John's note: At last Wednesdays delegate body meeting, EST Bilello looked like a deer caught in the headlights and
was unable to answer a simply question regarding his authority to sign
a contract which allocates $2.12 per-hour to the Welfare Fund. Bilello is clearly in violation of the District Council Bylaws, section 21 is very clear, the delegate body decides all questions of allocation of trust fund monies. The $2.12 allocation was never
debated, approved or voted on by the delegate body, the only delegate
vote that ever took place regarding the WC&C contract was on a four
on August 22, 2012. The agreement submitted to judge Berman has never been submitted to the delegate body for a
During the District Council Delegate Body meeting of March 12, 2013, Delegate John Musumeci of Local Union 157 brought to the attention of EST Michael Bilello two discrepancies within the Wall- Ceiling Agreement.
1) Mr. Musumeci's identified the non-existent “stamp plan” (referred to by side-letter enclosure of District Council attorney Murphy in submission [Document 1272] to Your Honorable Court on March 15, 2013.) Said language needs to be stricken from the CBA.
2) Delegate Musumeci then presented a second discrepancy to EST Bilello within the Wall- Ceiling Agreement regarding an hourly-allocation of $2.12 to the Welfare Fund. Though not vested by the August 5, 2011 District Council Bylaws with authority to do so, and in absence of approval from the Delegate Body under its inherent and controlling plenary power. EST Michael Bilello entered into an illegal agreement on behalf of the District Council with the WC&C and increased the Welfare Fund contribution by $2.12 per from $11.25 to $13.37.
EST Bilello was questioned directly by delegate Musumeci why he would execute a contract allocating wage rates and fringe benefit contributions without debate or vote by the Delegate Body.
The EST has no authority either express or implied which allows him to subvert and hold unto himself a power not reserved to him, thus his illegal actions require a veto by the Review Officer.