At Wednesday's delegate meeting, Inspector General (IG) Scott Danielson, refused to answer several direct questions posed to him about the representations made in a November 19, opinion/report, incredibly saying, "the bylaws require me to issue a report not answer questions."
The report is in response to a complaint, that during a meeting (see article "Insanity") of the delegate body on July
25, 2012, both Executive Secretary-Treasurer, Mike Bilello and former District Council
President Bill Lebo (who was forced to resign) during questioning, on the MWA crisis, became unhinged, harassed, intimidated, threaten and allowed
members of the delegate body to disrupt the meeting.
I sent the IG and Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) Josh Leicht, several emails regarding my dissatisfaction with their opinion.
On November 16, I posted an article calling the report a whitewash, "You have delivered a whitewash report that misrepresented EST Bilello's response to my questions by cherry-picking Bilello's comments in an effort to exonerate and portray him in the most desirable way."
Leicht responded and said, "I understand that you disagree with the opinion and it is your right to
do so. Nonetheless, except to correct a typographical error in the original, the opinion will not be changed."
Below are some of the remarks I made to the IG at Wednesdays delegate meeting:
It is unfortunate your report, failed to interview other delegates or members in attendance, cherry-picked quotes, contains errors of fact, has material taken out of context, and does not accurately reflect what transpired at the delegate body meeting on July 25, 2012.
Shockingly, the only thing your report found inappropriate, was that the former president "did not retire from the Chair or follow established procedures when he injected himself into the exchange between myself and the EST."
Quoting from the report you wrote, the former president, " had the right as a union member to express his good faith opinion to what he believed, correctly or incorrectly, to be misconduct on my part."
In other words, you did not find the "good faith opinion" expressed inappropriate, you found the failure to retire from the Chair to express that "good faith opinion" inappropriate.
With all due respect, you have it all wrong!
The former president had no right to inject himself or express his opinion about my alleged misconduct whether he retires from the Chair or not.
So the one thing your report found inappropriate, is inappropriate for all the wrong reasons.
I want to read something, this is a quote from the Review Officer (RO):
"Though reasonable men might draw different conclusions from what they observed at the July 25th delegate meeting, I am of the view that the events which were the subject of the report represent an appalling failure of decorum and procedure and that the conduct of the chair could fairly be characterized as harassment."
Question, Can you explain how given the same evidence, your report fails to draw the same conclusions as the RO and explain why there is such a disparity in views between yourself and the RO?
The IG refused to answer.
Sunday, December 2, 2012
IG refuses to answer questions on report
Monday, May 21, 2012
Steward Review Operating Procedures
 |
| Memo posted on Council website. |
I will attempt to explain and clarify the memo for you.
Section 12 (K) of the District Council By-Laws, requires the Executive Committee to develop and preside over a uniform system of Shop Steward review and sentencing guidelines,which shall be adopted by the Delegate Body. The By-laws required the development of said system by March 15, 2012 or thereafter be developed and implemented by the Review Officer.
In attempting to comply with this By-law provision the council distributed the Shop Steward Operating Procedures to all delegates on May 9th..
From the Bilello Memo:
"Brothers and Sisters, Prior to the May 9th delegate meeting, a packet was distributed to all delegates that contained draft "Steward Review Operating Procedures," as well as draft "Steward Review Sentencing Guidelines." These documents were included in response to delegates rightfully demanding the receipt of all material for review well in advance before they are asked to vote on whether or not to approve."
"While it was in the interest of satisfying that demand, they were distributed before the Executive Officers of the Council had a chance to review them."
Bilello is playing fast and loose with the facts.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Notice to Local 157 Members
Dear Member,
 |
| Click to enlarge. |
Elections for these positions will be held at the New York City District Council of Carpenters Labor Technical College 395 Hudson Street New York, N.Y. 10014 (Clarkson Street Entrance) on Monday October 24, 2011 from 6:00a.m through 7:00p.m, regular scheduled meeting will follow.
Please note future meetings will be held at Saint Cyrios 502 West 40th Street New York, N.Y. 10018 (between 10th and 11th Avenues) on November 21, 2011 and December 19, 2011 at 4:30p.m.
Fraternally yours,
Patrick Nee
President
Levi Messinetti
Recording Secretary
(John's note: 100 Delegates to the District Council)
Saturday, August 6, 2011
District Council By-Laws Dated August 5, 2011
Under District Council Bylaws Section 20 and as formally recommended by the Review Officer, the Delegate Body adopted the following standing
rule at its meeting on Thursday, April 25, 2013, by a roll call vote of 81-1.
All votes relating to collective bargaining ratification should be by roll call of the Delegates.
These Bylaws are intended to conform with any and all relevant provisions of the Consent Decree, the Stipulation and Order entered on June 3, 2010, and any other Order entered in the matter of United States v. District Council et al., 90 Civ. 5722 (SDNY) (RMB). Any provision of these Bylaws that is inconsistent therewith shall be null and void, and of no force or effect.
This Council shall be the central governing body over and shall have legislative and executive powers on all matters relating to the general interest and welfare of affiliated Local Unions and their members.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Congratulations 105 Signed The Petition!
Originally posted Saturday May 21.
The comment period for the draft bylaws has ended. I want to thank all of you who have written to the RO or signed the petition. Your comments are part of a very important court record.
The RO has urged all members to read and consider these draft bylaws. At the Court conference held on May 16, the RO stated he received 12 comments (very pathetic). You have until June 9, 2011, to express your opinion, either sign the petition or email written comments to the RO about the draft bylaws and become part of a VERY IMPORTANT COURT RECORD.
To help you better understand and explain why you should be against these bylaws, we posted this petition which you should read and we urge ALL UBC member's to sign.
It is clear that these bylaws if allowed to be implemented will "Destroy Rank and File Rights" by taking away our guaranteed Right to Vote, to Organize and to Legislate our own affairs at the Local Union level.
By signing this Petition you will be telling the RO that you OPPOSE these bylaws that eviscerate and negate our guaranteed protected rights under the law.
Click "Continue Reading" to View Petition Text and Sign Petition!
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Tensions Rise Among NYC Union Carpenters
 |
| Rally For Solidarity Members of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters gathered to protest proposed changes to wages and mobility rules. |
New York City union carpenters' rank and file members rallied at union headquarters in Manhattan on April 12, protesting proposed changes to wages and mobility rules and calling for reform of council leadership. The “Rally for Solidarity” came as heated bargaining continues between local unions and contractor groups.
John Musumeci, Local 157, likened the conflict to the union battle in Wisconsin earlier this year. “We are in that same fight, only our fight is not with the governor; our fight is with [United Brotherhood of Carpenters'] General President Douglas McCarron and his sock puppet [New York City District Council of Carpenters Supervisor] Frank Spencer,” he told protesters.
Musumeci accused McCarron of “cozying up to” contractors. He also called for reform of union bylaws to “empower membership.”
The carpenters union is still reeling following a series of federal investigations into alleged wrongdoings by past council leaders. The alleged infractions included fraud, kickbacks, illegal drug use and credit card abuse. U.S. attorneys appointed Spencer as emergency supervisor in 2009.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Lebo on Transparency and Council Bylaws
I have read through the draft of the proposed bylaws that the UBChas submitted to you. I thank you for this opportunity to comment on said proposal. My first reaction to these bylaws was one of disbelief and anger. I realized after reading them that there was a distinct lack of the protections, discussed by the UBC’s attorney Kenneth Conboy, at the April 6, 2011 status conference with Judge Berman. There was absolutely none of the transparency also discussed. I would have thought Judge Berman was quite clear that he considered “openess”, or in other words, transparency, to be a virtue. I’m sure, you also feel,that transparency is also key to an open, honest, and corruption free NYCDCC, as do I.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Message to All Members of Affiliated Local Unions of the District Council
The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America has submitted to me for review a set of draft bylaws proposed for use by the New York City District Council of Carpenters (the “District Council”). The draft bylaws are posted on the District Council website.
I urge all members to read and consider these draft bylaws. For the next thirty days, through June 9, 2011, all members may submit written comments to me about the draft bylaws.
To comment on the draft bylaws, simply send me an email or letter containing what you want to say. In addition to general comments, I recommend that you cite specific sections when applicable. You must identify yourself and provide some contact information. Please clearly specify if you would like to have your comments kept confidential.
Review Officer
Dennis M. Walsh
(John's Note: I posted the bylaws in the forum section of the blog for your comments.)
