flawed. He has to.I am curious due to the fact that they continue to avoid use of the word trusteeship that they might try to say 157 is not in Trusteeship. It most certainly is according to the LMRDA.They can call it what they want but it is a trusteeship.
ReplyDeleteIf Spencer indicates that it is continuing due to the Councils reorganizing the accounting practices as they said then ask why they are touching that or the Locals assets if there was not a problem indicated in the accounting practices at the time of the Trusteeship and did they indicate any problems in the LM15.Have him tell you exactly what they are doing. Did they fire ARMAO, COSTA & RICCIARDI. Are they training the bookkeepers. Neither one of these would justify continuing the supervision. Ask him why the Council is paying the bills when the only thing the LMRDA limits is the ability of the Councils or International to move money out of the Local to either one of them. It does not require the International to freeze the locals accounts and stop them from paying their own bills. Ask him to explain why that was done and WHO is going to oversee the process when the council comes to the local to be paid back. It will be interesting to know who is going to be charged for the reorganizing of Local 157s accounting practices or who is going to foot the cost for the Council paying the Locals bills during the supervision.Especially since it was unnecessary.
Intresting, calls to the U.S. Department of Labor,(646) 264-3190 reveal that no LM-15 report has been filed for local 157 supervision as of March 3.
ReplyDeleteSurprise ..Surprise...
ReplyDeleteTrusteeship Defined
Section 3(h) of the LMRDA defines a “trusteeship” as “any receivership, trusteeship, or other method of supervision or control whereby a labor organization suspends the autonomy otherwise available to a subordinate body under its constitution or bylaws.” The same definition applies under the CSRA. A “labor organization” includes any labor union except a state or local central body or a union representing solely public employees of a state or political subdivision of a state, such as a county or municipality. The term “subordinate body” means “subordinate labor organization.” Any trusteeship imposed over a body that meets the definition of “labor organization” is subject to the trusteeship provisions. The most common example of a trusteeship is an international or national parent body union imposing a trusteeship over a local labor organization.
A trusteeship exists whenever a parent union suspends a subordinate union's constitutional or statutory autonomy; that is, whenever the parent assumes control over affairs that the subordinate would normally handle itself. Thus, an action referred to as an “administratorship,” “stewardship,” or “supervisorship” is a trusteeship if it involves a suspension of autonomy otherwise available, regardless of the word used to describe it.
A union assuming a trusteeship over a subordinate union must file certain trusteeship and other reports with the Department of Labor's Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS).
Initial Trusteeship Report - Within 30 days after imposing a trusteeship over a subordinate union, the parent body must file an initial Trusteeship Report, Form LM-15, containing the following information:
* The name and address of the subordinate union;
* The date the trusteeship was established;
* Provisions of the constitution which specifically authorize imposition of the trusteeship;
* A detailed statement of the specific reason or reasons for establishing the trusteeship;
* Whether a convention met to which the trusteed labor organization sent delegates or would have sent delegates if not in trusteeship;
* Whether the labor organization imposing the trusteeship held an election of officers; and
* A full account of the assets and liabilities of the subordinate as of the time the trusteeship was established
I suggest double checking here unless the local office has confirmed to you that they checked the entire system.
ReplyDeleteOffice of Labor Management Standards (OLMS)
200 Constitution Avenue, NW
Room N-5605
Washington, DC 20210
E-mail: olms-public@dol.gov
Tel: 1-866-4-USA-DOL (1-866-487-2365)
Follow up to Anonymous, I did speak with VP Frank Spencer today and sent him an email about the constitutional questions and issues you raise in your postings. Mr. Spencer was very professional and cordial. When I receive the answers I will post them.
ReplyDeleteThank you John. However things work out may I say it is good to see a member who has the integrity to at least ask the questions.To many members of the UBC live in a self imposed climate of fear. They are afraid to question the Officers that are suppose to be working for the rank and file. Mr. Spencers answers will be important to all members of the UBC and their Locals.
ReplyDelete"supposed to be working"
ReplyDeleteYo John you ROCK the discussion is fantastic learning alot keep up the good job
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous
ReplyDeleteThough you raise some interesting questions. We will have to inquire about the answers. The Trusteeship/Supervision was eminet.Yes we have fired the accounting firm Arnao,Costa and Riccardi. We are also retraining our staff in accounting practices. Though no funds were misappropriated, the accounting procedures were not up to par. We are confident Frank Spencer will provide us with the appropriate assistance in obtaining information for our members and help us move as expeditiously as possible through this transition. Hopefully meetings will resume in the next couple of months.
I posted my concerns on February 22,2008 and here we are on March 9,2008 and no response. One has to wonder as to the integrity of Mr. Spencer and Mr. Forde. After inquiring as to the location of the LM15 it appears that one has not been filed as REQUIRED by the law. There are insinuations that Forde and Spencer are going to argue that this was not a trusteeship. Sorry boys that is not going to fly and this is not going to go away.
ReplyDeleteA trusteeship exists whenever a parent union suspends a subordinate union's constitutional or statutory autonomy; that is, whenever the parent assumes control over affairs that the subordinate would normally handle itself. Thus, an action referred to as an “administratorship,” “stewardship,” or “supervisorship” is a trusteeship if it involves a suspension of autonomy otherwise available, regardless of the word used to describe it. Even when the suspension of autonomy is only partial, a trusteeship exists and is subject to the LMRDA.
Supervision of a Local
If the supervisor exercises a degree of control over the local, however, by taking such action as directing that the local cancel a scheduled meeting or discharge one of its employees, then the autonomy of the local is suspended and a trusteeship exists.
Since it seems neither Mr. Spencer or Mr Forde are going to explain their actions I would have to say it is time for the DOL to determine the status of the Trusteeship and the violations under the LMRDA. We can have the DOL explain the lack of an LM 15 and have them take a CLOSE look at the actions of Forde and Spencer during this Trusteeship. I am glad your are confident in Mr. Spencer Patrick. I however do not share your confidence given the circumstances and the actions of the Mr. Forde and Mr.Spencer up to this point. I am curious who directed the Local to fire the accountants and who they were replaced by. Does it not alarm you that it seems Mr. Spencer has ignored his duties as supervisor and handed over Local 157 to Forde and the District Council to do with as they please.The lack of response on the part of Forde and Spencer and their refusal to abide by the UBC Constitution has made this a case for the DOL.All UBC members need to join 157 to see that things like this never happen to another Local and their brothers at Local 157 are given the rights guaranteed them by the UBC Constitution and the LMRDA. Our Locals are not personal play things for District Councils or the International.
Did anyone in Local 157 see the word "Trusteeship" in the recent articles from the union? Did anyone wonder why there was no report explanation for a "Trusteeship" given to the D.O.L? Maybe it's just a move from above to structure your local for other reasons. Only applications for delegate spots, not BAs or delegate & excecutive board.Constitutions not followed and BA's fired without a trial or a hearing? If it was a real "Trusteeship" , McCarron would have to appoint spots, not EST'S. Make sure you check out whos put into spots over there! Ask questions!
ReplyDeleteJohn on March 4 you say you spoke with Frank Spencer about the connstitutional questions and sent him an email. How long does it take to get an answer? Is he avoiding the issue?
ReplyDeleteSo John what happened??? You felt my questions were legitimate and of interest. Now you wont even give us the courtesy of a response to the questions regarding Spencer and his answers. Have you somehow been offended??Have you been warned to back off? Thanks
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous, You have a very lively imagination. I am not offended and I have not been “warned to back off”. I sent VP Frank Spencer an email today asking when can we expect an answer to the constitutional questions being raised. Lets have a little patience I am confident the issue is being addressed.
ReplyDeleteFirst John I asked you a legitimate question. I and others have asked you what the status of Spencers answers are and you have not even had the courtesy to respond. I asked if we had offended you in some matter and you respond in a cocky rude manner such as "You have a lively imagination" Have I done something to you to make you forget your manners. If you think it is off base for Forde and Spencer to come to you and tell you to back off than your a bit naive. Tell us honestly that you have not gotten any heat for asking these questions.
ReplyDeleteSecond. It has been almost a month since these issues were brought forward. This is not brain surgery. What is there for Spencer to think about. Answer the questions about the constitutional issues. End of story. I have been more than patient and sorry but I am not confident that the issues are being addressed. What I am confident that they are doing is stalling and hoping this goes away. There is NO DOUBT that they have violated the UBC Constitution and the LMRDA and you think it is a "lively imagination" to see that they are taking the time to cover their ass. I have respected you and been civil through this entire conversation. I suggest you continue to do the same.
To Anonymous, Take it easy I meant no disrespect to you or anyone else; I am home sick today and not myself. No one has told me to back off and the issue is not going away. I agree with you and I am puzzled why we didn’t receive an answer to our specific questions. Hopefully VP Spencer will have an answer today or tomorrow as to the status of our questions.
ReplyDeleteCalm down boys, I am sure there is a logical reason why Mr. Spencer has not responded to the issue. Maybe he hasn't check his email in box. Maybe he changed his email address. Maybe he is waiting to hear from some UBC legal eagle. Then again maybe Anonymous is correct, they violated the UBC Constitution and the LMRDA thinking no one would question or notice anything and hope the issue will just go away. Either way I find the conversation fascinating.
ReplyDeleteJohn, I don't expect an answer from Spencer, no LM 15 is filed yet with the DOL, his lack of an answer is proof that they are violating the constutution, he is just going to stall
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous, I spoke with VP Frank Spencer this morning regarding the email I sent on March 4 about the constitutional questions you raised. VP Spencer said he forwarded the questions to the UBC lawyers, “it is being worked on and will be answered in due time”. When I have more information I will post it.
ReplyDeleteJohn, Isn't it funny how we need lawyers to interpret what the plain language of the constitution says. I could have guessed thats what Mr. Spencer would say. It's always the lawyers, what ever happen to common sense. Lets see how long these smart lawyers take to answer simple questions from us dumb members.
ReplyDeleteI would have to Agree with Joe,
ReplyDeleteNothing as we know, is Written in Stone... But, This is a Cut and Dry Case. The Constitution Basically Speaks for Itself.
Lawyers No, Mediators Yes !
The Membership !
Thank you for continuing the work John. I asked before about you getting pressured because as you know you ask these questions at a risk to yourself. You have my respect for having the brass to ask at all. Spencer has to pass this off to the Lawyers not because he needs them to interpret the Constitution but due to the complaint filed with the DOL over the LM15 and LMRDA Trusteeship violations. If a UBC member has a Constitution question he or she is usually directed to the International VPs office for interpretation and not to the Internationals lawyers. If the Lawyers wrote the UBC Constitution or even served as advisor's then the UBC member would not be denied the right to legal Representation at trial. The UBC Constitution allows the UBC member the basic right of Counsel at trial as is a right under the United States Constitution. However the UBC Constitution demands the members attorney MUST be a member of the UBC. I wonder which lawyer would be stupid enough to write that bylaw.Do you know any UBC Carpenter /Lawyers. I wonder which one of the UBC Lawyers reviewing these Constitutional issues is a member of the UBC. If they are not did Mr Spencer exhaust all his internal remedies before he went outside the UBC to seek legal representation??
ReplyDeleteI would speculate that these issues never make it to any International Lawyers but have been handed to Forde who will hand it to O'DWYER & BERSTEIN to try to keep it in the State where they can exercise some kind of influence over the Local DOL. The lawyers are not interpreting the constitution but doing damage control over the LMRDA violations. As the last poster said the constitution issues are "Cut and Dry"
I am curious. What are the newly inserted 157 management team doing to address these concerns. Have they solicited an independent legal opinion free of either Spencer or Forde to determine if the members of Local 157 have had their legal rights under the LMRDA violated.I wonder if they are aware that they have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the members of 157 and not The District Council if they are indeed the Union Officers they and Forde THINK they are. Maybe they realize they ARE NOT the officers of Local 157. Maybe they are waiting until they are duly elected by the membership of Local 157 as the Constitution clearly requires before they feel obligated to a fiduciary duty to the members of Local 157.Have they raised these Constitutional issues
as representatives of the members of Local 157 or are they silent. Have they questioned at all the "Justification" and legality of the continued supervision as is required under the LMRDA.
The point I am trying to make is that we have no Constitution. We have bylaws of convenience. They are to be used and enforced only to restrict and penalize the UBC member yet the UBC hierarchy only have to abide by them when it is convenient for them. Would it not be fair if we to got to ignore them when it suits OUR purpose as well. It is time for the Spencers,Fordes and McCarrons of the UBC to be reacquainted with their lesson of servitude. We are not here to serve their purpose.They exist to serve the members of the UBC but seem to have forgotten that mission.If Forde and Spencer are allowed to install permanent officers in a local in direct violation of the Constitution than our locals autonomy ceases to exist. If Forde and Spencer are allowed to ignore the protections given the Local Union membership under the LMRDA than our locals autonomy ceases to exist. If Forde and Spencer are successful in ignoring the voices and demands of the membership than our locals autonomy ceases to exist.If the autonomy of our locals ceases to exist them we will be left to stand silent while these individuals become an ever increasing burden to our democratic brotherhood. Look around you today.Is this what your dream of a democratic brotherhood always looked like. Judging by our steady decline it would seem that these Burdens unchecked will become more than the Brotherhood can survive.
It does seem clear from Spencer’s answer that the lawyers are not interpreting the constitution but doing damage control over the LMRDA violations. Membership meetings cannot be suspended, members cannot be fined or suspended unless such member has been charged and afforded a full hearing. This is the LAW and our protected rights under the LMRDA. Spencer, Forde and D’Errico cannot do as they please; they have all violated the constitution and LMRDA.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous raises interesting questions:
Has the newly inserted 157-management team raised any of these Constitutional issues as the representatives of the members of Local 157 or are they silent?
Have they solicited an independent legal opinion free of either Spencer or Forde to determine if the members of Local 157 have had their legal rights under the LMRDA violated?
Have they questioned at all the "Justification" and legality of the continued supervision as is required under the LMRDA?
Obviously the answer is no to these question. The question now is what should we do about it and how do we proceed? Any Ideas?
Don't you guys get it. It was a hostile take over, And this is why the members feel there is nothing that can be done.If the department of labor or the LMRDA can,t help you what's a member to do.
ReplyDeleteJohn you said you spoke with VP Frank Spencer on March 21, its now April 3 where is his answer "VP Spencer said he forwarded the questions to the UBC lawyers, “it is being worked on and will be answered in due time”.
ReplyDeleteWhere are the answers from Spencer?
ReplyDeleteWe are now going into month #5 with no meetings and no answer to the questions. Can we as members file a lawsuit?
LAWSUIT!
ReplyDeleteThis is BULL SHIT!!! NO meetings, NO answers to simple questions, there was not even one word about local 157 in the district council magazine. What gives?
ReplyDeleteMaybe if we withheld our dues payment someone would listen.
ReplyDeleteI'm no legal expert ( And I find the requirement to be so astounding given the comman sense involved ) and if finding that things were above board we would have had emergency metings/elections/more information provided to the members.
ReplyDeleteDaamage control may not be the only issue involved and I am sugessting the conspiracy lies within the Coziness of the UBC and Wash., just as with the current airline situation.
( What ? The Union and or Capitol Hill isn't capable of this ? )
The events which have unfolded after the consent decree was imposed ( I speak chiefly of McCarron running the show since removing Mr. Devine )have led to continuing corrupt practices and an established climate of fear &
helplesness,to-wit the removal of our voice.
Other than standing outside 395 Hudson and handing out info and trying to recruit a body able to throw them out we're at their mercy.
It's how they've survived for too many years. Fact, the boys @ 157
have been at their game despite internal committees to root out the problem for many years now.
If Mack wasn't removed I have full confidence he wouldn't have to stumble onto evidence He would have
systematically gathered what he was looking for for some time =
157's corrupt practices and I'll
conservatively put that as the whole time they've been in office.
So when all is said and done Callahan has to " STUMBLE " onto these facts. Belive me the root of the problem isn't just that these guys were not within 157 jurisdiction or taking too many days off. Though what we do know
certainly suggests the stupidity involved by 157 leadership that expect us to sit back and do nothing about this so believe me when I suggest the DOJ ( Haight )
can't be finished with them yet.
PS:
- What about the UBC trials seeking justice in this matter ?
- What about the Govt's removal motion, There's a reason for it !
To Start with every 157 member who agrees that Spencer and Forde have violated the Constitution and the LMRDA needs to join the other members and put his or her name on a compliant with the DOL over the trusteeship and lack of an LM 15.The process is quite simple.
ReplyDeleteNext.157 members can copy and print the Constitution issues raised here on this site and send them to the UBC International demanding an investigation. This starts the process of exhausting your internal remedies before filling a civil lawsuit and it assures you that the matter REALLY will go to the UBC lawyers at the International level. As far as internal remedies goes the process is already two months old thanks to John submitting the questions to Spencer and acknowledging that Spencer has received them and CLAIMED to have sent them to the UBC lawyers. The refusal of Spencer to answer the complaints and issues raised over a two month period has established a pattern of refusal by the UBC to settle the matter Internally and the Judge will allow the civil case to proceed. That was the purpose of this exercise. I had thought that Forde being the arrogant ass that he is would have come on here and made statements FOR THE RECORD and hang himself and Spencer but he did not.To busy playing golf at the Westin Resort I guess.Spencer must now answer the complaints raised FOR THE RECORD since he has admitted receiving the complaints. One would hope that John will provide those emails and they do not mysteriously get lost. John how about posting those emails with Spencer here NOW so they do not get lost.
A civil suit in NY district court can and must be filed to force the compliance of the UBC in giving the answers to the questions asked and to determine if any criminal or civil laws have been broken which the 157 member can seek financial restitution for. At a minimum we have violation of fiduciary duty. The NYCDC Council sticking its fingers in the 157 accounts and book is both a violation of the LMRDA Trusteeship regulations as well as a matter that can be pursued in civil court. They had NO authorization or power under any UBC bylaw,State or Federal regulation or Local 157 bylaw that allowed them to touch the books of 157 let alone fire the accountants and rearrange the accounting practices.Has anybody read the consent agreement lately.
In the matter of withholding dues. Yes but be careful to follow the UBC bylaws. Disrupting their cash flow is always a good idea. Monthly dues should be withheld for the allowed period of three months as detailed in the Constitution. Be sure to pay at least two days before the three months is up and be sure to get a detailed receipt of you payment. Second. Demand a copy of your dues assessment authorization form that MUST be on file at the Union Hall and the Employer you work for or Dues Assessment cannot be deducted from you pay. Any company who has removed assessment money from you pay without a copy of that form is in violation of the law. Any Union who tells a company to deduct assessment without the members signed consent form is in violation of the law. If the member has not signed such a form they should not do so. Read the form first and the obligations it locks you into. You can also rescind this consent and choose to self pay. The rules for self pay are. You have thirty days from the end of the last month worked to pay. If you do not hey must send you a letter telling you you have thirty more days to pay or not be a member in good standing. If you dont pay you get another letter giving you 30 more days to pay or be removed from the membership roles.Dues assessment payroll deduction is NOT mandatory and your CHOICE. Memebers in the Empire Council have been told they cannot self pay and MUST pay before they can go to work. That is bullshit and called extortion.Interrupting their cash flow is always a good idea especially since you can see the plans they have for you assessment money such as market Recovery and golf outings in Vegas.
Next.Vacation fund. The NYDCC holds money form your vacation fund as ransom for picket duty. Vacation fund participation IS NOT MANDATORY. Tell then to stick their vacation fund in their ass. Payroll deductions are under your control. They cannot force you to participate in Vacation funds.Do you think that if they decided tomorrow to have a Christmas club that they could force you to participate and just remove money from your check against you will and without your signature??? I will provide anybody who wants to look copies of my pay stubs that show NO Deductions for assessment.There will be no further deductions for Vacation funds either. While we are on the subject do the members realize that the Vacation money is NOT a separate fund and combined with the Health and Welfare Fund. The vacation money is a part of the bottom line of the Welfare fund and the interest from the vacation money they put in their pocket.
It is my opinion that the membership by signed petition to the International has the right to bring charges against the any officer of the UBC as detailed under Section 51A. The issues raised here is that the actions of Spencer and Forde have violated the UBC Constitution and the LMRDA. Therefore under Section 51A 6 the membership has the right to demand charges against Forde and Spencer for Defrauding the Brotherhood. The UBC Constitution is quite clear and the LMRDA is quite clear on the process to be followed . Mr Spencer have a duty to be knowledgeable and proficient in both the UBC Constitution and the LMRDA before they can be appointed and act as a Supervisor in a Trusteeship. Mr Spencer and Forde should have turned to the UBC Lawyers and acknowledged their lack of expertise in the UBC Constitution and LMRDA BEFORE they accepted the position of Supervisor in a trusteeship and BEFORE tyhey made ANY decision in the Trusteeship of 157. By turning the issues raised here over to the UBC Lawyers when these issues were raised instead of answering the questions both Forde and Spencer and Spencer have confirmed their lack of expertise in both areas and should have refused the appointment as Supervisors ion as trusteeship. One can only conclude by their actions of Mr Forde and Mr Spencer willfully and intentionally conspired to violate both the UBC Constitution and the LMRDA. If not than the UBC International must concede that they willfully appointed unqualified individuals to supervise a trusteeship.
Now here are a couple of points I left out because I did not want to give away the entire store and help Spencer and Forde to cover their asses. Lets see the UBC Lawyers deal with these tidbits. Section 51 clearly states that Officers found guilty AFTER being tied and convicted can ONLY be reprimanded,fined,suspended or expelled by A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE LOCAL UNION PRESENT AT A Regular meeting or by a vote of the delegates to the Council.I hope they will produce a record of the vote to fire Delacio or accept resignations from Handley or Kennedy. Section 51 C also clearly details that the Council is limited to the right to suspend but NOT fire.That right however was further negated by the trusteeship.
What has been allowed to happen here will negatively affect all UBC members. It must be challenged and exposed. Local 157 members must act to regain the autonomy of the Local or it will,be the victim of more of Fordes and the Councils quest to destroy the identity's and rights of all the locals and rank and file members
To Anoyoumous, You really bring up good points, I have a question.
ReplyDeleteYou said Vacation fund participation IS NOT MANDATORY.
In NYC on a 35 hour check we have $224.25 or $6.41 vacation fund deducted from our weekly pay check. The vacation fund payment is made to members quartly less the 1% assessment and $0.60 working dues assessment. Are you saying they cannot force us into vacation fund deduction and that $224.35 would have to be paid weekly to members in their check?
If so how do you go about having the district council stop withholding this vacation money?
Also how would the council collect their assessments, would they send you a bill?
Thanks, and keep posting
On assessment deduction. If YOU HAVE NEVER signed an assessment deduction authorization form you instruct your employer to STOP the deduction. THEY MUST COMPLY or face action by the NLRB.Go to the NLRB web site and look up case 3-CB-8635 to see what happens to an employer who refuses to comply.They will say the are obeying the request of the Union and try to refuse.It is your pay check and your choice.If you have signed one the forms then the form contains details for options to opt out and choose direct pay. A direct pay procedure must be provided from your local. I pay by walking into the Union hall and paying with a check within the alloted time. The council SHOULD NOT BE COLLECTING any assessment MONEY the local must and moneys are then forwarded to the council. The Empire Council has an assessment form and can be seen here.http://www.local370voice.com/assessment.jpg
ReplyDeleteThe form should have the heading of the Local and not the Council but that is another argument.UBC Constitution Section 45 C C Any Local Union, District Council, or Regional Council may establish working dues, dues checkoff, supplemental work dues or work fees payable to the Local Union or Council by members working in its jurisdiction. If a member who owes such dues or fees fails to pay them as provided by the Local Union or District Council, or Regional Council, such dues or fees shall be charged to the member by the Financial Secretary by notice in writing that same must be paid within 30 days to entitle the member to any privilege, rights or donations. If the member does not make payment of arrears within the time prescribed, the member shall not be in good standing and he or she shall be notified in writing by the Financial Secretary that unless the amount owing is paid within thirty (30) days thereafter his or her name shall be stricken from membership. Notices shall be sent to the last known address of the member as reported by the member to the Local Union. This clearly details the time frame you have to pay assessment money. One trick they try to, pull is to tell you that you have to pay every day by check if you choose the direct pay option. The NLRB has already ruled that to be an undue burden on the member therefore illegal.If the employer requires a letter om assessment be very careful of the wording. Short and sweet. Please stop payroll assessment deduction because I have chosen direct pay.Nothing more.
In regards to Vacation. Again. Tell the employer to stop the deduction. If you want to establish a paper trail than give them a letter. It is the position of the NYS DOL that no employee can be forced to participate in payroll deductions for Christmas Clubs,Vacation funds,involuntary savings programs or etc.etc without their signed consent. Ask the Local to show you yours. Next they will try to say the program was instituted by majority vote of the Local and you must participate. Again. Bullshit. Ask for a copy of the vote to provide to the Department of Labor. They can have all the sham votes they want but you STILL do not have to participate.Call and ask them yourself.
And yes is your answer to both is the money stays in your paycheck and goes in your pocket
You know I am sure you are asking yourself."What The Hell.Is this for real" I can assure you it is. I would hope that you come to understand that the only reason that they get away with all this shit is because the members let them. Nobody says no.How can members not know their rights. This is not a game. This is food off YOUR table. I am sure members know carpentry inside and out. Thats what makes us skilled tradesman. So I must ask why members do not know their rights in regards to their own Union. Thats what makes them a skilled Union member. It is this lack of knowledge that has allowed them to get this far into your wallet. To get them out.Just say No!!! We can think about the tar and feathers later.
ReplyDeleteHere is one for Forde and Mr Spencer.TITLE V-SAFEGUARDS FOR LABOR ORGANIZATIONS
Fiduciary Responsibility of Officers of Labor Organizations
(29 U.S.C. 501)
SEC. 501. (a) The officers, agents, shop stewards, and other representatives of a labor organization occupy positions of trust in relation to such organization and its members as a group. It is, therefore, the duty of each such person, taking into account the special problems and functions of a labor organization, to hold its money and property solely for the benefit of the organization and its members and to manage, invest, and expend the same in accordance with its constitution and bylaws and any resolutions of the governing bodies adopted thereunder, to refrain from dealing with such organization as an adverse party or in behalf of an adverse party in any matter connected with his duties and from holding or acquiring any pecuniary or personal interest which conflicts with the interests of such organization, and to account to the organization for any profit received by him in whatever capacity in connection with transactions conducted by him or under his direction on behalf of the organization. A general exculpatory provision in the constitution and bylaws of such a labor organization or a general exculpatory resolution of a governing body purporting to relieve any such person of liability for breach of the duties declared by this section shall be void as against public policy.
AND b) When any officer, agent, shop steward, or representative of any labor organization is alleged to have violated the duties declared in subsection (a) and the labor organization or its governing board or officers refuse or fail to sue or recover damages or secure an accounting or other appropriate relief within a reasonable time after being requested to do so by any member of the labor organization, SUCH MEMBER MAY SUE such officer, agent, shop steward, or representative in any district court of the United States or in any State court of competent jurisdiction to recover damages or secure an accounting or other appropriate relief for the benefit of the labor organization.
And for FORDE:Prohibition Against Certain Persons Holding Office
(29 U.S.C. 504)
SEC. 504. (a) No person who is or has been a member of the Communist Party 9 or who has been convicted of, or served any part of a prison term resulting from his conviction of, robbery, bribery, extortion, embezzlement, grand larceny, burglary, arson, violation of narcotics laws, murder, rape, assault with intent to kill, assault which inflicts grievous bodily injury, or a violation of title II or III of this Act, 10 any felony involving abuse or misuse of such person's position or employment in a labor organization or employee benefit plan to seek or obtain an illegal gain at the expense of the members of the labor organization or the beneficiaries of the employee benefit plan, or conspiracy to commit any such crimes or attempt to commit any such crimes, or a crime in which any of the foregoing crimes is an element, shall serve or be permitted to serve. You do not have to wait for the International to put Forde out. You can have the DOL do it for you.Is not Forde a convicted Felon???????
NLRB Case Number Correction For Authorization Form Violation
ReplyDelete3-CA-26160
To Anonymous, Need Help! I tried searching the NLRB web site for Case Number you cite 3-CA-26160, could not find anything. Do you have a name of the case?
ReplyDeleteps I met with John M Saturday at the district council 1-day evaluation program for the hiring of organizers, he told me a meeting for local 157 members will take place on April 21, at 5pm at the council to discuss the supervision.
ReplyDeleteJoe. Search Region 3 cases. MR Drywall. I am having trouble getting the case file to open.I thought it was my firewall. Do you have access to the NYDCC last CBA to see if it has a section on authorization for deduction. The Empire Council has Article 19 and other Councils such as the Philly Council specifically lists the form requirement. Check the last CBA and see for back ammo to self pay in lieu of a signed authorization form.
ReplyDeleteI hope at the meeting you will remember that IT IS NOT a supervision. IT IS a trusteeship.First question: Where is the LM15 detailing the reasons for the Trusteeship and were are the required LMs required to be filed during the Trusteeship.
ReplyDeleteRemember the LMRDA
A trusteeship exists whenever a parent union suspends a subordinate union's constitutional or statutory autonomy; that is, whenever the parent assumes control over affairs that the subordinate would normally handle itself. Thus, an action referred to as an “administratorship,” “stewardship,” or “supervisorship” is a trusteeship if it involves a suspension of autonomy otherwise available, regardless of the word used to describe it.
To Anonymous, tried searching "region 3 cases MR Drywall" did not find anything, also the DOL did receive the LM15, they attached General President McCarron's two letters, dated November 21, 2007 addressed to Lawrence D’Errico and the second letter addressed to Local 157 members dated December 3, 2007 as the reason for the action.
ReplyDeleteIn both letters McCarron cites his authority under Section 10H and 6D to immediately assume supervision.
Joe,
ReplyDeleteSorry about the NLRB. I put the case number in and it comes up for me but I cannot open the file. I go to NLRB main site. Click EGov.Click Regional case search. Click Basic Search. Change search to Case Name instead of Case Number and it comes up this
Case Information
03-CA-23648-001 MR Drywall, Inc.
The file number is a link I cannot get to open. If you would like I can send you a copy of the case and Notice MR had to post on their job sites stating that they would not collect dues check off without signed forms on file even if directed to do so by the UBC. Better yet I will send you a copy of the Letter I was given by the UBC that I give to each new employer directing them not remove assessment from my check because I have not signed an authorization form and choose to direct pay as is MY and YOUR choice.
I am surprised to hear about the LM-15. I called and sent a letter in but was told there was no LM15 filed. Good news though. So there is no escaping it was a trusteeship and covered by the LMRDA. Since the letters you mentioned say nothing about financial irregularities than the Council firing the accounts and this account practice reorganizing is something that Spencer will have to answer for along with all the rest. I wonder how it is that the Letters you mention satisfy the content requirements of the LM15. Where is the "full and complete account of the financial condition of such subordinate organization as of the time trusteeship was assumed over it." Was the LM15 filed within the 30 days or after we started asking questions. Others besides myself asked if the LM 15 was filed and we were told not filed as of Feb.
SEC. 301.Every labor organization which has or assumes trusteeship over any subordinate labor organization shall file with the Secretary within thirty days after the date of the enactment of this Act or the imposition of any such trusteeship, and semiannually thereafter, a report, signed by its president and treasurer or corresponding principal officers, as well as by the trustees of such subordinate labor organization, containing the following information: (1) the name and address of the subordinate organization; (2) the date of establishing the trusteeship; (3) a detailed statement of the reason or reasons for establishing or continuing the trusteeship; and (4) the nature and extent of participation by the membership of the subordinate organization in the selection of delegates to represent such organization in regular or special conventions or other policy-determining bodies and in the election of officers of the labor organization which has assumed trusteeship over such subordinate organization. The initial report shall also include a full and complete account of the financial condition of such subordinate organization as of the time trusteeship was assumed over it.
In regards to McCarrons right to establish a trusteeship under 10H and 6D that is not disputed. It is what he does after ward that is in violation of the LMRDA and UBC Constitution. 10H and 6D give him the right to impose a trusteeship. It does not make him,Spencer or Forde God. 10H and 6D clearly allows McCarron to suspend officers PENDING. It DOES NOT ALLOW HIM to permanently replace anybody. It does not allow him to violate the LMRDA. It does not allow him to ignore the UBC Constitution. It does not allow him to put the 157 accounts or control of the 157 accounts in the hands of Forde and the Council.IT DOES NOT ALLOW HIM to deny the right of 157 membership to fill their own vacated positions at the discretion of the membership.Local 157 DOES not belong to Forde and the District Council and it is about time they learned that.Once under Trusteeship the LMRDA dictates he MUST follow the procedures in the bylaws of the UBC Constitution in maintaining and overseeing the trusteeship.It does not give he or Spencer/Forde the right to make up the rules as they see fit.Since we now know the Trusteeship is official then it is time for the DOL to determine if the LMRDA has been violated during this trusteeship.Since the letters clearly state that ONLY reasons for the Trusteeship was Handley and Kennedy defrauding the UBC and they were gone in November lets see them explain the need to continue the Trusteeship as they have done.
Also remember that on April 21st,2008 the UBC(Spencer and Forde) must file another report with the DOL "and semiannually thereafter"3) a detailed statement of the reason or reasons for establishing or continuing the trusteeship. Now lets see what in 15 days they tell the DOL the reasons for continuing the Trusteeship was and is. No you know why the meeting is on the 18th. Lets see what they tell the members compared to what they tell the DOL.
Where are all the jobs? On out of work list for months - called back, work two days, then laid off! I know I am not alone on this. Where is every member working?
ReplyDeleteSome facts about the LM 15 filed with the DOL…The form was filed on March 13, 2008, In addition to the letters from McCarron they filled out the Statement of Assets, Assets = $704372 Liabilities = $115045.
ReplyDeleteYou had to check the reason for the trusteeship and the reason checked was (1) to assure the performance of CBA and other duties and (2) to restore democratic procedures.
I guess the UBC reasons in order to “restore democratic procedures” we first have to take them away…
Wow Joe. I guess they missed the 30 day deadline by almost 4 months. Do you think any of the posts here or the issues presented by John had anything to do with the LM15 being filed.
ReplyDeleteJOHN watch out for this anonmous guy. He sees to make sense mebe to much sense watch he doesn't set you up. Trust No-one
ReplyDeleteJohn,
ReplyDeleteYou have nothing to worry about From me. I am a rank and file hammer swinging Carpenter who just so happens can read. The things I am putting out here are not brain surgery but common sense. The Constitution should be read and studied by all members. The LMRDA should be read and studied by all members. This is part of our job and if we are ignorant of the content of either than people like Forde and Spencer will get to do exactly what they have done. Every thing that I have access to so does every other UBC member IF THEY WANT TO. I am just so very surprised that they do not. I am nothing more than an acoustical Carpenter. If FYI thinks I know so much than I have to ask why he does not. It is food off of our table. It is clothes off the backs of our children. It is injured UBC members begging for their disability pension while the UBC spends $100,000 on the Mandalay Resort in Vegas. .It is UBC members taking a 47% increase in health care premiums and the entire NYCDC playing golf in Florida. It is a UBC member handing over, with NO CHOICE, a large chunk of his paycheck back to the Union so they can get salaries of a quarter million and pension contributions of $125,000. It is the Rank and File member getting slapped down every day by UBC Officers so ignorant and crooked they could not get a job cleaning shitters outside of the nepotism of the UBC. Yes FYI I do know some things. Why. Because every day for the last 20 years as a UBC member I have had the UBC sticking it straight up my ass just like you. I for one am tired of it. I for one am learning how to fight back. These people are fleecing our locals for one reason only. Because we let them. Look around you. It should be an insult to you that such mindless low IQ crooks are robbing you blind. It does not take a high IQ to be a UBC Officer Either your somebody's cousin or you can stick more pencils in your nose and pull them out you ass than the VP. Did you know that the difference between EST and President of the Council was only two pencils.
It is sad that a small group of people who have trouble pulling up their zippers are defeating the combined strength of the UBC working Carpenters. If you think I am wrong than stop and look around you.What the members have seemed to forgot is that if Mike Forde gets pissed off at you only one Mike Forde can come knocking on you door. If the working membership get pissed off at Mike Forde there are thousands of Rank and File members that can stop by Mikeys house. Its that simple. Think about it.
IMPORTANT UPDATE…I have deliberately not commented on the Constitutional issue until I had something to report.
ReplyDeleteOn April 7, responding to members comments on this blog I sent VP Frank Spencer a follow email to my March 4 email regarding the constitutional questions being raised.
On April 7, I called VP Spencer’s office and was told he was out of town until April 11.
On April 11, I tried calling VP Frank Spencer but was unable to speak with him due to his busy schedule. I left a message inquiring about the status of the answers to the constitution questions raised and members posting comments asking for his answers.
On April 14, I spoke with UBC District Rep. Mike Capelli, he informed me that he and VP Spencer had a meeting with UBC lawyer Brain Quinn on Friday April 11, and they are drafting answers to the constitutional questions being raised on this blog. He said I should have them in a few days, which I will then post.
Mr. Capelli was very professional, He told me among other things, they had preliminary discussions and meetings as to when Local 157 will resume membership meetings, but nothing has been decided as of yet. He said that another meeting is scheduled with the supervision team for Thursday to discuss among other things, membership meetings, nominations and election of officers.
He also told me they want nothing more than to get Local 157 back up and running for the membership. He said that when final details are worked out a newsletter will be sent to all Local 157 member’s and posted on the official Local 157 website.
Again John. You deserve all the praise you are offered. Great job in sticking with the issues to get the membership results. Does this"nominations and election of officers." mean that the people planted in 157 by Forde and the Council will now have to find someplace to go if the membership of Local 157 does not nominate and elect them to an Office of Local 157???
ReplyDeleteStay with it John. The April 21st filing with the DOL to justify continuation of the trusteeship must happen. After filing the LM15 3 months late I am sure they will file this on time. Here is a suggestion. Verify Brian Quinn for yourself.
John, The General Counsel for the International is John T Decarlo of Decarlo,Connor and Shanley out of Los Angeles CA. Brian Quinn does work for them :
ReplyDeleteBrian F. Quinn (Member) admitted to bar, 1989, Georgia; 1996, District of Columbia; 2001, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia. Education: State University of New York at Buffalo (B.A., 1984; J.D., 1988); American University, Washington College of Law (LL.M., International Law, 1994). Member: State Bar of Georgia; District of Columbia Bar. (Resident, Washington, D.C. Office). Practice Areas: Labor and Employment; Litigation.
Ill tell you a story.Once upon a time I called the International and asked to have the UBC Constitution clarified.I wanted to know if the there is a time limit to hold elections to replace pro tem appointments by a local President. Vacancies are filled pro tem UNTIL an election can be held to fill the vacancy with a duly elected Officer. I wanted to know if the election had to be held in a certain amount of time from the day of vacancy and pro tem appointment Naturally the Local President involved said no and wanted to wait a year until the next election to avoid the position going to a member that was not his buddy. The Council had no opinion on the matter and since they did not write the Constitution they had no need to be involved. I called the International and was referred to the person who was the expert on the Constitution and who all inquiry's are sent to. Funny thing is he refused to answer. He asked what my local had told me. He asked what my Council had told me. I asked him to clarify for the record since he represented the UBC International and the International should settle Constitution disputes or requests for clarification so that Local or Council Officers have the right to ignore the Constitution and do as they want.Hmm. Sound familiar. So I asked this UBC Constitution expert to answer the question.He refused."He said and Im quote"I am not going to do that" I was very surprised that the UBC Constitution expert would not answer for the record if there was a time limit on when elections must be held. It appeared that his answer was to "Let the Local or Council do what ever they wanted and dont ask." I will let you call the International and ask for Constitutional clarification and see who they put you through to.I contacted Banes Office and they told me to send my questions to them and they would see to that they were answered. I sent the question, They never answered.So I must ask. Will Local 157 have its attorney look at the answers they give you??
Now. You said that you talked to UBC District Rep. Mike Capelli. How did the Treasurer of Local 393 in Glouster NJ become involved in this. We know he is not a District VP since we only have Draper,Maples,Spencer,Smith and Yeggy. So why is the Treasurer of Local 393 meeting with Brain Quinn to draft answers to the questions we have poised. We know that Frank Spencer is the EST of the New Jersey Regional Council and Mike Capelli is one of his employees but what expertise does he have in the Constitution to be drafting answers to our questions or acting in ANY capacity of the 157 Supervision??Is he acting in a secretarial capacity??Do I have the wrong Mike Capelli??
To Anonymous, Fantastic research, I am sure the UBC is impressed...lets see if Brian Quinn answers our questions in a few days! We might have to hire a lawyer to interpret the answers. John, keep up the good work, see you at the meeting...You Rock
ReplyDeleteThanks Joe but they should not be impressed. I had Capelli in about 6 minutes and Quinn in less.All this info is online and easy to get free access to. What I hope the UBC realizes is that we are not easily fooled.I look forward to their response and hope there is truth to the indication in Johns post that the vacated Offices in 157 will be filled by nomination and election conducted the 157 membership demanded in the UBC Constitution.
ReplyDeleteGiven the fact that Capelli is the treasurer of 393 I would hope that anything given to John has Quinns signature on it to verify his involvement and that the information is indeed coming from the International and not New Jersey. As far as hiring a lawyer. It would be cheaper and safer just to have the DOL look at their answers.Due tom the LM15 filing being 3 months late and the April 21st filing due for justification of continuation of the Trusteeship I am sure they would be very interested. It will also be very interesting to see any financial statements included with the filing. Someone definitely needs to ask the DOL to oversee the Council repaying it self for unnecessarily freezing the accounts of the Local and paying ts bills. I am sure this was done to give the Council access to the Books and Accounts of 157 which it had no legal right to touch in a Trusteeship. Any decision to touch the books,fire accountants and change accounting practices should have been done by the International and has to be justified. Any payment of the Locals bills and decision to NOT ALLOW the Local to pay its own bills as is allowed under the LMRDA should have been done by the International. It was none of the Councils business. The International has to justify such actions by indicating some type of financial irregularities when it filed the LM15 within 30 days indicating the reasons and justification for the Trusteeship. I would like to hear that story when it comes time to answer to the DOL.
The entire case for seizing 157 given by the International was "defrauding the UBC" by the 157 Officers. So they put the Local under Trusteeship and have continued it for 6 months to remove local 157 Officers that had already resigned or been fired.What is important is the story will expose for the membership to see that there IS a difference between a Business Rep and a duly elected Local Officer. It will also establish for the membership to see that while the council can fire their hired guns(employees/Business Reps)they can only suspend a duly elected Officer pending trial.And that includes the Interantional in regards to removal rights. It is ONLY the Local 157 Trial Committee that can remove a duly elected Local Officer. It will also expose that the removal is at the discretion of the membership at a monthly meeting who MUST approve the trial committees actions. It will also expose that the members by Majority vote at the said meeting can reduce or OVERTURN the decision of the trial Committee.
What this whole thing should and will show the Local 157 membership is it is THEM and not the NYCDCC who has the final say in the removal and control over their duly elected Officers and that should piss the Council right off. Hopefully the 157 membership and the rank and file members of all UBC locals will come to understand by the actions here is that "The only reason the Councils have been able to Steal the Autonomy of the Locals is because the members let them". The actions such as holding vacation money as ransom,forcing members to pay kick backs out of their pay for some clowns Market Recovery idea,raising and imposing assessments and dues without a vote of the membership,forcing payroll deductions without member approval or proper required documentation,denying Locals the right to be governed by their own bylaws as is guaranteed in the Constitution,imposing Council bylaws on the locals in violation of the UBC Constitution,writing and the International approving Council bylaws that are in direct conflict with the UBC Constitution just to name a few reality's of UBC membership are NOT backed by laws or even UBC bylaws. They are allowed to be imposed because the membership is not versed in the rights of their own Unions. Many members do not know the LMRDA exists. Many members are astounded to learn that many of the rights and obligations listed on this blog are actually guaranteed them in the UBC Constitution.
Let me ask you how many programs exist in any UBC training facility that teaches members their rights under the LMRDA or explains members right under the UBC Constitution. How many times have you been denied the Local or Council bylaws despite asking for them 10 times. How many members have been victims of retaliation for asking why Mike Forde makes over a quarter Million a year and you are almost out of Unemployment. How many of you have been denied access to your 5500 Pension and Health Financial Statements because your fund has been seized and moved 3 hours from your Local Union Hall.How many members know that they have the right to examine those records at all.How many times have members stood and watched the rampant nepotism of the Local or Council and been a victim of its buddy system. How many times have you wondered how one person can be a paid organizer,Financial Secretary and Delegate to the Council all at once. It is one thing for the members to take responsibility for not being versed in the UBC Constitution or LMRDA and knowing their rights. It is another for Local,Council or International officers to systematically engage in behavior that is intended to deny members access to this information. To bully or intimidate members who ask the questions and do their duty as good Union members to expose the abuses. To misrepresent their rights and powers under UBC bylaws at any level to gain control over the membership so they may continue in their irregular and many times illegal actions against the autonomy of the membership. To violate State and Federal Labor Laws created to offer protection to the working Union men and women and to violate their fiduciary duty to act in the best interest on the UBC Brotherhood. Many in the UBC feel that we must accept these actions and that we are powerless. Well we are not.We are a Brotherhood and when we join together to bring to task those in our organization who conspire to steal food from our tables they will be amazed at what power we really have
O.k., I tried to be polite and courteous…
ReplyDeleteAfter reviewing the 2006 UBC Constitution, the NYCDCC By-Laws, the US DOL LMRDA, and contacting the US Department of Labor at the Washington D.C. and New York City offices, I needed to give D’Errico, Forde, Spencer, and McCarron an opportunity to explain the current LU157 trusteeship much better and in writing. I had wished to provide the answers to my questions to the membership before and without having to send a second letter. However, even before writing the first letter, I knew my questions were extremely unlikely to be answered. (Being ignored or “stonewalled” is the first phase of four phases.)
I tried to fax to each the first letter early Monday April 7 but didn’t get the chance to do it until about 2:00 AM Tuesday April 8. However, apparently none of these first faxes were received. I faxed the first letter to each a second time at about 1:45 AM April 11.
D’Errico responded at about 11:35 AM the following day to my April 11 fax. He was polite and courteous, but stated it would be better to send a letter to Spencer. I informed him that I already had sent to Spencer a similar letter.
I confirmed the receipt of the faxing of the second sending of the first letter and the second letter to Forde’s office and McCarron’s office. I sent Spencer’s letter to the DC as advised by D’Errico. Forde’s secretary told me that the letters addressed to Spencer would be forwarded to him.
Each letter had practically the same questions but some of the questions were adjusted to match the individual.
See following "Supervision Letter 1" and "Supervision Letter 2".
2008 April 7
ReplyDeleteMichael J. Forde
Executive Secretary Treasurer, NYCDCC, UBC
Assistant Supervisor, Local Union 157, UBC
395 Hudson Street
New York, NY 10014
Tel: 212-366-7500
Fax: 212-675-3118
RE: UBC Local Union 157 Supervision
Dear EST Michael J. Forde:
The sending of this letter was delayed due to the necessity to review the 2006 UBC Constitution, the NYCDCC By-Laws, the US DOL LMRDA, and having had to contact the US Department of Labor at the Washington D.C. and New York City offices.
Since Local Union 157 has not had a regular meeting for five consecutive months and that no official information has proceeded UBC GP Douglas J. McCarron’s “Supervision Formal Notice” letter, your “Status Report to Members of Local 157 Regarding UBC Supervision” letter, and the Local Connection 157 February 2008 newsletter, I must now ask the following questions:
1) Specifically, what are all the reasons as to why the supervision of Local Union 157 was initiated? Were there any reasons for the supervision other than Business Representative absenteeism and its concealment? If so, what were the reasons?
2) Why is the supervision of Local Union 157 continuing? How much longer is the supervision expected or planned to last?
3) Was the supervision of Local Union 157 instituted as an "Emergency Supervision"?
4) Why were Hanley, Kennedy, and Dilacio, dismissed as Business Representatives, not formally charged with a violation and then tried [as members]?
5) Why were all the officers of Local Union 157 dismissed? Who authorized the officer dismissals? How were the officer dismissals authorized? What law authorizes such dismissals?
6) Why were the officers who are thought to have done no wrong also dismissed as officers?
7) As of yet, why have there been no officer reinstatements or nominations and elections?
8) Why have there been no regular meetings? Have any special meetings been called during the supervision? If so, why?
9) Why did GP Douglas J. McCarron appoint EDVP Frank Spencer as Local Union 157 Supervisor?
10) Why did EDVP Frank Spencer appoint you as Local Union 157 Assistant Supervisor?
11) Why was the freezing of Local Union 157 financial accounts necessary? Who is the person who cashes the quarterly dues payments? Into what/who’s account?
12) Were and/or are other Local Unions being investigated for similar circumstances?
13) Is the supervision actually a trusteeship as defined by the US DOL LMRDA? If so, what are the reasons as to why the LM-15 and LM-15A forms were not filed within 30 days from the start of the supervision?
14) Specifically, what are your current efforts with respect to Local Union 157 supervision? Specifically, what are you trying to accomplish with the supervision of Local Union 157? Specifically, what are your duties as Local Union 157 Assistant Supervisor?
Your attention to this matter and your written swift response will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Daniel J. Franco
Journeyman
Local Union 157, UBC
[Street Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
Tel: 347-293-0724
Fax: 718-766-7188
Supervision Letter 1:
ReplyDelete2008 April 7
Frank Spencer:
Vice President, Eastern District, UBC
Supervisor, Local Union 157, UBC
395 Hudson Street
New York, NY 10014
Tel: 212-366-7500
Fax: 212-675-3118
RE: UBC Local Union 157 Supervision
Dear DVP Frank Spencer:
The sending of this letter was delayed due to the necessity to review the 2006 UBC Constitution, the NYCDCC By-Laws, the US DOL LMRDA, and having had to contact the US Department of Labor at the Washington D.C. and New York City offices.
Since Local Union 157 has not had a regular meeting for five consecutive months and that no official information has proceeded UBC GP Douglas J. McCarron’s “Supervision Formal Notice” letter, NYCDCC EST Michael J. Forde’s “Status Report to Members of Local 157 Regarding UBC Supervision” letter, and the Local Connection 157 February 2008 newsletter, I must now ask the following questions:
1) Specifically, what are all the reasons as to why the supervision of Local Union 157 was initiated? Were there any reasons for the supervision other than Business Representative absenteeism and its concealment? If so, what were the reasons?
2) Why is the supervision of Local Union 157 continuing? How much longer is the supervision expected or planned to last?
3) Was the supervision of Local Union 157 instituted as an "Emergency Supervision"?
4) Why were Hanley, Kennedy, and Dilacio, dismissed as Business Representatives, not formally charged with a violation and then tried [as members]?
5) Why were all the officers of Local Union 157 dismissed? Who authorized the officer dismissals? How were the officer dismissals authorized? What law authorizes such dismissals?
6) Why were the officers who are thought to have done no wrong also dismissed as officers?
7) As of yet, why have there been no officer reinstatements or nominations and elections?
8) Why have there been no regular meetings? Have any special meetings been called during the supervision? If so, why?
9) Why did GP Douglas J. McCarron appoint you as Local Union 157 Supervisor?
10) Why did you appoint NYCDCC EST Michael J. Forde as Local Union 157 Assistant Supervisor?
11) Were and/or are other Local Unions being investigated for similar circumstances?
12) Why was the freezing of Local Union 157 financial accounts necessary? Who is the person who cashes the quarterly dues payments? Into what/who’s account?
13) Is the supervision actually a trusteeship as defined by the US DOL LMRDA? If so, what are the reasons as to why the LM-15 and LM-15A forms were not filed within 30 days from the start of the supervision?
14) Specifically, what are your current efforts with respect to Local Union 157 supervision? Specifically, what are you trying to accomplish with the supervision of Local Union 157? Specifically, what are your duties as Local Union 157 Assistant Supervisor?
Your attention to this matter and your written swift response will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Daniel J. Franco
Journeyman
Local Union 157, UBC
[Street Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
Tel: 347-293-0724
Fax: 718-766-7188
Supervision Letter 1:
ReplyDelete2008 April 7
Douglas J. McCarron
General President, UBC
101 Constitution Avenue N.W.
Washington D.D. 20001
Tel: 202-546-6206
Fax: 202-543-5724
RE: Local Union 157 Supervision
Dear GP Douglas J. McCarron:
The sending of this letter was delayed due to the necessity to review the 2006 UBC Constitution, the NYCDCC By-Laws, the US DOL LMRDA, and having had to contact the US Department of Labor at the Washington D.C. and New York City offices.
Since Local Union 157 has not had a regular meeting for five consecutive months and that no official information has proceeded your “Supervision Formal Notice” letter, NYCDCC EST Michael J. Forde’s “Status Report to Members of Local 157 Regarding UBC Supervision” letter, and the Local Connection 157 February 2008 newsletter, I must now ask the following questions:
1) Specifically, what are all the reasons as to why the supervision of Local Union 157 was initiated? Were there any reasons for the supervision other than Business Representative absenteeism and its concealment? If so, what were the reasons?
2) Why is the supervision of Local Union 157 continuing? How much longer is the supervision expected or planned to last?
3) Was the supervision of Local Union 157 instituted as an "Emergency Supervision"?
4) Why were Hanley, Kennedy, and Dilacio, dismissed as Business Representatives, not formally charged with a violation and then tried [as members]?
5) Why were all the officers of Local Union 157 dismissed? Who authorized the officer dismissals? How were the officer dismissals authorized? What law authorizes such dismissals?
6) Why were the officers who are thought to have done no wrong also dismissed as officers?
7) As of yet, why have there been no officer reinstatements or nominations and elections?
8) Why have there been no regular meetings? Have any special meetings been called during the supervision? If so, why?
9) Why did you appoint EDVP Frank Spencer as Local Union 157 Supervisor?
10) Why did EDVP Frank Spencer appoint NYCDCC EST Michael J. Forde as Local Union 157 Assistant Supervisor?
11) Were and/or are other Local Unions being investigated for similar circumstances?
12) Why was the freezing of Local Union 157 financial accounts necessary? Who is the person who cashes the quarterly dues payments? Into what/who’s account?
13) Is the supervision actually a trusteeship as defined by the US DOL LMRDA? If so, what are the reasons as to why the LM-15 and LM-15A forms were not filed within 30 days from the start of the supervision?
14) Specifically, what are your current efforts with respect to Local Union 157 supervision? Specifically, what are you trying to accomplish with the supervision of Local Union 157?
Your attention to this matter and your written swift response will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Daniel J. Franco
Journeyman
Local Union 157, UBC
[Street Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
Tel: 347-293-0724
Fax: 718-766-7188
Supervision Letter 2:
ReplyDelete2008 April 22
Michael J. Forde
Executive Secretary Treasurer, NYCDCC, UBC
Assistant Supervisor, Local Union 157, UBC
395 Hudson Street
New York, NY 10014
Tel: 212-366-7500
Fax: 212-675-3118
RE: UBC Local Union 157 Supervision/Trusteeship
Dear EST Michael J. Forde:
On April 7, 2008, and then again on April 11, 2008, I faxed to you questions pertaining to the current Local Union 157 “supervision”. I have verified by speaking with Ms. Bodha Bodhwattie on April 16, 2008, that, at the very least, the second fax was received. Since I have not received a response yet, I must ask, are the questions being ignored? If not, why have the questions not been answered? Do you have any intent to answer the questions presented?
Since having had five months to create, understand, and personally direct the trusteeship of Local Union 157 as Assistant Supervisor, you should know the answers to the questions presented. To be unable to answer the questions directly, i.e. now and without assistance, most especially lawyer assistance, would imply an evasion of duty and suggest assistant supervisory/trustee incompetence.
I have been very respectful and patient with this needless and wrongful trusteeship. However, my patience with this trusteeship and the lack of information has now been exhausted. So now, I will ask the questions one last time.
[Same questions as first letter.]
If personal acknowledgement of the receipt of this letter is not provided via phone, fax, or email by 5 PM today, Tuesday, April 22, 2008, I will assume you have no intent to answer the questions. If the questions are not answered in earnest via fax or email by 5 PM tomorrow, Wednesday, April 23, 2008, I will interpret this as contempt of being questioned. In addition, not answering the questions will further suspicion of your questionable intentions with respect to the Local Union 157 trusteeship.
Sincerely,
Daniel J. Franco
Journeyman
Local Union 157, UBC
[Street Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
Tel: 347-293-0724
Fax: 718-766-7188
Email: trusteeship@francowoodwork.com
Supervision Letter 2:
ReplyDelete2008 April 22
Frank Spencer:
Vice President, Eastern District, UBC
Supervisor, Local Union 157, UBC
395 Hudson Street
New York, NY 10014
Tel: 212-366-7500
Fax: 212-675-3118
RE: UBC Local Union 157 Supervision/Trusteeship
Dear DVP Frank Spencer:
On April 7, 2008, and then again on April 11, 2008, I faxed to you questions pertaining to the current Local Union 157 “supervision”. I have verified by speaking with Ms. Bodha Bodhwattie on April 16, 2008, that, at the very least, the second fax was received. Since I have not received a response yet, I must ask, are the questions being ignored? If not, why have the questions not been answered? Do you have any intent to answer the questions presented?
Due to your apparent lack of presence at the Local Union 157 office, I faxed the letters to you at the NYCDCC because being Supervisor of Local Union 157 would require you to be at least in NYC to supervise competently the Local Union 157 trusteeship. If I am incorrect with your need to be at or near the Local Union 157 office, please explain.
Since having had five months to create, understand, and personally direct the trusteeship of Local Union 157 as Supervisor, you should know the answers to the questions presented. To be unable to answer the questions directly, i.e. now and without assistance, most especially lawyer assistance, would imply an evasion of duty and suggest supervisory/trustee incompetence.
I have been very respectful and patient with this needless and wrongful trusteeship. However, my patience with this trusteeship and the lack of information has now been exhausted. So now, I will ask the questions one last time.
[Same questions as first letter.]
If personal acknowledgement of the receipt of this letter is not provided via phone, fax, or email by 5 PM today, Tuesday, April 22, 2008, I will assume you have no intent to answer the questions. If the questions are not answered in earnest via fax or email by 5 PM tomorrow, Wednesday, April 23, 2008, I will interpret this as contempt of being questioned. In addition, not answering the questions will further suspicion of your questionable intentions with respect to the Local Union 157 trusteeship.
Sincerely,
Daniel J. Franco
Journeyman
Local Union 157, UBC
[Street Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
Tel: 347-293-0724
Fax: 718-766-7188
Email: trusteeship@francowoodwork.com
Supervision Letter 2:
ReplyDelete2008 April 22
Douglas J. McCarron
General President, UBC
101 Constitution Avenue N.W.
Washington D.D. 20001
Tel: 202-546-6206
Fax: 202-543-5724
RE: Local Union 157 Supervision/Trusteeship
Dear GP Douglas J. McCarron:
On April 7, 2008, April 11, 2008, and then again on April 16, 2008, I faxed to you questions pertaining to the current Local Union 157 “supervision”. I have verified by speaking with Ms. Jeanne Brown on April 16, 2008, that, at the very least, the second and third faxes were received. Since I have not received a response yet, I must ask, are the questions being ignored? If not, why have the questions not been answered? Do you have any intent to answer the questions presented?
Since having had five months to allow, understand, and be involved with the trusteeship of Local Union 157 as [General President], you should know the answers to the questions presented. To be unable to answer the questions directly, i.e. now and without assistance, most especially lawyer assistance, would imply an evasion of duty.
I have been very respectful and patient with this needless and wrongful trusteeship. However, my patience with this trusteeship and the lack of information has now been exhausted. So now, I will ask the questions one last time.
[Same questions as first letter.]
If personal acknowledgement of the receipt of this letter is not provided via phone, fax, or email by 5 PM today, Tuesday, April 22, 2008, I will assume you have no intent to answer the questions. If the questions are not answered in earnest via fax or email by 5 PM tomorrow, Wednesday, April 23, 2008, I will interpret this as contempt of being questioned. In addition, not answering the questions will further suspicion of your questionable intentions with respect to the Local Union 157 trusteeship.
Sincerely,
Daniel J. Franco
Journeyman
Local Union 157, UBC
[Street Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
Tel: 347-293-0724
Fax: 718-766-7188
Email: trusteeship@francowoodwork.com
I created the following petition in March/April 2007. Last year when I presented it, I received some praise for it, but no one wanted to sign it then. Though the praise was nice, what I was actually seeking were signatures.
ReplyDeleteRecently, I started showing it around again. To my amazement, some members have actually signed it. However, as expected, most members still won’t sign it.
I am seeking intelligent, constructive criticism to the following petition. Would you sign it? If not, why?
We, the members of the Local Unions, of the New York City District Council of Carpenters (NYCDCC) and Vicinity, of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (UBCJA), petition that the NYCDCC, the Local Unions thereof, and any and all other parties, that have information pertaining to the daily and special activities, to the financing (expenditures, salaries, reimbursements, etc.) associated with the pursuit of organizing, and with operations in general, since at least July 1, 1988, are hereby required to provide any and all such information, whether it be written/printed or any other media, at no cost, to any member or employee thereof upon request. Information that is to be made available shall include, but shall not be limited to, Executive, Business Manager, Business Agent, Organizer, NYCDCC employee, Local Union employee, and any and all other Representative obligations/duties, daily activity, special activity, court activity, salary disbursements, and expenditure reimbursements. Also to be made available shall be reports pertaining to picketing activity, organizing efforts, organizing statistics (such as companies attempted to be unionized, companies unionized, number employees unionized, etc.), the accountings of the 1988 December 1% Assessment, the accountings of the 2000 June $0.30 Assessment, and the accountings of the 2007 January $0.30 Assessment, any other information as to how the Assessments and all other NYCDCC and Local Union monies have been used, are being used, and as to their intended use, with all such information to be updated at least monthly
(John, I didn’t know where else to put this, so if you would like to move it to another page, please feel free to do so. If you feel that it is too controversial then you of course can delete it.)
Daniel Franco. Why you "Sleeping Giant". Great move on the letters and petition. I would sign it in a heart beat. So do you think a Treasurer or the guy who fixes the water coolers from Hoboken NJ or Podunk Maine will send you a letter saying he and the International are working on a response and you should have it in a couple of days. God I am so cynical.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately I’m afraid to post anything because I heard the District council will ruin my livelihood and my life wish I could say something like the rest of you. If we sign a partition Scott Danielson will never call me for a job. Mr. Callahan is his partner and He’s the guy whose suppose to help us .MOST IMPORTATLY IS THE GOVERNMENT CAN’T GET RID OF CALLAHAN
ReplyDeleteThank You and good luck Local 157 Members
"I’m afraid to post anything because I heard the District council will ruin my livelihood and my life"
ReplyDeleteThis I take it is not real?? If the District Council is threating anyones livelihood than perhaps you need some of your Union Brothers (of which there are quite a few more than 6) to pay a visit to the NYCDCC with you to have a chat about their livelihood. Just because some puffy chested Council EST or other Council lacky thinks they can sustain the might of the combined Rank and File does not mean they are not full of BS. I have $100 that the rank and file can make Mike Forde pee himself. Or my mom could do it. Or a girl Scout.Or a cub scout. Or a two legged dog. Get the idea.
robert reich one of obamas men said white males should not get any construction jobs that come of the stimulus package
ReplyDeleteJUST FACE IT THE UNION LIFE AND FREE RIDES ARE OVER.PEOPLE DONT WANT TO PAY UNION SCALE.GOOD LUCK.MR ANDERSON
ReplyDeletevery sad,this is what union life is.not good at all.have a son was going to put in the apprentice program but heard they are closing down.there any truth to that.good luck fellow workers ,thank god i retired looks really bad. louis d,if anyone can help anyother good union apprentice propgrams starting for my son.thanks.. 608 never late lol
ReplyDeleteYour blog is very nice.
ReplyDeleteThe Council shall have the power to hire, discipline, promote, and fire all employees of the Council, including Organizers and Representatives, in accordance with the established District Council Personnel Policy, effective January 31, 2011, as updated and amended (the “District Council Personnel Policy”). No Council Officer or Executive Committee Delegate shall receive salary or other compensation or hold an elected or appointed position as an Officer of an affiliated local union. Except for clerical employees of Local Unions, all persons employed on matters within the jurisdiction of the Council, including Business Representatives and Organizers, shall be employees of the Council. No person shall be an employee of an affiliated Local Union except for persons employed in clerical positions, subject to the District Council Personnel Policy.
ReplyDeleteUpon approval of these Bylaws, all Local Union employment positions, except for clerical positions, shall cease to exist.
{APPROVED AUGUST 5, 2011....by none other than Doug McCarron, the crooked Judge Kenneth Conboy & his side-kick Dennis Walsh......"SHALL CEASE TO EXIST"....get it now dummies? Oh yeah, they also took away your right to Elect the Business Agents....Walsh did that while he feigned to be your friends & you fuckers all fell for his Bullshit at the ROMAC Sessions, but not a fucking one caught on to this part of the little scam. Doug owns all of them & your paying em & you all thought Dennis was your buddy. Huh! he just fucked all of you real good & you all kissed his ass....ain't New Yorkers supposed to have some fucking street smarts??? SERIOUSLY}
Furthermore, the Council shall have all other powers provided for in the Bylaws. The governance, finance and administration of the District Council and its affiliated local unions shall at all times be in compliance with applicable law.{AND THE EASTER BUNNY & SANTA ARE REAL TOO}