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.
Sunday, October 23, 2016
U.S. v. D.C. Transcript of 10/17/16 Court Conference
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.
Monday, February 8, 2016
Source: Ex-Carpenters head Ed Coryell was blindsided by his ouster
 |
| Edward Coryell Sr.’s union had quit the Philadelphia Building Trades Council. |
Douglas McCarron, the decisive general president of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, dropped in to tell Coryell that he was out.
The visit was short. Less than an hour. And Coryell had no idea it was coming, said friends and allies of the ousted labor leader.
By the time McCarron left, or shortly afterward, signs went up on the doors of the carpenters' headquarters on Spring Garden Street.
"At the direction of UBC general president Doug McCarron," the signs said, the council's 17,000 members and their union locals were closed and divided among councils based in Edison, N.J.; Pittsburgh; and Framingham, Mass.
While many aspects of Coryell's dismissal remain mysterious, one thing is certain, said John J. McNichol, chief executive of the Pennsylvania Convention Center: The change won't lead to union carpenters' returning to the building to set up and dismantle conventions.
"There is zero discussion or consideration of that," he said.
Fellow union leader John J. "Johnny Doc" Dougherty said he spent the day on the phone "talking to owners, developers, and contractors and letting them know there's continuity in the construction industry." Dougherty, who leads Local 98 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, now also heads the Philadelphia Building Trades Council.
Coryell's union had quit the council, a sore point among others in the building trades.
Dougherty said his role was to reassure: "The cool part of Philadelphia, you can change quarterbacks and the game goes on."
Running the show at the carpenters' headquarters is Michael Capelli, eastern district vice president under the direction of Frank Spencer, a McCarron lieutenant from Haddonfield and a top national vice president.
Saturday, January 16, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
