What We Have Here Is Failure to Cooperate

Above the law Bilello.  

On Wednesday March 27, Review Office (RO) Dennis Walsh, issued a eight count notice of possible veto to New York City District Council of Carpenters Executive Secretary-Treasurer Michael Bilello. 

Among other things, Bilello is accused of directing a business representative on March 22, to "let a suspended member work at the Javits Center "knowing that the person had been suspended as a member."

Bilello is also accused of "failing to cooperate" with an investigation of the RO by falsely stating, in sum and substance, that a certain business representative “suggested to me that I give [a suspended member] to the end of the week [working at Javits Center], like we are doing for others.”

Council employees are required to cooperate with the RO pursuant to Paragraph 7 of the Stipulation and Order. Failure to comply with the undertaking or invocation of the right against self-incrimination may subject persons to action pursuant to Paragraph 7, which makes failure to cooperate an express violation of the Stipulation and Order, as well as Paragraphs 5.b and 5.f.

Bilello has until April 9, 2013 to answer the eight count notice of veto, and to deliver a written submission to the RO stating any facts, law or arguments which might be relevant to consideration of this matter.

Biello Embroiled in Scandal

Bilello grossly negligent. 

On Wednesday March 27, Review Office (RO) Dennis Walsh, issued a notice of possible veto to New York City District Council of Carpenters Executive Secretary-Treasurer Michael Bilello, for among other things, failing to "abide by Section 21 of the District Council Bylaws and caused or attempted to cause employer compensation for members to be directed to the New York City District Council of Carpenters Welfare Fund."

The RO issued the notice after reading a story exposing Bilello's improper actions we posted last Saturday.

Bilello, claiming ignorance, said "it was a mistake" and he was unaware that he did not have the authority to direct monies to the welfare fund. He also blamed members of his administration for the failure saying, "no one told me I needed approval."

Section 21 of the District Council Bylaws, is very clear, the delegate body decides all questions of allocation of trust fund monies.

Bilello's claim of ignorance is not to be believed. First, Bilello is fully aware that "the full plenary power and authority of the district council is vested, without limitation, in the delegate body." Second, his running mate and former disgraced president and highly paid assistant, William S. Lebo, claimed to be an expert in the Bylaws and submitted a very detailed letter to the RO criticizing the Bylaws.

"All delegate meetings must be documented accurately, and all of this documentation should be disseminated to the membership so that they might know whether or not their delegates are doing the job they expect them to do. Also, as you have discussed at meetings with the membership, the voting by the delegates must also be recorded and documented for dissemination to the membership for the same reasons."

Lebo was vetoed in September 2012, the decision to allocate the Hoist raise was made in June 2012.

Bilello is not only grossly negligent, he is incompetent. Not only did Bilello fail to abide by the Bylaws, he also failed to notify the affected members that he allocated their entire contract raise to the welfare fund.

Union-wages war heats up and threatens City Point project

A fair-wages war over the City Point mega-development in Downtown Brooklyn heated up today when its developer accused the Building and Construction Trades Council of trying to hold up construction by ending negotiations.

“After months of discussing in good faith the terms of a possible Project Labor Agreement, we were disappointed by the Building and Construction Trades Council’s decision to terminate negotiations unilaterally,” Paul Travis, managing partner of project co-developer Washington Square Partners, said in a letter to Gary LaBarbera, president of the BCTC.

“As you know, our agreement with the city requires local, minority and women contracting and employee participation regardless of whether a union contractor is hired. We have made it our priority to meet these obligations. In Phase 1 of City Point, over 50 percent of contract dollars went to such firms. Over 80 percent of the employees were local residents or members of minority groups.

“Unfortunately, the deal the BCTC wanted to make would have put these commitments to our neighbors in jeopardy— this is a point of contention that is not a viable position for the Brooklyn community.”

However, LaBarbera later fired back that his group never broke up negotiations, that Travis' letter was filled with "false" statements and that the developers showed “a lack of character and integrity” by distributing the letter to the media on Good Friday.

“The fact is that the Building and Construction Trades Council of Greater New York did not break off negotiations,” LaBarbera said in a statement. “What we refused to accept is a racist, discriminatory and disgusting offer from the development team that would have effectively agreed to have employees -- except those of minority and women-owned business enterprises -- enjoy the good wages and benefits that come with union representation.

“In effect, the development team asked us to agree that employees of MWBEs be treated as second-class citizens and that the bulk of the development team’s financial concerns be balanced on the backs of the employees of these MWBEs.”

A City Point spokesperson later responded that, "It's unfortunate that BCTC is making inflammatory claims instead of working with us to get an agreement that can keep minority workers on the job while employing the union's members."

Source: NY Post

"It was a mistake, I made a mistake, I didn't know"

Disgraced former president & Bilello 
assistant, I read the Bylaws.

A member posted this comment, I thought it deserves a more prominent place on this blog.

"It was a mistake, I made a mistake, I didn't know," no one in my administration told me that the Bylaws state the delegate body decides all questions of allocation of trust fund monies.

Three words for ya Mikey....Idiot, Imbecile, Moron. So which one are you?

Your boy Lebo signed on to the response to the Restructuring Plan submitted to the honorable Judge Berman's court nearly two years ago on July 1, 2011.

In it cases were discussed citing ignorance of the law not being a plausible excuse. In the instant matter relative to your malfeasance in office, your actions remain criminal, so you better lawyer up dumb-ass.

No one in my administration told me....The dog ate my homework, wah, wah - boo-hoo. Too damn bad.

Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way - remember that one Mikey? You are unfit to lead anyone, bottom line. You don't have the smarts to out-wit the R.O. nor the foresight to see how he has used you, notwithstanding the fact that he has done your homework for you for the last 3-years....wink, wink. Your quid-pro-quo deal has blown up in your face and his, exposing the two of you for the sham's you've been before the honorable Court, before Judge Richard M. Berman.

Time to Pension out & run buddy. Call Pete Thomassen and he'll fill you in on how to stay out of jail. Sorry, I meant Club Fed".

John's note: The former disgraced president and highly paid Bilello assistant, William S. Lebo, also submitted this letter to the RO. Lebo was vetoed in September 2012, the decision to allocate the Hoist raise was made in June 2012.

Letter to Judge Berman

A handwritten letter from 24 year member Anthony McGuire, a long time shop steward, eloquently said writing against full mobility.

Court Order 3/28/13

Click to enlarge.

Order: Brief oral argument (15-20 minutes per side) onthe petition of Daniel Franco, dated February 8, 2013, is herebyscheduled for Wednesday April 3, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 12Dof the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Courthouse at 500 Pearl Street, NewYork, New York 10007.

Franco, Review Office Walsh, Assistant U.S.Attorney Benjamin Torrance, and James Murphy on behalf of the DistrictCouncil are requested to attend.

Parties to the petition should beprepared to discuss with the Court factual circumstances and legalarguments. The Court is not planning to entertain presentations fromothers.

*************************

If anyone has information that may support my petition requestingJudge Berman vacate the RO's veto regarding my charges against Bilelloand Lebo please send it to me ASAP.

Email: Dan Franco danieljfranco1@gmail.com

3-27-13 Desi Bravo Memo to Judge Berman

Petition to Judge Berman not to approve and implement Full mobility.

A Message from our Executive Secretary–Treasure

EST Bilello

Brothers and Sisters,

I want to begin by mentioning our fallen brother, Michael McQuade, beloved husband and father of two. Michael, a Dockbuilder Diver, died while working on the job Sunday, February 17, 2013. We mourn his family’s loss, which is our loss as well. While at the funeral service, I stood between VP Mike Cavanaugh and President Steve McInnis and was struck by how important it is for us to be there for our members and their families at all times. I offer my sincere condolences to the McQuade Family.

One of the most pressing of the many issues this District Council has had to deal with over the past year since we’ve been in office is the drastic cuts to the Welfare Fund benefits. These cuts, instituted this past June, were the result of a decision made by an arbitrator prior to our being elected and unbeknownst to us until taking office. These cuts have since become one of our primary issues to rectify. One clear path forward to attaining that goal is increasing the number of man hours contributed to our benefits funds.

It Was a Mistake

Bilello–I didn't know

"It was a mistake, I made a mistake, I didn't know," no one in my administration told me that the Bylaws state the delegate body decides all questions of allocation of trust fund monies.

Those were the immortal words uttered by Executive Secretary-Treasurer Michael Bilello at last nites delegate body meeting as he was questioned on violating Section 21 of the District Council Bylaws.

Last nite we learned, Bilello failed to seek delegate body approval and improperly diverted a July 1, 2012, $2.59 per hour contract raise with the Hoist Trade Association into the welfare fund.

Bilello failed to seek delegate body approval and improperly diverted a January 1, 2013, $2.46 per hour contract raise with the Millwrighst Association into the welfare fund.

And Bilello failed to seek delegate body approval and attempted to improperly allocate the contract raise with the Association of Wall-Ceiling and Carpentry Industries agreement; the March 12, 2013 executed CBA submitted to Judge Berman for approval purports to allocate $2.12 per hour to the Welfare Fund.

Bilello also failed to mention the notice of possible action letter he received from Review Officer Dennis Walsh, when questioned he said "I am not going to talk about it."

Among other things that happened last nite, the Bilello administration recommended approving the three contract raise allocations to the welfare fund, motions were made, debated and approved by the delegate body.

I'll have more to say later...Stay tuned.

Coalition calls for halt to City Point project, charging workers are paid poverty-level wages

By Lore Croghan / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Unions and community groups are calling on the Bloomberg Administration to halt construction work at the City Point mega-project.

The city should stop the massive downtown Brooklyn development at DeKalb and Flatbush Aves. while it does a new study of the impact of low wages developers are paying, the groups said.

“We know that construction workers are being paid poverty wages at City Point and they are not getting any benefits,” said Terry Moore of Metallic Ironworkers Local 46.

Workers are being paid $15 per hour at the 1.6 million-square-foot residential and commercial development, the advocates charged — which adds up to $22,500 per year, below the city’s poverty level for a family of four.

NOTICE OF POSSIBLE ACTION BY THE REVIEW OFFICER

Bilello–You're Fired!

Breaking News...The New York City District Council of Carpenters is once again rocked by scandal as Executive Secretary-Treasurer Michael Bilello faces a possible veto for among other things, failing to abide by Section 21 of the District Council Bylaws and caused or attempted to cause employer compensation for members to be directed to the New York City District Council of Carpenters Welfare Fund, according to a notice of possible action letter signed by Review Officer Dennis Walsh (see letter below).

Pursuant to Paragraph 5.b.iii of the Stipulation and Order entered on June 3, 2010, in the matter of United States v. District Council, 90 Civil 5722 (SDNY) (RMB) (the “Stipulation and Order”), please be advised that the Review Officer is considering issuing a veto of your service as Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the New York District Council of Carpenters.

The facts and circumstances under review involve suspected violations of (1) Paragraph 5.b.iii (c), (d) and (e) of the Stipulation and Order entered in this matter on June 3, 2010, and (2) violation of Paragraph 7 of the Stipulation and Order; to wit:

(a) from on or about July 1, 2012, through March 12, 2013, you failed to abide by Section 21 of the District Council Bylaws and caused or attempted to cause employer compensation for members to be directed to the New York City District Council of Carpenters Welfare Fund;

(b) on March 22, 2013, you directed a business representative of the District Council attempting to properly enforce the collective bargaining agreement at the Javits Center to let a suspended member work at the Javits Center knowing that the person had been suspended as a member;

(c) on March 13, 2013, you refused to answer questions about your report to the Delegates properly posed to you by a delegate at a meeting of the Delegate Body of the District Council;

(d) on July 25, 2012, you engaged in indecorous and undemocratic behavior in a debate with a delegate at a meeting of the District Council Delegate Body;

(e) from on or about September 2012, to the present, you failed to continue the development of the business representative cross-training program recommended by the Review Officer and begun by the former District Council President and Assistant to the EST;

(f) from on or about August 22, 2012, through October 2012, you failed to take reasonable and prudent measures to implement the terms of the Memorandum of Agreement between the District Council and the Association of Wall-Ceiling and Carpentry Industries of New York, Inc.;

(g) from on or about January 11, 2012, to the present, you failed to review minutes of the meetings of the Board of Trustees of the Benefit Funds with the District Council Executive Committee;

(h) on March 22, 2013, you failed to cooperate with an investigation of the Review Officer by falsely stating, in sum and substance, that a certain business representative “suggested to me that I give [a suspended member] to the end of the week [working at Javits Center], like we are doing for others.”

Pursuant to procedures promulgated by the Review Officer to supplement the record in such matters (enclosed), and as provided for herein, you may deliver a written submission to this office via email stating any facts, law or arguments (and appending any exhibits) which might be, in your view, relevant to consideration of this matter. Said submission must be delivered by noon on April 9, 2013. A pre-action conference will be scheduled to occur at a later date. Please email any submission or other communications relevant to this notice to dmwfw@verizon.net, with copies to jacknmitchell@gmail.com and Bill O’Flaherty at oflah267@optonline.net.

Dated: March 26, 2013

Dennis M. Walsh
Review Officer

Update: Bilello Rocked by Scandal

Bilello—Gross Negligence

Review Officer (RO) Dennis Walsh is investigating the circumstances involving "how and by whom" the allocation decisions involving at least three contracts were made (Hoist, WC&C and BCA).

We reported that on July 1, 2012 Executive Secretary-Treasurer Michael Bilello failed to seek delegate body approval and improperly diverted a July 1, 2012, $2.59 per hour contract raise with the Hoist Trade Association into the welfare fund, costing members millions in lost wages.

We also reported that Bilello has also attempted to improperly allocate the contract raise with the Association of Wall-Ceiling and Carpentry Industries agreement; the March 12, 2013 executed CBA submitted to Judge Berman for approval purports to allocate $2.12 per hour to the Welfare Fund.

Informed sources say that Bilello plans on having all allocation decisions put before the delegates for approval at tomorrows delegate body meeting.

Though not vested by the District Council Bylaws with authority to do so, Bilello failed to seek delegate body approval for allocating monies into the welfare fund. Section 21 of the District Council Bylaws, is very clear, the delegate body decides all questions of allocation of trust fund monies.

I have reviewed the meeting minutes of the delegate body from May 2012 through March 2013. At no time did Bilello inform the delegate body of his conduct to or seek their approval to allocate a contract wage increase into the welfare fund.

The RO is expected to have all of the answers for Wednesdays delegate meeting, "It is certainly possible that gross negligence will be the explanation for the allocation issues," the RO said in an email.

In my view the first contract raise should rightly go into the pockets of the Rank and File who have not had an wage increase since 2010. There will be another contract raise implemented in 3 months, there needs to be a much more informed discussion and debate about reducing and controlling our costs in the welfare fund, and with our choice of a health care provider. We should also have a detailed study of the expected increase in man-hours (2 million) with the approval of full mobility, and the expected increase in man-hours as we enter into a construction spending building boom, before the delegate body wantonly rubber-stamps these allocations to the welfare fund.  

The key in solving the problems of the welfare fund is increasing man-hours, increasing the contribution rate does not compensate for the loss in man-hours. We should not have members paying higher rates for the same health coverage.
  
Below is a the inaugural issue of Benefit Funds News, it was originally posted in December 2011. There is a very good frequently asked questions and answer section regarding the welfare fund. One question that you will find interesting is:

Q. Why not just increase the employer hourly contribution rate?

A. A contribution rate of $11.25 per hour is already substantial and represents over 13% of your total hourly compensation. Increasing the employer contribution rate is not the solution. In fact, it may be counter-productive to improving the employment situation. Because it is in everyone’s interest that our union employers remain competitive with non-union employers, we must start with controlling our costs.

(John's note: Call your delegates and tell them to vote no on increasing the allocation to the welfare fund. In addition to the below newsletter read the Fourth Interim Report by the RO page 56 regarding the welfare fund) .

Update: Bilello Rocked by Corruption Scandal

On Saturday we reported that...The New York City District Council of Carpenters is once again rocked by scandal as Executive Secretary-Treasurer Michael Bilello illegally diverted $2.59 per hour contract raise with the Hoist Trade Association, increasing the welfare fund contribution from $11.25 to $13.84.

Below is the fringe benefit agreement showing that the welfare fund contribution did in fact increase by $2.59 per hour on July 1, 2012. It is estimated that at least $1.5 million has been illegally diverted out of the pockets of hard working hod hoist carpenters.

Also today I called and sent the following email to Bilello and the District Council Officers, they did not return my calls or respond to the email.

Gentlemen: Can you please cite and supply authorities that allowed for the July 1, 2012 allocation of $2.59 into the Welfare Fund regarding the agreement between the NYCDC and The Hoisting & Scaffolding Trade Association.

Bilello Rocked by Corruption Scandal

Click to enlarge.

Updated 7:30 pm
 
Breaking News...The New York City District Council of Carpenters is once again rocked by scandal as Executive Secretary-Treasurer Michael Bilello illegally diverted millions of dollars of a contractual raise into the welfare fund and now may face a possible veto by Review Officer (RO) Dennis Walsh.

Though not vested by the District Council Bylaws with authority to do so, we just learned that on July 1, 2012 Bilello failed to seek delegate body approval and diverted a $2.59 per hour contract raise with the Hoist Trade Association, increasing the Welfare Fund contribution from $11.25 to $13.84 (the highest  member contribution).

The Hoist Trade Association Agreement was passed in the direct membership vote in March last year. It is one of five agreements sent out by the delegates for a direct vote and the only one that passed (see letter). The Hoist agreement covers approximately 600 to 800 members who work over one million man-hours a year. It is estimated that at least $1.5 million has been illegally diverted out of the pockets of hard working hod hoist carpenters.

Hod Hoist Carpenters are members of Local 1556, they erect and maintain the material and personnel hoist on new construction sites. They also work on scaffolding and sidewalk bridges across the city. In July 2011, UBC General President Douglass McCarron dissolved Local 1456 (former Timbermen/Hod Hoist) and Local 1536, (former Dockbuilders) the memberships of both local unions were merged into the new Local 1556, which has approximately 3300 members.

Roto Born, a hod hoist shop steward working at St Patrick’s Cathedral was unaware he even received a raise.

“I am working on one of the largest scaffolding jobs in the city and the men and I didn’t even know we received a raise, why was the entire raise put into the welfare fund and why weren’t we even notified about this," Born stated.

In an email to the RO requesting comment on the illegal allocation, the RO stated, “if that was done it was without notice to me.”

I contacted several district council delegates and they all stated that they have “no recollection of the hoist raise ever being mentioned or debated” nor is there any reference to the raise recorded in the delegate meeting minutes.

In a March 21, 2013 letter to Judge Berman, the RO stated among other things, “there is no question that pursuant to Section 21 of the District Council Bylaws, the delegate body decides all questions of allocation of trust fund monies."

Judge Berman Order

On March 21, 2013 Judge Berman issued an Order that states: "Mr. Walsh and Mr. Murphy are requested to supply authorities for the proposition that this Court can approve a collective bargaining agreement where only an MOU has been approved by a delegate body."

As we have been saying, the only delegate vote that ever took place regarding the WC&C contract was on a four page MOU on August 22, 2012, which we believe is not a formal contract. The March 12, 2013 agreement submitted to judge Berman has never been submitted to the delegate body for a ratification vote.

Below is a video explaining how formal or legally binding is a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).

District Council Response to Schroder Letter

Dear Judge Berman: As you know, this firm represents the New York City and Vicinity District Council of Carpenters ("District Council"). I write at the request of the Court pursuant to its Order dated March 13, 2013 (Doc. 1255) in response to the March 11, 2013 submission of Demian Schroeder (Doc. 1246) and subsequent submissions from others regarding the above-referenced collective bargaining agreement (”CBA”) between the District Council and Wall-Ceiling & Carpentry industries of New York, Inc. (“WC&C").

The District Council joins in the substance and the sentiments expressed by Review Officer Dennis M. Walsh in his letter of March 19, 2013 to Your Honor. I write to make two brief points. First, the WC&C CBA was properly ratified by the District Council. And second, the real issue here is anti-corruption compliance, not full mobility.

Franco letters to Judge Berman and RO Response

Below are letters from Dan Franco to Judge Berman regarding the RO's January 11, 2013 veto of charges against Bilello and Lebo and response from Bridget Rohde counsel to the RO.

NYC construction spending hits 4-year high

Construction spending in the city topped $30 billion in 2012.

Construction spending in the city topped $30 billion last year for the first time since the bubble burst in 2008, according a report released Thursday by the New York Building Congress.

That spending totaled $30.6 billion in 2012, up 3.6% from $29.5 billion in 2011, and not far off the all-time high of $31.1 billion in 2007. Last year's gain was fueled largely by a rebound in residential building and a surge in government spending tied in part to Superstorm Sandy relief efforts. Last year's performance marked the second straight year of growth for the construction industry after a precipitous decline to $25.9 billion in 2010.

"It really is a stronger than anticipated market," Richard Anderson, president of the Building Congress, said. "If you look at it sector by sector, it's easy to see why."

Residential construction is booming again, and while it remains well below the peak levels of the last decade, it has recovered faster than expected, Mr. Anderson noted. In fact, residential construction jumped 56% last year, to $5.1 billion. In all 10,599 units of housing were built, up 19% from 2011.

Government spending has held strong at $15.5 billion, down only $100 million from 2011, and not far off the 2008 peak of $16.3 billion. The Building Congress attributes this strength to ongoing work on a number of huge government projects, like the Second Avenue subway and the World Trade Center PATH Hub, and post-Sandy rebuilding work.

Non-residential work, as a whole took some of the steam out of last year's activity. The volume of work in that sector, which includes office, institutional and industrial projects slipped 8.5%, to $9.8 billion. Even there, however, Mr. Anderson said there were bright spots. "Universities and hospitals continue to build, which has been very good for the institutional segment," he said.

The big drag last year was office construction, which Mr. Anderson blames on still weak job growth.

"We're not getting the jobs we need, and the jobs we are getting, they're taking up less space," Mr. Anderson said. Employers, trying to cut cost during the recession, shrunk not only their workforce but the amount of space they allocate to each staffer, by cramming more people into the same or even less space.

"The offices are ready to go, they're designed, whether it's Hudson Yards or the World Trade Center or on the avenues, but the leases just aren't there yet," Mr. Anderson said. "But they'll come."

Overall, the Building Congress remains optimistic and expects the construction market to continue to grow.

"We've got a lot of different things going on," he said.

Posted from iPhone

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20130321/REAL_ESTATE/130329975?template=smartphone&X-IgnoreUserAgent=1

RO to Judge: Delegates Must Vote on Raise

Dear Judge Berman: In a letter docketed yesterday, rank and file member Demian Schroeder raised what he perceived to be certain points of concern regarding the conduct of the District Council Delegate meeting held March 13, 2013.

I reiterate the opinion I expressed in my letter to the Court of March 19th, that the terms in the “Memorandum of Understanding” (“MOU”) made between the WC&C and the District Council in August 2012 are legally enforceable. However, I am also of the opinion that the delegate body must vote on any unique and material terms not previously considered. To use the District Council’s term, “operationalization” can only be recognized with respect to contract terms, conditions and principles considered by the delegate body.

Mr. Schroeder raises a question about the proper method of the Union determining how and whether an increase of $2.12 per hour payable by the employers should be allocated. The executed CBA purports to allocate the money to the Welfare Fund. Though I believe such a planned allocation is prudent, proper procedure must be followed.

Contract Update: Schroeder Letter to Judge Berman

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 page MOU on August 22, 2012. The agreement submitted to judge Berman has never been submitted to the delegate body for a ratification vote.

************************************

Dear Judge Berman:In regard to the execution of the District Council/Wall-Ceiling contract (CBA) dated March 12, 2013, as set forth by the Court's March 13, 2013 Order [Document 1255] I submit for Your Honor subsequent observations relevant to the Case:

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.

RO Letter to Judge Berman

Dear Judge Berman: I write to address the full mobility provision of the proposed collective bargaining agreement between the District Council and the Association of Wall-Ceiling and Carpentry Industries of New York, Inc. (WC&C CBA). I have reviewed the papers and letters submitted by Demian Schroeder, Daniel Franco and other Union members and respond to what I view as the key concerns articulated in the submissions.

My interest in the WC&C CBA, and other CBAS, derives in significant part from my obligation as Review Officer to ensure to the best of my ability that the Union is democratically run and comlption free. In my view, full mobility does not run afoul of these objectives. Indeed, I expect the electronic time entry technology, including its member oversight component, to significantly enhance anti-corruption efforts.

First, the WC&C contract terms, including full mobility, were approved by the District Council in a democratic fashion. As stated in my Fifth Interim Report

On August 22, 2012, the delegate body of the District Council, by a Vote of 60-26, approved terms amending in significant respects the current collective bargaining agreement with [WC&C]. In sum, in exchange for significant wage increases, the employers and the District Cotmcil must develop an appropriate compliance program and obtain an order from the Court to alter the current hiring ratio (“67/33”) to allow employers to select the District Council members who will work for them. The employers will be obliged to match any employee from outside the jurisdiction of the District Council with a District Council member ....

Fifth Interim Report at 8; see also Exhibit 5 to the Fifth Interim Report (RO letter to Court responding to letter by Union member Veronica Session, attaching the terms approved by the delegates). The delegate body was elected by the Union membership in the eight local unions in December 2011, and installed in January 2012, under my supervision.

Bilello Administration Like Gang Who Can’t Shoot Straight

Click to enlarge.

John's note: At last Wednesdays Delegate Body meeting among other things, I brought this matter of a nonexistent "stamp plan"to the attention of EST Bilello. Also when I questioned Bilello that he had no authority to sign a contract which allocates $2.12 per-hour to the Welfare Fund, (see section 8 page 32) he looked like a deer caught in the headlights and was unable to answer a simply question. This $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 page MOU on August 12, 2013. The agreement submitted to judge Berman has never been submitted to the delegate body for a ratification vote.

******************************

Side Letter to Agreement with a term of July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2017

This letter will serve to memorialize our understanding with respect to clarifying certain provisions of the parties Agreement with a term of July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2017 that we executed on March 12, 2013.

First, with respect to Article VII-Job Referral System, it is the parties' understanding that the remedy under Section 6(b) of reinstating the 50:50 hiring ratio means that such remedy would require the individual Employer to hire at least fifty percent (50%) of Carpenters from the District Council's job referral list (a/k/a Out of Work List or OWL) without the ability to make requests not withstanding anything to the contrary in Section 6(b) or Section 4 of that Article VII.

And second, the parties agree that Section 13 of Article XVI concerning a "stamp plan" is no longer in effect and that Section 13, is unenforceable because it is moot.

If the above accurately reflects our understanding please sign in the space indicated below and return a countersigned copy of this letter to me.

Judge Berman Docket 3/18/13

The following items related to collective bargaining agreements were received by the Court and docketed on March 18, 2013.

Due to the upcoming holidays, the deadline set forth in the Court's March 13, 2013 Order [Doc. 1255] for any submissions is extended to April 4, 2013.

Proposed Orders regarding Full Mobility

On February 27, 2013 council for the District Council sent Judge Berman an Order being proposed by the District Council in support of the implementation of full mobility. Judge Berman invited members to comment and has accepted member letters from the rank and file in opposition of full mobility.

On March 11, 2013 carpenter Demian Schroeder filed an Order being proposed by the rank and file in opposition of full mobility.

On March 12, 2013 Judge Berman issued an order stating, the Court has reviewed the March 11, 2013 submission, of Demian Schroeder [Doc.1246] and has asked that:

"Any response(s) are to be served and filed by March 20, 2013, e.g., District Council, RO,Wall-Ceiling, etc. Responsive filings should include the status of union approval/ratification of the District Council/Wall-Ceiling collective bargaining Agreement, dated March 12, 2013.

John's note: In regards to the status of the submitted District Council/Wall-Ceiling collective bargaining Agreement, dated March 12, 2013. It has never been submitted to the delegate body for a ratification vote. The signed contract contains provisions that are no longer applicable or approved by the Delegate Body; for example: Section 13 references a non-existent “stamp plan” (page 48) and Section 8 references $2.13 per-hour allocated to the Welfare Fund (page 32) which was never approved or voted on by the Delegate Body. The only Delegate vote that ever took place regarding the WC&C was on a four page MOU on August 12, 2013 

Below are the two Orders being proposed.

Letters to Judge Berman

Updated 3/16/13 with new letters to Berman, original posted 3/13/13

On Wednesday February 27, Judge Richard Berman invited comments and reserved decision on the approval of the compliance provision for the Wall & Ceiling Contract to allow for full mobility within the collective bargaining agreement. Below are letters to Berman from the rank and file opposing full mobility.

The Carpenter

The Carpenter 2013

Delegate Body Approves New BCA Contract

(John's note: It took Bilello over a month to post this information, so much for keeping you informed, also they failed to include the date in their post, the vote was on February 13, 2013, which I posted on the 14th.)

The New York City District Council of Carpenters’ Delegate Body approved a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA) that provides a nearly 11% wage and benefit increase over the life of the contract which expires June 30, 2015. The new contract between the District Council and the Building Contractors Association (BCA) contains a new Market Recovery addendum created to put members to work on jobs previously lost to non-union contractors throughout the city.

In addition, members will see an increase in their wage and benefit package of $2.13 an hour upon implementation, and another increase of $4.80 on July 01, 2013, followed by another $2.40 increase July 01, 2014. The wage and benefit package will rise to $94.36 at the end of the deal, from a current level of $85.03--a nearly 11% increase.

This new agreement contains the same manning provisions contained in the Wall and Ceiling Agreement previously approved by the Delegate Body, requiring employers to match all non-NYCDCC local members with a dispatch from the NYCDCC Job Referral list. That provision is aimed at capturing between one and two million hours a year, which are worked in our jurisdiction by members of other district councils, and the contributions our benefit funds lose when those hours are transferred to non-NYC District Council benefit funds.

The NYCDCC Executive Committee and the BCA reached a tentative agreement in February. Now the delegate-approved CBAs containing the new manning provisions and compliance requirements mandated by the court appointed Review Officer, have to be approved by Federal Court Judge Richard Berman before they go into effect.

Posted from iPhone

Passero Request To Judge Berman

On February 12, 2013 we reported that Review Office Dennis Walsh vetoed Joseph Passero as President of Local 1556. Below is a letter from Passero to Judge Berman requesting judicial review of the veto.

Judge Berman Order: District Council, RO, Wall-Ceiling, etc. respond to Member submission

The Court has reviewed the March 11, 2013 submission, of Demian Schroeder [Doc.1246]. Any response(s) are to be served and filed by March 20, 2013, e.g., District Council, RO,Wall-Ceiling, etc. Responsive filings should include the status of union approval/ratification of the District Council/Wall-Ceiling collective bargaining Agreement, dated March 12, 2013.

Best Blogger Nominee

We have been nominated as Best Construction Blogger in the 2013 JDR Industry Blogger Awards! Voting is now open. Please vote for us here TODAY!

Click to VOTE!

Rank and File Carpenter SDNY Motion in response to 2-27-13 NYCDC/WC&C Full Mobility Proposal

Dear Judge Berman: The February 27, 2013 “Proposed Order” on Job Rules and Anti-Corruption Compliance Procedures under Collective Bargaining Agreement, as drafted by the NYCDCC in-house counsel Murphy, in concert with the UBCJA International’s oversight, and the Wall-Ceiling &Carpentry Industries of New York, Inc. is a smokescreen which by design is for the express purpose of steering the Court away from multiple violations of local, State & Federal laws, long settled NLRB Board precedent, Appellate Court & United States Supreme Court precedent via the stick & carrot approach for contract negotiations for new Multi-Employer Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA’S.)

Federal Court Reinstates Dispute Over Union Dues Hike

By ANNIE YOUDERIAN

(CN) - The 9th Circuit on Thursday revived part of a union worker's challenge to a dues increase by an umbrella labor organization.

The federal appeals court in San Francisco agreed with union worker Alex Corns that the Northern California District Council of Laborers had overstepped its authority when it approved a dues hike in 2008.

Corns, now retired from the Hod Carriers Local Union No. 166, sued his local union, the district council and the Laborers International Union of North America over their increased dues and fees. He argued that the umbrella unions needed the approval of a majority of local members, typically through a secret ballot vote, to ratify higher dues or fees.

A federal judge rejected Corns's challenge, and the 9th Circuit reversed a portion of that ruling.

The three-judge panel said a local majority is only required when a local union wants to raise dues. An international union like LIUNA can do so through "alternative methods," the court ruled, including by a majority vote of delegates at a convention, as it did in 2006 when it ratified a $0.25 organization fee per hour worked for all construction unions.

Transcript of Judge Berman's court conference with NYCDCC on February 27

Posted from iPhone, view the February 27, 2013 court transcript below.

THE COURT: Let me just say a word or two about the technology. We have had some back and forth over the last couple of days, and I didn't really give you -- there was no opportunity to explain what my thinking was. It strikes me that with respect to the implementation of this new collective bargaining agreement, what you proposing is a companion technology that goes towards implementation. And I think that's pretty much up to all are you. In some respects it strikes me as a little bit of a tail the dog. The dog is the collective bargaining agreement. What's new about it? We have been talking for quite some time about collective bargaining agreements.

I remember Mr. Conboy saying last year that they were imminent -- I think over a year ago there were going to be a whole series that didn't happen. I don't think there's been a whole lot of discussion about why it didn't happen or when it is going to happen, but I'm frankly more interested in the collective bargaining agreement itself, the new one, and somewhat mobility going to wagging of a discussion about the change to rule of full than I am in what particular technology you all are employ in connection with that agreement.

On Vacation

Posted from iPhone

Carpenters letter to Judge Berman in response to contract

See link to read letter files with Judge Berman.

Complete Update on the Current MWA Situation

Here is the latest on the current situation involving the MWA, the arbitration, and the members working for MWA contractors.

Right now

As we all know, the arbitrator decided that she can not rule on issues regarding benefits and also awarded the MWA $8,000,000 for past wages paid compared to the Gilbert wage package. So as it stands right now, the District Council owes the MWA $8,000,000, and the MWA owes the Benefit Funds for all the hours worked. Also the original decision regarding wages stands. The MWA can pay it's shop workers the lower Gilbert pay rate, but most shops will not lower wages because they know most skilled craftsman will not work for $21 per hour (as opposed to $31). Tobin and Bauerschmidt are the only known shops that have lowered their wages (to approx. $28 per hour).

What's next?

The MWA has been in talks with the District Council on hammering out a new MWA Agreement in addition to settling all other issues. The MWA can still take the DC to arbitration again if they want, this time over the benefits. This could result in a ruling against the DC upwards of approx. $30,000,000 in addition to what has already been awarded if they decide to go that route. However, the MWA is interested in signing a new agreement, and in return agree not to bring up arbitration again towards the DC. This proposed global settlement will resolve everything, and the MWA and DC can move forward.