THE COURT: Nice to see everybody. I have two issues
that I'd
like to talk about, just feel free. The principal one, as you
know, relates to the funds. Way back, I think in January of
this year, I don't know what prompted it. I think I saw a
report about the funds and not unlike other people had some
really dismal results, financial results. I asked around. I
think we've had the same funds manager, as it were, Gallagher,
for a long time. I don't know them one way or another, but I
do know that in other industries and in other fields, they're
continuously looking at their performance and results and if
they see a dip, they talk to three other people and see who
maybe could do better, or maybe not. And I thought here,
particularly since there's so much money involved, several
billion dollars, and since these are funds really of employees,
actually I thought I had a duty to raise the issue. I did
raise it. I got an immediate response, I think, from
Mr. McGuire was very positive, said we'll get on it right away.
And then I was a little disappointed not long after that to get
a letter which suggested that he wasn't getting on it so fast.
Anyway, there's been back and forth, and now it's November and
I'm a little surprised that we're at November and nobody is
eager as I am to do something. That's the origin. I'm happy
to you from you, Boyd, and also from you, Glen, but I'd be more happy to hear from the trustees, who have been pointed to as
why nothing has happened.
Saturday, November 25, 2017
U.S. v. D.C. Transcript of 11/2/16 Court Conference
Sunday, November 19, 2017
Sunday, April 9, 2017
Fourth Independent Monitor Interim Report With Exhibits
Pursuant to Paragraph 5.l.iii of the Stipulation and Order filed in this matter on April 18, 2016 (the “2016 Stipulation and Order”), I respectfully submit this Fourth Interim Report as the Independent Monitor (“IM”) of the District Council of New York City and Vicinity of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (the “District Council” or “Union”), and its affiliated Taft-Hartley fringe benefit funds (the “Benefit Funds” or the “Funds”).
Sunday, October 23, 2016
U.S. v. D.C. Transcript of 10/17/16 Court Conference
THE COURT: Don't go down that path, Mr. McGuire.
This issue has been pending since January 2016. I could more easily have gotten the president of the United States to come up with a meeting, and I don't feel that I have any particular inside track. What is it, ten months or so? We could have gotten, I don't know, you name it, Donald Trump. We could have had him here in that period of time. These are busy people.
So that's an unfortunate -- that is going to be an
unsuccessful path for you to go down.
Friday, October 21, 2016
Third Independent Monitor Interim Report With Exhibits
As the Court is well aware, there has been significant discussion over the last six months regarding the Court’s interest in the Trustees’ solicitation of outside auditors to evaluate whether its current financial advisors’ methodologies are consistent with, if not surpassing, typical market practices. After much back-and-forth between the Court and counsel for the Funds, I am genuinely confident that the Trustees will devise an outside review that will satisfy the Court, and that the Funds can engage in such an inquiry without fear that whatever recommendations are made will be binding on them. I expect in the coming weeks that the Co-Chairs of the Trustees, Funds counsel, and I will meet with the Court to further discuss this project.
Third Independent Monitor Interim Report With Exhibits
As the Court is well aware, there has been significant discussion over the last six months regarding the Court’s interest in the Trustees’ solicitation of outside auditors to evaluate whether its current financial advisors’ methodologies are consistent with, if not surpassing, typical market practices. After much back-and-forth between the Court and counsel for the Funds, I am genuinely confident that the Trustees will devise an outside review that will satisfy the Court, and that the Funds can engage in such an inquiry without fear that whatever recommendations are made will be binding on them. I expect in the coming weeks that the Co-Chairs of the Trustees, Funds counsel, and I will meet with the Court to further discuss this project.
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
On Thursday June 23, 2016 Vote Members' Voice
 |
| Click to enlarge |
carpenters were receiving in their local and regional union government.
We are a group of rank and file carpenters, we work on the tools day in and day out. With that we have an understanding of what issues face union members and their families that no paid employee of the district council can ever understand.
This election is different from all the others. Your voice is needed now more than ever. With the briskly changing times in construction in New York City, we need to work together to preserve principles that protect our families and union. Sadly, when one looks at the voting records of some delegates, it appears they are completely out of touch with the average carpenter working in the field today. The members of Local 157 and their families deserve leadership that understands their needs and situations.
We work hard to represent the carpenters of Local 157 and welcome member input and support. We also encourage members of all the Locals' in The New York City District Council of Carpenters to stand up and demand the representation they deserve!
To learn more check out our website www.membersvoice157.com
Saturday, May 14, 2016
U.S. v. D.C. Transcript of 4/18/16 Court Conference
THE COURT: Well, who cares, to be perfectly honest with you. Necessary, appropriate, and prudent, I, without knowing more, I would disagree. It seems to me -- and I've been in business myself in the private sector for a long period of my career. This kind of thing is done all the time. It's called an audit. And it's an audit by an outside independent to see if in fact they're right. It's not uncommon for people who have a vested interest in the performance, in saying things are hunky dory and healthy, doing well, don't think it's necessary, etc., etc., it's very common to have that reaction. But from my point of view it's not very comforting.
MR. McGUIRE: I could revisit it with the trustees, your Honor, but I'm fairly confident they will again make the same decision.
THE COURT: And why? Why do they think that it's unnecessary? Yes. You tell me an audit is too expensive to do, costs a hundred thousand dollars and a waste of money. So I don't know if it's too expensive or, you know, we're doing so well, or why.
MR. McGUIRE: Well, this kind of audit, by another firm, of your investment advisor, in fact is highly uncommon in that part of the world.
THE COURT: Oh, that's nonsense. I don't mean to be rude. But all the time, financial performance is monitored, and all the time are outside persons called in to -- it's not necessarily an evaluation to see if there's wrongdoing. It's just an evaluation to see if this money could be better invested. It's not a big deal.
THE COURT: So to your knowledge, Mr. McGuire, has the Department of Labor done a recent audit of the benefit funds?
MS. O'LEARY: There was a pension fund audit, your Honor, done last year that ended with no action, and the Department of Labor has just commenced a welfare fund audit.
THE COURT: What did they say about the issues I'm raising?
MS. O'LEARY: They just asked for a number of documents and then they just said -- they don't tell you specifically what their focus is.
THE COURT: That's not really what I have in mind.
MR. McGUIRE: Your Honor, DOL ordinarily does not evaluate your performance returns.
THE COURT: That's my point. That is exactly my point.
MR. McGUIRE: But the law has entrusted that responsibility to an equal number of union trustees and management trustees. The only guidance provided in the law is that you have to ensure that you secure expert advice, which we've done, and you have to have widely diversified investments, because --
THE COURT: And they don't care what return on investment you get.
MR. McGUIRE: They don't.
THE COURT: They don't.
MR. McGUIRE: No.
THE COURT: Really. That's astonishing.
Saturday, January 16, 2016
Sunday, September 13, 2015
Sunday, March 29, 2015
Meet the Independent Monitor–– GLEN MCGORTY
 |
| Glen G McCorty |
It is a great honor to be appointed as your Independent Monitor. First and foremost, I am committed to approaching this position with diligence and respect. The District Council and its Benefit Funds have a tumultuous past, but the core mission runs deep. Every interaction I have had with its Brothers and Sisters has shown me that you are here to support each other, and that you will hold the District Council and its Benefit Funds accountable to that purpose. I will aid you in this endeavor, drawing on my experience of nearly fifteen years as a federal prosecutor, during which I prosecuted organized crime, fraud, and corruption of every sort.
I come to the Council at a time when the most visible forms of corruption have been abolished. However, this success required the decisive action of both the District Court and United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and its appointed Monitors. Great progress has been made in adopting policies that guard against corruption, and I firmly believe that it is now time for the District Council and the Benefit Funds to assume a greater role in holding itself up to the admirable standards set forth in the UBC Constitution.
I will work with the leadership of the Council and the Funds to ensure that all improvements to its operations going forward benefit members in a fair, effective, and compliant way. And while my approach to this job will be one of teamwork and cooperation, make no mistake that I am here for a single purpose: to ensure this union remains free of the problems which have plagued its past. As a result, I will not tolerate corruption at any level of this organization and I intend to use the powers given to me by the District Court to prioritize this goal above all others.
I do not believe my time here, however, is indefinite. On the contrary, during my tenure I hope to oversee the strengthening of the governing framework to the point where a monitor is no longer necessary. Self-governance cannot be achieved without your involvement. This Council’s democratic system of governance depends on it, and corruption can rebound all too easily amid disinterest.
I urge you to stay educated about the issues facing the District Council and its Benefit Funds and to use your voice and your vote in an informed and reasoned way. I also urge you to use both the Independent Monitor Hotline (877-712-4896) and internal lines of reporting, if you have any concerns about corrupt practices. This union has a bright future, and I look forward to assisting in any way I can to get it there.
Respectfully, Glen G. McGorty
Wednesday, December 31, 2014
The Final Report of the Review Officer
 |
| Federal Watchdog Dennis Walsh |
Let the bells ring. Though there is much good news, there are those for whom my departure is reason enough for celebration. But I hope that there are also those who reflect on what has been wrought, and on the simple question: what now?
To those who will continue to accept the imperative of working hard and meeting the challenges facing the Union with courage, energy and intellect, but most of all with honor, I will say well done.
Sunday, December 21, 2014
District Council Officer Election - Preliminary Results
Sunday, December 14, 2014
Government Response to Motion for Stay
Plaintiff-appellee the United States submits this opposition to the application by non-party appellants Patrick Nee and Levy Messinetti for a stay of the entry of a consent decree agreed to by the parties (and already entered by the district court), while their appeal of a previous matter is pending. The application should be denied. First, Nee and Messinetti seek to challenge an order of the district court from which they never appealed, and accordingly this Court lacks jurisdiction. Second, their challenge rests on a misconstruction of the district court’s order, and a misreading of a passing remark by the district judge, and is accordingly meritless.
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
Javits Center Accepting Applications
The Javits Center will be accepting Journey person Applications on Friday December 5th from 3pm – 5pm and Saturday December 6th from 8am – 4pm. You must bring a valid State ID, Social Security Card for payroll purposes and an up to date Union Card. Applicants please enter the Javits Center through the employee entrance at West 34th Street and 12th Avenue.
Memorandum in Support of an Injunction or Stay Pending Appeal or Review
We are objecting to the Monitor having the authority to 'approve' candidates
before they are permitted to run for elected office because this authority bars us from running for elected office without ever having been afforded the required process and alters the theory upon which the case was originally decided, (a decision which we are currently appealing).
Before one can stop any union member from running for elected
office in their union, other than for nonpayment of dues, that member has to have been provided with a fair hearing and the opportunity to defend themselves. The very minimum that can be afforded to any member is the process contained in their unions constitution.
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
U.S. v. D.C. Transcript of 11.19.14 Court Conference
THE COURT: I originally thought it was a good idea to meet the staff as it were. I didn't realize at the time how big the staff was. They are certainly welcome. What I thought I would do -- I have gotten your helpful agenda in terms of talking to people -- is use your agenda. So, for example,
Mr. Geiger, we'll start with you. I have a couple of questions. I have read everybody's affidavit. If there is some gist or point that each of you wishes to make, do that first. I am happy to hear it. Just that. So how about
Mr. Geiger, who is the executive secretary treasurer of the District Council.
Nice to meet you. I think we met before.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
Stipulation and Order Regarding Appointment of an Independent Monitor
|
| Glen G McCorty |
Glen G. McGorty is a partner in Crowell & Moring's New York Office and a member of the White Collar & Regulatory Enforcement practice group and the firm's Litigation and Trial Department.
Glen is an experienced trial lawyer and served almost fifteen years as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in Washington, D.C. During his career with the government, Glen prosecuted and supervised a wide range of significant high-profile cases, handling white collar matters such as securities fraud, public corruption, wire and mail fraud, money laundering, tax violations, insider trading, accounting fraud and options backdating cases, and other serious criminal cases, such as RICO enterprises, international narcotics trafficking, and violent crimes including kidnapping and murder.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
New York District Council Sued for 8 Million By Minority SignatoryContractor
Creative Construction has sued the NYC Council for 8 million alleging among other things racial discrimination and civil rights violations. The council has also been accused of bypassing the Out Of Work list and violating the new bylaws and thus the consent decree.
Creative Construction has accused the council of forcing substandard uncooperative, unskilled and non productive members who had been laid off by other contractors such as RCC Construction on the same job over to Creative instead of back to the Out Of Work List. The suit also alleges the council is by passing the Out of Work list and violating the consent decree by sending skilled members to non minority companies regardless of where they are on the list.
Council Reps Rambo and Betlewicz are accused of threats such as telling creative owner to “Lets go outside and settle this” and racists remarks such as. "You just hire your own kind” and “You minority’s take food out of my mouth.” There is also sexist remarks alleged by the Council against a Creative female project manger.
The Council is also accused of providing a non certified shop steward and harassing, threatening and intimidating any member not sent from the hall or placed on site by the council. The suit was filed on September 19, 2014.
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
September 30, 2014 Status Hearing Transcript and Court Order
A Status Hearing for the District Council of Carpenters was held on September 30, 2014 at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S. Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, 17th Floor, New York, New York, 10007. Please see the below document for the transcript of the proceedings and court order.
