Wednesday, December 4, 2013

The Seventh Interim Report Of The Review Officer

Review Officer Dennis Walsh has issued his Seventh Interim Report, (with exhibits) the report contains numerous items of interest and is a must read for all members.

Seventh Interim Report Exhibits. 1-10
Seventh Interim Report Exhibits. 11-20




  2. RO: " The hiring of Ms. Jones is nothing but an attempt to fight me"

  3. The R.O. has indeed been the de-facto CEO/EST given the failed leadership of prior actors and their inability to follow simple direction.

    There are simply too many players at the D.C. who have no incentive to perform as one would in the dreaded private sector and to produce tangible results. It seems that their resort to the LCD mindset of handing out caps, t-shirts, doing charity raffles and/or voting to give this one & that one a donation & never putting in the extra effort for matters of true import is the rule of the day which leads one to believe that more term limits are in order as opposed to the lifelong do nothing, produce nothing appointed positions now in existence where 95% of the individual effort is geared toward not rocking the boat & holding on to that easy money job.

    There are those at the D.C. who probably believe that the R.O. is too damn hard on them and needs to step back & do like they do - absolutley nothing. However, there are other still who believe he should step it up five fold and start summarily firing those deemed unfit to continue in D.C. employment and who are otherwise simply too comfy, too old & too slow adapt to any typical modern businss as they are run today by corporate America.

  4. Stop sucking the ro's ... anonymous!

  5. However, there are other still who believe he should step it up five fold and start summarily firing those deemed unfit to continue in D.C

    That's the ticket!

  6. Hiring of Counsel to Deal with the RO

    On September 12, 2013, the delegate body passed a motion to deal with the RO.... Exhibit 5. An advertisement was placed in the New York Law Journal. See Exhibit 6.

    Despite that the District Council's Chief Compliance Officer ( CCO ) was directly involved in the interview process, the Council violated the Stipulation and Order by failing to give my office notice of the delegate body's vote (via email) to retain the attorney in question or the terms of the retention agreement.

    My office was similarly not provided with adequate appropriate prior notice of the interviews conducted by the District Council's General Counsel, CCO (who scheduled the interviews) and Vice President.

    I was presented with the retainer agreement after it was executed.

    The delegate body was not presented with the proposals presented by other law firms (a violation of Section 5(B)7 of the District Council Bylaws).

    The email sent to the delegate body to consider the recommendation of the above-referenced committee is attached as Exhibit 7.


    No doubt the UBCJA G.P.'s hands are all over this & he and his counsel and e-borad members should be deposed as to the hiring of Judge Jones.

    There are three potential & immediate veto's required here, the EST Pro-Tem (via special dispensation from the UBCJA G.P. McCarron which was not in accord with the Consent Decree or the venerable UBCJA Constitution which violates & shreds federal labor law at every turn), th Vice President for this individual violation as well as the prior Section 21 violation for which former EST Bilello was vetoed, re: pattern of continued & repeated willful/wanton violations by Mr. Cavanaugh) and the CCO.

    Without said veto's, the R.O. loses his credibility to enforce the near 20-year old Civil RICO Consent Decree and the Stipulation & Order appointing & vesting in him the powers he needs to turn the D.C. around; and, perhaps more importantly, the U.S.A.O.'s office will lose the little credibility it has left and lastly, the Federal Distirct Court and Judge Berman will come off as ineffective as is the Distirct Council's current leadership.

    Giving any of them a free pass solves nothing. There is no time to act like the present. By now, per best practices & the HR business model (authored in chief by the RO), the D.C. can fill the void with new personnel via motion to Judge Berman until the election for EST is complete in January. The V.P. spot can be filled via special election or; via pro-tem appointment by the R.O./Court. & the CCO position can be put out to a recruiter under the By-laws via a simple RFP and H.R. & the RO can conduct interviews accordingly.

    1. There are three potential & immediate veto's required here.....................

      Carpenters agree, that hits the nail on the head.

  7. I. An imperfect Approach to Negotiating CBA's

    ..."Such a policy and practice would also foster consistency in substantive terms (set by the Executive Committee) from one industry association to another."....


    Rank & File members have been calling for the boiler-palting of all standard contract (CBA) langauge for well over 2-years.

    Moreover, were the D.C. up to current private sector practices for multi-billion dollar corporations, it's alleged in house legal counsel & out of council hired legal beagles would have recognized this simple fact years ago (decades in fact) and adopted policies with the the R.O., U.S.A.O. and the Federal District Court via the proper by-law changes requiring same.

    The substantive terms & conditions of every District Council contract (CBA), the meat & potatoes of all contractual terms & conditions under every Industry Association CBA, inclusive of all Trust Fund lanaguage within them are the same and should be the same for both economic reason tied to re-negotiations on the typical 3-year cycle as well as std. business best practices which every large multi-billion dollar for profit or non-profit corporation utilizes.

    The only differences betweeen Industry Association contracts (CBA's) are stop/start times and work rules and wage/benefit rates, which, when viewed in light of the best practices model being fostered by the RO Dennis Walsh should also be negotiated at uniform rates across all industry associations. This economy of scale would foster unity within the rank & file and contract negotiations could be done across the board on the same schedule, whether a 3, 4 or 5-year cycle. The MWA 10-year cycle now being contemplated should be summarily tossed as the time-frame is far too long. The R.O. & Court should move the D.C. and its legal counsel in the direction of adopting a 4-year contract cyle during off Presidential Election years, thereby saod schedule would not interfere with the Union's political action initiatives for their chosen candidates.

    Under the current August 5, 2011 by-laws, the Executive Committee should undertake the above in concert with competent legal counsel for for the D.C. under a separate RFP for this specific purpose alone. Boiler-plated contract language would result in the RO's desired approach of having D.C rep's spend more of their time in the field and it would also lessen the overall amount of member funds being spent on legal fee's/expenses at the D.C. The end result would be in the D.C. canceling the contracts of a large number of law firms now being retained, but would also allow the D.C. to spend the resources on a firm with better expertise all around. Overall legal expenses would go down, while the quality of the work product would go up.

    This process should start now prior to the currently negotiated contracts expiration & contract re-opener so they are ready in 2016.


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.