NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
72 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

Bill Walsh


Brother John Newell Jr. of Local Union # 291 , Albany, N.Y. has won his NLRB Case. NO MORE FINES for not participating in Mandatory Union Participation! The Settlement Agreement was signed today by Mike Shanahan , President of Local Union # 291 and a host of other UBC Business Agents and Regional Council Officers throughout the Regions.

Other Local unions affected are:  New Jersey Local Union's # 251 , # 253, # 254; Pennsylvania Unions Local # 158, # 173; Delaware Local Union # 164 ; and New Jersey/ Delaware/ / Maryland Local Union # 255; and of course Albany , N.Y  Local Union # 291.

Notice will be posted on the National Labor Relations Board website and various Carpenter union websites. Notices will also be posted in all the union halls listed above.

I have a few questions that need to be answered.

How does the NYCDCC get around this ruling by the NLRB? I have asked this question at Delegate meetings and was told by McInnis that we were protected from this without an explanation. Perhaps when someone files a complaint with the NLRB, this will change for us also. Where are the fines going and how much money is in the fund? How much has been collected each year and is this forced tactic actually having any impact on getting members to support their Union? How many jobs have been turned around because of the Organizing Departments efforts and is this method of penalizing the members only making member participation worse? The time for new strategies is long over due.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

roy  ernst845
I talked ton the lawer handling the case in new York from the nlrb in Albany  and I was told the following   they do not have a problem with the fines  what they have a problem with is losing acess to the hiring hall  so I said then nothing will change on the unions we will still get fines \dues assement as such    and said that could be correct   but ask the unions these questions  what happens if I don't pay assment   if v they wont allow u to pay dues because of an assment   then u will lose acess to the hiring hall     because they wont accept your dues  then they will be liable and u will need to file charges with your local nlrb    and since it was already heard the case there will not be a long wait like brother  john had to go threw      and I am a 30 year member  that has completed picket lines  while I was not forced to     but mandatory   is a  f       JOKE     !!!!!     roy Ernst    local 845
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

told you so
How's that raise doing losers ?
EH
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

EH
In reply to this post by roy ernst845
Are you 100 percent sure on this ruling?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

roy ernst
I am as disappointed   as everyone else   yes I did talk to the lawyer for nlrb   I am 100 percent sure  we will still get fines   but they wont be able to throw u out for not paying    
EH
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

EH
So there is no reason to pay the fine if they can’t throw you out. Actually I think it’s good thing the Mup but the assessment is not
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

roy ernst
the Albany nlrb phone number that called me back was 1(518)4196672 the guys name was james   it was   rather easy to get info about the case   feel free to call
EH
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

EH
Thank You
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

Bill Walsh
In reply to this post by roy ernst845
Paragraph 4 of the Consent Decree mandates that the District Council Bylaws include a provision requiring active members to perform at least seven (7) hours of union activity per year.  In compliance with that mandate, members are assessed $500 per year and that assessment is waived if a member meets the union participation requirement.  Courts have determined that union participation requirements like those contained in the District Council Bylaws are completely lawful.  Nothing in the Newell/Local 291 matter changed established law, and, in fact, a decision in the case confirmed this precedent.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

Bill Walsh
Now that there has been a new ruling on this clause, perhaps the Judge should revisit the issue? I guess the Independent Monitor will be looking into this.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

RichardDorrough
This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by Bill Walsh
"Courts have determined that union participation requirements like those contained in the District Council Bylaws are completely lawful" Sorry Bill but that's complete BS. Show us the court rulings please. The single case the UBC scum bags and their shit bag lawyers are using is the Scofield v. NLRB, 394 U.S. 423 430 (1969). from 50 years ago. A ruling that would not AND WILL not stand up before a Judge in 2018.Especially with proof of 50 years of UBC corruption since then. Show us the other case law and detail the "established law" you speak of.
 
Notice the one single document in the case the NLRB is not forcing workers to FOIL has the word "fines" redacted. Hmm wonder what NLRB regulation allowed this.Rather odd dont you think.Why would the word "fines" be redacted and at whose request.

 Newly appointed Director Office of Appeals Mark E. Arbesfeld, cancelled the appearance before the ALJ and took a personal interest in the Newell case. Must not have had much going on as the new Director Office of Appeals .

Now when I say NLRB bought and paid for (or suck ass for Union bosses and their lawyers) is that fair.???

VI.
Conclusion
"The NLRB was intended to be a fair and unbiased agency that balances the interests of
employers and unions.  However, as this staff report discussed, the problems and bias at the
NLRB run rampant.  Courts have invalidated its rules, it is reinterpreting labor law with a slant towards unionization, and its leaders apparently believe the rules do not apply to them. Such a
systematic pattern of behavior is the reason the NLRB is becoming known as a rogue agency
 and is no longer viewed as fair and impartial." Oh no not me. This comes from "STAFF REPORT
U.S HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 112TH CONGRESS COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND
GOVERNMENT REFORM DECEMBER  13,2012"  


     The premise is that Union members can leave the Union(why should they have to quit to avoid some UBC punk ass bitches robbing their paychecks) to avoid being extorted by UBC scum bag rat pussies and still work on Union jobs at Union rate and be kept on the dispatch list as Agency Fee payers. ALL AS THE LAW DEMANDS. Further members do not "voluntary leave" the Union to avoid the extortion they are "thrown out" if they refuse to be extorted.Yet had it gone before the Judge, which Arbesfeld so so careful to make sure it did not,evidence would have been presented that THERE ARE NO Agency fee payers in the Northeast Council  AND that when a UBC member refused to pay the extortion they not only took his name off the membership list the UBC shitbags also went to the members employer and DEMANDED the member be fired and removed from the job because he was no longer a member of the Union. ALL ILLEGAL under the NLRA. (Read the ZERO in the number of Agency Fee payers on the (now gone and robbed by Dirty Doug)Northeast Council LM2)ILLEGAL Kind of like when the shitbag Murphy and the NYC scumbags ignored the order of the NLRB and 2nd circuit court and continued to try and force members to switch their books to work in NYC.
So mister bought and paid for NLRB shitbag tell us how these fines(not fecking assessments)are not related to your employment opportunities.
     Sadly for Arbsfeld he thinks the matter is done and he did his job to serve not workers rights but his or perhaps somebody elses agenda.Not so skippy...Oh yes and Feck McGorty.
 

AND!! Are you saying the Federal court has issued a court order forcing  active members to perform at least seven (7) hours of union activity per year or be fined $500 and thrown out of the Union if they refuse to pay. Can you post this...Now that opens a whole new legal angle to pursue. One has to wonder why the shitbag Arbsfeld did not quote this recent case??You said "Paragraph 4 of the Consent Decree mandates that the District Council Bylaws include a provision requiring active members to perform at least seven (7) hours of union activity per year". and " In compliance with that mandate"

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

 Samuel Tarallo
All this and everything needs to be bought out to the brotherhood,all members need to see whats going on,especially hudson yards,working along scabs on the job,it is putting union workers lives and safety at risk.labor violations are being committed,union members are being screwed,we need big job actions,we need to strike the entire city,a national revolt on workers rites,pay,and decent benefits is what it is all about,we should be going forwards,not backwards.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

roy ernst
I filed an  ufl with nlrb  in Philadelphia for threating me  with assements and possible suspension from membership if I fail to particapte in the mup program   after I called William Sproule   ans asked about the posting online  I was told it means nothing and if I did not want to do it I could go work nonunion they do not have to do them     I am a 30 year member who does not work out of the hall and will not be talked down to anymore by men we keep in the office from working in the field      don't know if I will win or lose but one thing is for sure   I will find out if they are aloweed to force us to do these mups    I have a meeting with investigator this week from nlrb and will keep everyone posted  
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

Mh88
I'm doing the same today! Fuck these guys which they forget we pay their salary! Good luck and tell more members to do the same. Philadelphia
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

Gonzo
In reply to this post by roy ernst
Roy.
Now that scumbag rat fuck jeresey piece of shit ballantyne pussied out and took a deal and dropped his suit...    What a fucking pussy .
I met with NRLB AND Doj 2 years ago. Face to face.
They want cappelli and spencer.
Billy " pickett cash" Sproules is a fucking scumbag from the old 623 ..if hed wipe the dna off his lip he might be able to speak.
Im filing again today .
Enough is enough.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

roy ernst
if your looking for an argument.   im not going to give u one   i do agree with u. wholrheartly  as long as we keep letting they will do whatever they want.    guys got to start callng the hall and ask them about what going on. with these  settlement agrements. they are posting on line
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

friend of Gene Debs
It is against the law to require any member to picket under threat of a fine. Brother Newell of Carpenters Local Union # 291, Albany, N.Y.  won his case against the union and NEVER had to pay a fine even though the union had sent him a notice of the fine.. It is any members prerogative as to if they want to participate in so  called " required " union activity.  He had a B.A. , Mark Sowalski, tell him during a monthly meeting that it was not a " fine ", that it was an " assessment ".  That is bullshit.  Of course Mr. Sowalski is the consummate bullshitter anyway. Brother Newell proved Mr. Bullshitter wrong in the court of law. You can too.  Just file the charge at your local NLRB office if you are ever threatened with an " assessment " ( FINE ) for not participating in their bullshit  activities. One word of caution.  It may take quite a few months for the NLRB to make their determination.  But hang in there. In the end you will prevail. If Newell can do it ( and he is no genius )  you can do it too !
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

roy ernst
so do u still get mup notices in the mail  or not   ours clearly state if u don't do them u will be hit with a dues assement of 125   and possible suspension from the union      they just voted to decrease our fine from 250 to 125 I guess we should be jumping for joy   our assement for an illegal activity is half price     thanks for looking out guys
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

Mh88
Ya Roy just got my letter and was supposed to report yesterday for my MUP🖕 filled charges this week and waiting for a letter. Good luck and pass the information on so hopefully our ball less members will do the same. Like I said before I don't have a problem with doing picket lines or anything that will help our Union stay strong, but don't threaten me with suspension. This is America!! These guys(our higher ups) got out of hand years ago and it's time for a change in leadership!! We need OUR Union back! We are run like a fortune 500 instead of a Union!! Look at the Ballentyne case. They paid him off and who's money was that he received!!! Not included the money for lawyer fees etc. I'm pissed. Pissed that we are a Union and you can't get 2 brothers to stand together. Unity is what built our Unions and we lost that. They need to start teaching that in our apprenticeship schools!!! Enough for now and again good luck, spread the word.🔨 Stay Philly strong
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NO MORE FINES in NLRB Ruling Mandatory Union Participation!

roy ernst
was at the nlrb from 930 untill 12  i will keep u posted.  met with investagator.     /lawyer
1234