The below letter to Judge Berman from UBC counsel Kenneth Conboy dated May 26th, addresses the revised District Council Bylaws, The Restructuring Plan for the Locals, an update on our Benefit Funds and an update on Collective Bargaining.
5.26.11 Letter to Judge Berman
Friday, May 27, 2011
UBC Letter To Judge Berman
10 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)
Written by Frank Spencer:
ReplyDeleteThe findings of the analysis also concluded that in order to increase market share and man-hour opportunities, there should also be a consolidation and/or re-chartering of local affiliates within each state. These new affiliates include:
* Local 290 – Formerly ESRCC Local # 7
* Local 279 – Formerly ESRCC Local # 11 and 19
* Local 291 – Formerly ESRCC Local # 370 and 1042
* Local 277 – Formerly ESRCC Local # 281 and 747
* Local 276 – Formerly ESRCC Local # 289, 85 and 66
* Local 255 – Formerly NJRCC Locals # 121, 393, 542, 623, 1489, 1743, 2018 and 2250
* Local 254 – Formerly NJRCC Locals # 31, 155, 455, 620, 781 and 1006
* Local 253 – Formerly NJRCC Locals # 6, 15, 124 and 1342
* Local 252 – Formerly ESRCC #42 and NJRCC Locals # 821 and 2098
* Local 251 – Formerly NJRCC Locals # 29 and 2212
John I lost my first post see if you can bring it back will you
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know what e-mail address I can use to write judge berman thank you!
ReplyDeleteHon. Richard M. Berman
ReplyDeleteUnited States District Judge
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
United States Courthouse
500 Pearl St.
New York, NY 10007-1312
Courtroom: 21B
Chambers Phone: (212) 805-6715
Deputy Phone:
(212) 805-6715
John was does this damn thing keep deleting the first half of my post
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteRichard: I receive an email on all comments and for some strange technical reason your comment did not get posted. When I have a chance I will re-post your comment correctly.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous has left a new comment which did not get posted I am re-posting the comment.
ReplyDelete1) VETO CONBOY NOW!
Former Federal Judge Conboy, the former IRO who stood in opposition to the UBC switched teams and is now for everything he once was against. More importantly, his legacy & credibility with regard to rulings he has issued in Teamsters affairs stand in direct conflict to his approach with the UBC today.
2) Judge Conboy & Latham & Watkins have submitted a pile of rehashed case-law and an alleged business plan designed to fool a Federal Judge, one with no real world experience or knowledge of the Construction Industry into believing that Gross Profit Margins in the Construction Industry average 24% (UNION) to 37%for the Non-Union sector.
Fact - the average Public Sector project, regardless of Contract form averages and is in fact limited to 5% Overhead & Profit (OH&P).
3) WHERE'S THE BEEF?
The UBC & Judge Conboy have failed to provide one documented Tax Return which depicts Gross Revenues, Profit, Net Earnings etc....nada!
Were the figures for 24%-37% OH & P true as fraudulently put forth, we would have 100% Full Employment in every craft & sector of the Construction Industry, here in NYCDCC & throughout the rest of the Country.
4) Given the obvious lies, Judge Berman needs to force the UBC & Latham & Watkins to prove their contentions. HINT - Court Order directing both to produce the Tax Returns for the top 10 ENR General Contractors & Subcontractors operating under Signatory Agreements with the NYC District Council of Carpenters.
BTEA, the UBC & Contractor Associations are hell bent on skimming more off the top - off the backs or rank & file Workers & Employees, all the while increasing their own pay & benefits to exorbitant levels; and all without one scintilla of solid proof or evidence....so have these firms cough up the data, their tax returns and do not allow them to state that it is privileged information.
Latham & Watkins and Doug McCarron opened the door for this material to be reviewed - so put up or shut up. The Court is entitled to factual data and detailed information as opposed to mere speculation and reports which are one sided and openly biased; reports which contain no hard proof or factual data for a competent review to be conducted.
Where is the Independent third party review, the audits, the bank accounting info, the tax returns. Where are sworn affidavits from the Industry experts?
Will McGraw-Hill, Means Cost Data and their attorneys stand behind these bogus reports? Subpoena them & find out....they will lawyer up.
Guarantee - not one firm can or will show these kinds of numbers. In a booming economy, they might average 10-12% OH & P. This holds for both the Public & Private sectors.
5) The UBC & Latham & Watkins cannot prove anything on a factual basis, so they resort to baffling the Court with Bullshit, Burying the Court in needless paperwork, under the auspice of: WE PRINTED IT, SO IT MUST BE SO!
6) While the Consent Decree may have eliminated some of the thug tactics employed, the fact is, the Mobsters have not gone away, they just switched roles & don finely tailored suits. What we have here is a bunch of lawyered up Mobsters within the UBC, whose chief purpose is to get at the Benefit Funds, fraudulently convert and move monies across State Lines into their private escrow accounts, offshore what they feel like pulling out & re-distribute the proceeds remaining to "Restructured Locals". This is all Smoke & Mirrors, so the only question is:
Will Judge Berman see the forest for the trees. Will he step up & call the UBC and Latham & Watkins on this and force them to produce hard-factual evidence?
So far, the 138-page Report is nothing more than third party hearsay, which translated means that it should be summarily rejected.
Time will tell.
Richard Dorrough has left a new comment which did not get posted I am re-posting the comment.
ReplyDeleteMr Walsh please be advised that the UBC has reported false information in its report to the judge in regards to Local 1163.
Besides the entire letter being pure UBC propaganda and BS leaving one wondering what dimension or planet Mr. Conboy lives on the information on 1163 is blatantly false.
Local 1163 is not affiliated with the Northeast Regional Council and was not a victim of the April rape of our Upstate Locals by Mccarron and Frank Spencer. It is operating its own."In limbo" as its officers have stated. One only has to check the Northeast Regional Council web site and check the list of the affiliated locals to find that 1163 is not affiliated(see below).
Further its BAs have told members they are to be merged into the existing Northeast Regional Council of Millwrights based in Mass. and not into some future Millwright Council as stated by Conboy. Either Mr. Conboy is living on another planet or is willfully lying for the UBC. I would guess the later.
Mr. Walsh. If the UBC is allowed to merge Local 740 with 1163 they are in danger of being removed outside the protections of the consent decree. This decree is the only thing protecting the NYC members from the destruction being imposed by the UBC. The rest of the UBC have no such protections and we have been decimated by the real criminals in this scenario Frank Spencer and Douglas McCarron.
Mr Conboy, whose letter is an insult to all UBC members, commented on the failure under the consent decree to prevent the Fordes and Devines to corrupt the NYC Council. The fact is that Forde managed to corrupt the NYC Council because he had the financial backing, material support and worked in collusion with Frank Spencer,Douglas McCarron and the UBC. Despite repeated cries from members the UBC not only refused to act against Forde it supported his attacks against members in retaliation for exposing him and the rest of his crooks.
McCaron and Spencer used the UBC system and UBC lawyers to persecute theses people with McCarron and Spencers full support. Joseph Oliveri was allowed to rob the NYC Council as a Trustee while the UBC did nothing. He was allowed by Frank Spencer, despite publicized ties to organized crime, to be the CHAIRMAN of the Empire Council Welfare fund.
To this day the UBC,McCarron and Spencer as well as the US Attorneys Office has REFUSED to investigate what Oliveri might have stolen from the Empire Council Funds. The US Attorneys Office and your offices refusal to bring charges against McCaron and Spencer and your continued refusal to force them to sign the LCN is a travesty of justice and an insult to the members of the UBC.
McCarron and Spencer must not be allowed to move any NYC Local outside the protections of the consent decree and as long as these two criminals are not brought to justice the consent decree can never be lifted from the NYC Council. God help its members if it is.
This letter and the actions of Conboy is a blatant attempt by the UBC to further inflict the destruction the rest of the UBC membership has been a victim of on the NYC locals even with the consent decree. What a slap in the face to your office for Conboy to pretend that the UBC is working with you when in fact if they could destroy and remove your office they would do it in a heart beat.
Mccarron and Spencer did not finally act willfully to stop the corruption and remove Forde, which they supported, they are doing it because you leave them no choice.
When you are gone and the consent decree lifted then what is left NYC Locals will be be finished off by these common criminals. Its ironic that Conboy presents to the Judge with his BS "stop the EST power" crap when the policy of the UBC in the rest of the country is the exact opposite.
McCarron has doubled the power of the ESTs nationwide even going so far as to title then CEO's. How can your office or Judge Bermans court swallow such tripe.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=5&sqi=2&ved=0CDUQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fllr.lls.edu%2Fdocs%2F42-2jacobs.pdf&rct=j&q=james%20jacobs%20ten%20years%20of%20court%20supervision&ei=bKfiTZerCoS_0AGdh-S1Bw&usg=AFQjCNGuzZUl0JTVAD4N0yEUwLMvNlyHRA&cad=rja
ReplyDelete