Wednesday, April 30, 2008

SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE

I received the following postcard in today's mail...

Dear Brothers & Sisters,
Due to improvements and the efficiencies that are apparent at your local union, as promised by me and your General President Douglas McCarron to minimize the duration of supervision of your local, I am pleased to invite all members of Local 157 to an informational meeting outlining the path to restoration of your locals independence from supervision.

This meeting will take place on Wednesday May 7, 2008 at 5:00 PM at the NYCDC Labor Technical College 2nd fl, common Room, 395 Hudson Street New York, NY 10014

Summary of Business
  • UBC Eastern District Vice President/Local 157 supervisior Frank Spencer addresses membership on local supervision status.
  • Nominations from the floor shall be held for position of election committe member from the local for the upcoming local delegate and Executive Office elections to be held Fall 2008

Also as an early notice that shall be repeated, pleses be aware the nominations for the ten (10) local officer positions and local delegate positions to the District Council shall take place in July, further notice to follow.

The term for the local delegates to the District council shall be36 months (3yrs.) and the term for local union officers shall be for thirth three months (2yrs. 9 mos.), so that these terms shall revert to their respective usual regular terms as per UBC Constitution Section 31 and District council By-Laws.

Fraternally,
Frank Spencer
UBC Vice President Eastern District/Supervisor Local 157

11 comments:

  1. Mr Spencer,
    Section 25 B clearly outlines the rights of Local Union to be governed by and write such bylaws. As stated: B Local Unions shall be governed by applicable uniform bylaws and have the power to make laws and trade rules which in no way conflict with the Constitution and Laws of the United Brotherhood. The NYCDCC as well as the Empire Regional Council have written by laws that indicate that they supersede any Local bylaws. They have FORCED these bylaws on Locals against their will denying said Locals the autonomy guaranteed them by the UBC Constitution and the LMRDA.
    This is a direct violation of the UBC Constitution under Section 25. Further General President McCarron by his attorneys has stated for the record in California District Court that the Councils have no legal binding authority over the Locals. The District Council in collusion with the International have illegally imposed council bylaws on Locals in a blatant systematic program of extortion and predatory control of our Locals.


    Section 26 of the UBC Constitution confirms that District Councils shall be governed by applicable uniform Bylaws and have the power to make laws and trade rules which in no way conflict with the Constitution and Laws of the United Brotherhood. It does not say they and the Locals shall be governed by bylaws that they create but the THEY shall be governed by said bylaws. It is clear that Section 26 gives the Councils power to govern themselves and their members. Since the Rank and File are NOT members but affiliated with the Council the councils have NO right to govern locals by bylaws they write. Your boss Mr. McCarron by court record, repeated public statements and letters has confirmed that the Locals are affiliated with the councils but not members. This distinction was made clear in Harrington –v- Chao. One good thing about the UBC International is that when they conspire to defraud the UBC membership they leave a clear and distinct paper trail. Need I remind you of the position given by the UBC International on the Locals relationship to the Councils. Further Mr. Spencer and whomever you pass this on to that thinks for you and fulfills your obligation as District VP to have some working knowledge of the constitution the Section also states that the bylaws shall not conflict with the UBC Constitution which they do in many areas. They also must be approved by the International. I must ask you to clarify why the International approved such by laws?

    In your recent mailing you end by stating “per UBC Constitution Section 31 and District council By-Laws.” While the Section 31 reference was appropriate the reference to Council bylaws was not. The Council bylaws have nothing to do with either this supervision or areas covered under Section 31. The NYDCC bylaws have not enforcement rights or rights to dictate election terms to the membership. Further in this matter and others concerning the UBC membership both Mr. Forde and Mr. Morin can use the Council bylaws to paper the only part of their anatomy that has an IQ. To make this easier for you to comprehend they can wipe their ass with them. Your reference to these bylaws is a clear attempt to validate these bylaws and confirm the memberships requirement to be governed by them. By this it is clear that you are conspiring defraud the Local membership. You are conspiring with the NYCDCC to take away the autonomy of the Local membership by supporting bylaws illegally imposed and created in violation of the UBC Constitution. Your actions during this trusteeship are a clear indication of your willingness to ignore the LMRDA,The UBC Constitution and conspire with the NYCDCC in the imposition of a questionable Trusteeship.

    Your actions during this trusteeship Mr.Spencer has been a clear attempt to defraud the membership of Local 157.Your refusal to answer questions ask by the membership and your deferral to Mr. Quinn has betrayed your lack of the required expertise and knowledge required to oversee a trusteeship. The membership of Local 157 were entitled to a competent International representative who has a duty to act in the best interest of the Local 157 members. You however by you actions are have proven your are not competent to oversee a Trusteeship and have no knowledge of the UBC Constitution which should be a basic requirement to be a District VP. In regards to this trusteeship you have conspired with the NYCDCC and in particular, by your illegal appointment to the supervision team of Mike Forde EST and accused criminal, to violate the UBC Constitution and the LMRDA regulations. You have through ignorance of the requirements, failure to properly oversee the trusteeship or blatant acts of conspiracy worked to defraud members of the UBC as outlined in Section 51. As a UBC member I would ask that you be suspended pending trial for resolution of these charges. I would also ask that Mike Forde as EST of the NYCDCC be charged as such and brought to trial also. I would ask at this time that Brian Quinn position with the UBC International be reevaluated with contemplation of dismissal. You have indicated through Mr. Cappelli that the responsibility to respond to the membership is Mr. Brian Quinns. Mr Quinn as of this date has REFUDSED to do so. Mr Quinn has had more than enough time to answer to the will of the membership. Since Mr. Quinn works for the membership and refuses to respond to their will then as a member of the UBC I demand his worthless ass be fired. Now.

    Please take into consideration that if the UBC refuses to respond to the request for your suspension and continues to ignore the demand of the UBC membership that the LMRDA can and will be used to compel them to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous great post, I am working on a hand out for the members at the May 7th meeting and could use your help. I want to make a hand out listing as bullet points specifically how spencer defrauded the membership and violated the constitution and LMDRA. I need something that could be easily understood by the members which i could explain, any help would be appreciated. Thanks, In Solidarity

    ReplyDelete
  3. Joe ,
    I will be glad to help. Mr. Spencer as District VP is responsible for all actions taken by the Supervision team. We have raised many issues here and if our
    interpretations are correct Spencer is liable for all of the Constitutional breeches regardless of who commits or concocts them. A fine example is the NYCDCC sticking its fingers in the Local 157 books and removing the accountants which I would hazard a guess and say they replaced with NYCDCC accountants. This was, I am sure, done at the direction of Mr Forde. Through this entire trusteeship one has to wonder how much hands on involvement Mr Spencer actually had. The actions taken and the results give a clear indication that Forde was allowed free rein to take actions which were not meant to get rid of lazy officers but to exert more control over the Local by the Council. Taking over the books,appointing so called Business Representatives and ignoring the democratic process make his intent clear. I can assure you that if we had not raised these issues here the people installed by Forde would have become permanent 157 Officers and there would be no upcoming election.One has to wonder what Forde will do with them if the members do not vote them in. You can also rest assured that the Council will see that each one of them is nominated and the Council will make every effort to see them voted in. Look for special voting regulations imposed by the Council to deal with this Unique situation. Maybe not since someone is watching. What egg on his face if he now has to do something with Business reps he had no right to install in the first place. Remember that he can call them what he wants but in Federal Court it is their actions during the trusteeship that the court will look at to determine if they were Officers of Local 157 or so called Business Reps.Have a look at what they have been doing during the trusteeship.

    Either way it will be on court record that there is a distinction between the two.This distinction is something the Councils have worked so hard to blur so they may exert further control of the Locals. This distinction was put to the test at Local 157 and had Forde been successful in ignoring and eroding the rights and procedures in the Constitution he would make further moves to exert control over the Local. Why do you think a duly elected Officer is paid by the Councils. Why is a duly elected Officer a direct employee of the Council and can be fired by the Council. How does that not create a conflict of interest when a duly elected Officer has a fiduciary duty to the members of a Local. Should the Local Officer attempt to act in the best interest of the membership and against Council policies he can and will be fired.Why do you think the Councils have seized ownership of the Locals buildings and now the 157 accounts.

    The Councils have done so before. Look at the case of Phil Allen of Local 229 of Glens Falls NY. Allens members demanded he reuse to go along with the Empire Councils plan to move half of his membership to Syracuse NY. 2 hours away. The members demanded by majority consent that their duly elected President say no to the plan. He did as he must under the LMRDA and the UBC Constitution. They fired him and the majority of his Officers. Locked them out of the Union Offices so they could not perform their elected duties.They had the International seize the Local in Trusteeship and destroy it. They have by their own actions destroyed a viable pension plan and Our Union Brothers who worked decades in the Brotherhood were reduced to $20 a credited year. The council by its own actions has destroyed the Health Plan and we now have Union Brothers and Sisters with NO health care because they have just been hit with a 47% increase in Premiums. Members have turned in 1300 hours and DO NOT have enough hours for health care. All because the duly elected President would not bow to the control of the Council. That was in 2003. The Empire Council has had control of the Pension and Health Plan for the last 4 years and destroyed each.Is this an example of Brotherhood in the UBC. Has any one person in the International come to the aid of these members.NO!!! Has the Empire Council although it sat on a $75 million dollar net for 2006 come to the aid of these members and their families? NO!!! Has a single International,Local or Council Officer offered one of their DOUBLE Pensions to these Brothers. NO!! Does anyone want the names of the Brothers who have lost their house,their marriages,their bank accounts and now their health care due to the direct actions of a UBC Council and its greedy power hungry low life E Board.and This is the Brotherhood we pay dues and assessment to finance and sustain. If you would like the names of these Brothers and sisters I can give them to you. If you think this is the exception and not the norm than I would ask you to look a little closer.

    So Joe before we go any farther together let me ask you. What is your opinion as to the issues raised on this blog. Do you agree the Constitution and LMRDA has been violated by Spencer and Forde. What is the purpose of your bulleted list. Is it to explain to the membership what has allegedly been violated. I need to know you position before I create a study sheet for Spencer and Forde. I know the International Lawyers and Spencer are not that sharp. They might get lucky. We would not want to give them the opportunity to create a scripted response by handing them a study sheet. I think it would be much more amusing and a wake up to the membership to watch them stammer and stutter as they try to answer off the cuff questions from the floor.Have you seen the Lights Out McCarron video. I wonder how many glasses of water Spencer and Forde will need.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Joe B, heres my my two cents without giving too much away. You can start with this email I sent to Spencer on March 4, which we are still waiting for an answer too.

    Hi Frank, I appreciate you taking the time to speak with me today and enjoyed our conversation. The constitutional questions posted from an anonymous UBC member on local157.blogspot.com is a response to Mike Forde's letter in the recent Local Connection 157 newsletter mailed out.

    The questions being raised are a bigger issue than just local 157 it's an issue of the councils control over the locals rights in the UBC. The anonymous postings raise questions, which I am not equipped to answer, as to why certain detailed sections of the constitution are being bypassed while certain vague sections are being enforced. I am presenting these questions and issues that require clarification so I can be better informed about the issue in order to answer questions clearly.

    Below is a list of questions that I would appreciate an answer too:

    1.General President McCarron's letter to local 157 members dated December 3 cites section 10H of the constitution that granted full supervisory authority. Specifically where in section 10H does it state that the General President has the "authority to remove elected officers" of a local? This would seem to bypass Section 52, which guaranties the right to a fair and impartial trial.

    2.Where in section 10H does it give the General President the authority to appoint officers to fill the vacated positions in a local? Section 10M gives the General President the right to appoint interim officers in NEWLY, CONSOLIDATED and MERGED Locals, which does not apply to local 157.

    3.Why is Section 32D being bypassed, which 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"

    4.Why is the District Council involved in the supervision by appointing business reps, business manager and involved with the locals finances and books? This right under supervision is the Internationals not the District Council.

    5.Why is the District Council 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.

    6.What is the reason for the continued supervision? If Hanley and Kennedy resigned on November 21 and the District Council fired Dilacio and no accusation of financial impropriety or other fraud was found isn't the problem solved?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Local 157 memberMay 2, 2008 at 10:08 AM

    This web site is very informative and ti deffinatly sounds like this Spencer Guy is trying to pull a fast one.. i hope the members are not afraid to ask him why and how and who give him the right to do what hes getting away with.Can we the members filr cahrges against spencer?

    ReplyDelete
  6. John thanks, and Anonymous you asked what is my opinion as to the issues raised on this blog. All I can say is by reading the comments from others and reading the sections in the UBC Constitution and the lack of answers from Spencer it certainly sounds like they have violated something.

    I would like to make up some type of handout to explain to the members what Spencer has done as supervisor of the trusteeship. Something very clear and easy to understand, like you violated this section…bam you did this bam…if you know what I mean. I agree that might tip them off but if they did wrong they won’t be able to answer it anyway.

    Members may not have the knowledge and know enough to ask the right questions. I have seen time and time again members ask questions and even if they are given a wrong answer they don’t know enough to challenge that answer. That’s how they get away with things. I am not saying members are stupid we are just not well versed in this sort of thing. I have learned more just reading this blog than the 11 yrs I spent going to meetings.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ok Joe. I am in.How shall we go about it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Joe if you wish to go off the blog you can email me at UBCBrother@yahoo.com

    John,
    If you are interested in what we come up with you can let us know. I really do not want to post what we create on the blog. Joe is right "I agree that might tip them off but if they did wrong they won’t be able to answer it anyway."
    But I think we should at least make them work at getting a copy. As far as I am concerned you are the man in all this. If you had not asked and created this blog we would not have gotten this far. So you decide how much you want to get involved off blog

    ReplyDelete
  9. Here is another bulleted list Joe.

    What have we done here at the 157 blog.

    1.Member involvement
    (A).Have members been keeping track of this blog to follow the trusteeship issues?
    (B)Have members participated in the discussion.
    (C)Have members gone off site to take action on the issues raised.
    (D)Have members realized that together they can bring about change.

    2. Member Education
    (A)Have members learned where to access the UBC Constitution
    (B) Have members learned they have rights and can exercise them
    (c) Have members learned how and where to access the LMRDA and become aware of the rights it affords them
    (D) Have members learned the location of the DOL Office.
    (E) Have members learned that it is their right and sometimes their duty to ask the International and Councils questions.
    (F) Have members discovered the new power of the Internet as a means of public exposure to force Union Officials to act accordingly.

    3. Member Awareness
    (A)Are members aware that this is their Local and not the Internationals or Councils
    (B) Are members aware that there seems to be an attack on our Brotherhood by those we entrust to safeguard it.Or did they know this already.
    (C)Are the members aware that the problems are bigger than local 157 and they have a duty to help all their UBC Brothers and Sisters in situations within the UBC similar to what has happened here at 157.
    (D) Have the members realized that the only one who is going to fight for their paycheck is them
    (E) Will the members realize that if what they have tried to do here is in violation of the LMRDA and UBC Constitution than perhaps MANY of the other things such as the involuntary .30 organizing charge or holding a members vacation money ransom for Participation might be a bit illegal as well and MUST BE challenged.


    If any of the above are true then regardless of the outcome of Spencer and Fordes questionable actions the members have won. Once the membership realizes that they have choices and that people like Forde and Spencer can be stopped by the combined will of the membership than they will be stopped. The NYCDCC is a greedy powerful machine but not as powerful as a United membership very pissed off. Insignificant little pissants like Mike Forde and his golfing buddies are only as powerful as the membership lets them become through neglect and inaction. How does a hand full of greedy carpetbaggers manage to exert control over a membership this large. Ignorance. They deny you information. Lie to your face. Threaten. Bully and intimidate. It time to bully back It is time to become knowledgeable. That is what they fear most. Once you find out they are full of shit they are done. it is time for the members to find out

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ok listen, Joe and Anonymous I am in also. I will contact our UBCBrother@yahoo.com and work off blog. This blog was started as a result of the trusteeship to help keep members informed and in that it has been successful. The lack of answers to questions and actions by the UBC during this trusteeship has really surprised me.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hey John, Is it possible to Post some Information from yesterdays Special Call Meeting, I'm Looking for the Nominations Outcome.

    Thanks,
    Charles Lezette
    Carpenters Local 370
    Albany, NY

    ReplyDelete

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.