Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

bill lebo
I am a steward on a job in Queens, I have been a steward for the better part of 20 years. I like to think I've done a good job for our members and our union as well as for the contractors that I have worked for because I do take pride in my work. A brother asked me yesterday on the job about a friend of his who took all the classes to become a steward, but when he asked when he would become a steward he was told he didn't have enough years in as a journeyman and would have to wait another 3 years. The member asked me if that was right, I wasn't sure since things have changed so drastically, however I told him I didn't think that was possible because I knew of a member who had just been hired as a business representative who was just last year a 4th year apprentice, and they couldn't possibly make the qualifications for being a business rep easier than the qualifications for being a steward.
So, I called the council and spoke to someone in the school and sure enough you must have 5 years as a journeyman in order to qualify to become a shop steward.
So I said to the person I spoke with, so a member with less than 1 year as a journeyman can become a business representative but that same person couldn't qualify to become a shop steward. The person I spoke with laughed and said yep.
Now I agree with the 5 years as a journeyman to become a steward, it only makes sense. However, doesn't a steward have to go to a Business rep for answers on jurisdictional disputes, as well as other problems that may arise on a job? Shouldn't a rep be at least as qualified as a steward if not more so? It seems to me someones messing this whole thing up. I was hoping that after all the crap this membership has gone through in the past things would get better. But if the UBC thinks for one minute that this membership is going to take a fifth year apprentice seriuosly they are in for a rude awakening.
Oh, and since I'm typing, how is it that the UBC can violate our contract by unilaterally wiping out our raises but if you violate the contract you are brought on charges and fined or thrown out? Just a thought.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

anon
Brother you have to realize that the UBC does not want a rep with years of experiance working for them. A man with experiance might know something about the business and they would not be able to control him with their lies and manipulation.
They are looking for young people who will not question their ways.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

im watching
In reply to this post by bill lebo
BILLY its a joke i think the members should stand up and take this council back . we are getting fucked from all directions .
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

John Musumeci
Administrator
In reply to this post by bill lebo
Bill, you said a member was hired as a BA who was a fourth year apprentice. Can you tell me his name, this is incredible.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

tester
His C.V. or Résumé is impressive and this is incredible :-)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

bill lebo
In reply to this post by John Musumeci
It's a female member from local 45 and I said she just turned journey man so she hasn't even been a carpenter for a year yet, I call that a 5th year apprentice.
Ted
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

Ted
In reply to this post by bill lebo
So, 9-years to become a UBC Steward under a Consent Decree & 1-year to become a Business Agent (Representative)....and, where is the esteemed Walsh now on this subject matter?

Given Walsh does all the HIRING & FIRING now, he must have approved it...Anyone???

How do you fast-track to the top here? Bill is absolutely correct, no one will respect a 5th Year Apprentice, regardless of here previous qualifications.....she sounds like window dressing - ala the glass ceiling, we're an all inclusive Organization routine.....is she bi-lingual?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

John Musumeci
Administrator
Thanks Bill: Its Shocking and absolutely makes no sense.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: BILL LEBO NEEDS TO BE SPEAKING WITH W.HARTLEY IN FLA.

iamlistman@yahoo.com
In reply to this post by bill lebo
IF YOU STILL HAVE IT IN YA ?    Respectively speaking of course.

                membersfordemocracy@gmail.com




IMPEDIMENTS TO UNION DEMOCRACY PART II:

RIGHT TO VOTE IN THE CARPENTER’S UNION?

HEARING

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM S. LEBO, CARPENTERS FOR UNION DEMOCRACY, baldwin new york *

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND

THE WORKFORCE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC JUNE 25, 1998

OPENING STATEMENT, CHAIRMAN Harris Fawell, SUBCOMMITTEE ON Employer-employee relations, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES *

OPENING STATEMENT, Ranking member Donald Payne, SUBCOMMITTEE ON Employer-employee relations, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES *

STATEMENT OF HERMAN BENSON, FOUNDER AND FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ASSOCIATION FOR UNION DEMOCRACY, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK *

STATEMENT OF JOHN F. LIGUORI, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 20, Plainfield, New Jersey *

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM S. LEBO, CARPENTERS FOR UNION DEMOCRACY, baldwin new york *

STATEMENT OF CLEMENS WITTEKIND, CARPENTERS FOR DEMOCRACY IN UNIONS, Royal Oak, Michigan *

STATEMENT OF JOHN DURCAN, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 608, Wappinger Falls, New York *

STATEMENT OF SALVESTER ZARZANA, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS IN AMERICA, Brooklyn, New York *

STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS MCCARRON, GENERAL PRESIDENT, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, washington, DC *

Appendix a - written statement of the honorable harris fawell, chairman, subcommittee on employee-employer relations, committee on education and the workforce, u.s. house of representatives *

Appendix b - written statement of the honorable donald payne, ranking member, subcommittee on employee-employer relations, committee on education and the workforce, u.s. house of representatives *

Appendix c - written statement of herman benson, founder and former executive director, association for union democracy, brooklyn, new york *

IMPEDIMENTS TO UNION DEMOCRACY PART II:
RIGHT TO VOTE IN THE CARPENTERS' UNION?

As I explained at our first hearing, the term "union democracy" embodies all of the rights granted to rank-and-file union members by the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, the LMRDA, or as it is commonly called after its sponsors, the Landrum-Griffin Act.

The subcommittee was privileged to receive an overview of the Landrum-Griffin Act last month from Professor Clyde Summers who helped draft the act at the encouragement of then Senator John Kennedy, and for those who missed the first hearing, let me briefly mention the five basic rights the act protects. They are, loosely stated, the right to financial information of the union; the right of free speech and assembly, including broad protection to speak out against union policies and officers; the right to participate in decision-making, including the right to nominate candidates and vote in union elections; the right to fair and honest elections; and the right to impose fiduciary obligations upon union officers, particularly in regard to the use of union funds.

 think we'd all agree that authoritarian control of unions is contrary to the spirit, the traditions and the principles that should guide the labor movement. The Landrum-Griffin Act recognizes that unions derive their strength from the democratic rights of rank-and-file membership. The subcommittee continues to hear stories alleging violations of these rights, and it is my intention that this series of hearings will identify, if necessary, areas in which the act could be improved or, perhaps, better enforced.

The subcommittee's focus today is upon the membership's right to vote upon union affairs, and for union officers in the United Brotherhood of Carpenters. We're privileged to have, today, as a joint witness of the majority and the minority, Mr. Douglas McCarron, general president of the Carpenters. Mr. McCarron is undertaking a nationwide restructuring of the Carpenters' Union, a plan that, according to one Business Week article, other union leaders are watching closely. That could be good or bad; I'm not quite sure. To quote the general president from that article, "We have a product to deliver, and we have to do it more efficiently."

The restructuring, however, is not without its critics. It has led to the dissolving and merging of certain carpenters' local unions which has not sat well with many rank-and-file members. Also testifying today will be members of the local unions from Michigan and New York who object to the restructuring and feel that a democratic right to vote on the changes has been violated. They also object to the laws of local autonomy resulting from Mr. McCarron's, quote, "streamlining" end of quote and feel he is consolidating his power at the expense of the will of the rank-and-file. We also will hear, today, allegations of physical assault in retaliation against Carpenters' members for opposing the reorganization plans.

The subcommittee is not here to take sides. We're here to listen, which is somewhat unique in Washington, and to consider what role, if any, the Landrum-Griffin Act should play in protecting the rank-and-file membership of the Carpenters' Union, and at the conclusion of this series in the labor movement in general.

So, I look forward to today's testimony. Let me say at the outset that I do have some concerns. It appears that so long as a union's constitution is not violated, most any action by union leadership is protected activities. However, regardless of whether the merging and dissolution of local unions violates Landrum-Griffin, I believe we'll hear, today, testimony that raises the questions of whether such action should violate the act.

I'm also particularly interested in the specifics of how the Carpenters' constitution allows this sort of reorganization to occur.

 Did the constitution have to be amended? If so, was it amended in a democratic fashion? Have any of the rights of the rank-and-file been sacrificed to the reorganization? This is an area, as I've read all the testimony, that is of interest to me. You have roundly being condemned by Professional Summers of any corruption. Obviously, we all condemn that, and then most everybody takes the view that we don't want authoritarianism either. And, then, the question, I guess is, in the restructuring, do we end up with so much authority being exercised that we, again, are trading over the rights, the democratic rights, of the rank-and-file members? I think that appears to be a very key question. I'll be very, very interested in how Mr. Benson analyzes that particular question and just where the Landrum-Griffin law comes or doesn't come into play. Also, how the law doesn't cover the instances where you have the transferring of the authority in power from local unions to the district council, then the rearranging or dissolving of the district council and things of this sort. I find it kind of fascinating that we have this dichotomy between corruption and then trying to change the corruption, do we corrupt when we're trying to take care of the corruption?

Well, it seems to me that a union is not a private, profit-making enterprise, not completely, at any rate. Rather, unions exist to express the will of the membership, and should not necessarily be run as a business enterprise. Unions belong to the members, and the bottom line is the desire of the rank-and-file. On the other hand, truly democratic moves to strengthen and render a voluntary organization more efficient would appear to be positive. The Landrum-Griffin Act is on the books for a reason, and I look forward to what I anticipate will be a healthy give and take as we consider whether the act is doing the job it was intended to accomplish, giving the rank-and-file the tools they need to govern themselves.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

iamlistman@yahoo.com
In reply to this post by bill lebo
STATEMENT OF HERMAN BENSON, FOUNDER AND FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ASSOCIATION FOR UNION DEMOCRACY, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK

 

Mr. Benson. What makes our country strong and secure is its democracy. What makes the union movement strong is the involvement of its membership and union democracy, and whatever undermines union democracy undermines and weakens the labor movement. I guess that's my basic thesis.

I'm a retired machinist and toolmaker by trade, and I'm still a member of a fine union, the United Automobile Workers. I began in 1940, and, over the years, I've worked as a member of the United Rebel Workers, the IUEW, the International Union of Electrical Workers, and for at least 40 years, I have been actively concerned with issues of union democracy. During this time, I've been in touch with tens of thousands of unionists; that's individual rank-and-filers, organized caucuses, and elected officials in most major unions in the United States. These are unionists who have faced union democracy problems or have been engaged in battles against organized corruption or authoritarianism and even organized crime in their unions. It's on the basis of this experience that I tried to assess the label of democracy in unions today and some notion of how to strengthen it.

I help found the Association for Union Democracy in 1969. I served as its executive director for many years. I'm still its secretary treasurer, and our AUD is independent, non-partisan, non-political. We serve as a kind of civil liberties organization for the rights of members inside their unions. We don't advocate any special platform or program for the labor movement except for democracy. We're available to support the rights of any union member regardless of its ideology from right, left, or center against abuse from any official, center, left, or right. Our board of directors includes people who are eminent in the field of union democracy law, including Clyde Summers, who was one of your opening witnesses.

We believe that strong labor unions are an essential element in American democracy. They protect workers against abuse by employers; they defend an American standard of living; they defend seniority rights for workers, for pensions, for unemployment insurance, but to fulfill its role in the most effective manner, the labor movement has to guarantee to its own members the same rights that it advocates in society at large. We believe that union democracy will strengthen the labor movement as a force for democracy in the Nation.

In this connection, we help to enforce the rights written into the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, like the rights of free speech, free press, free assembly, and the LMRDA has been absolutely indispensable in strengthening union democracy since 1959. Before LMRDA, union members were expelled for criticizing their officers, usually on trumped up charges of slander. They could be expelled from the union merely for suing in court or going before authorized Government administrative agencies. They could even be expelled from their unions for circulating petitions within inside their own unions.

Now, all of that is illegal because of the basic rights that are written into Federal law under the LMRDA. When the rights of miners were protected under the LMRDA, they were able to get rid of, for the first time, a literally murderous official, one who was guilty of murdering Jock Yablonski. When the rights of teamsters were protected by the LMRDA, they were able to break the grip of organized crime over their national office. And there are many other illustrations of that same tendency in the Marine Engineers Beneficial Association, the Masters and Nation's Pilots and others that I could mention.

However, there is still a long way to go. The law itself has certain weaknesses that have to be corrected, and I would like to enter into the record, if I may, a statement that the AUD had prepared for the Dunlop Commission in which it goes into great detail on how the law for union democracy could be strengthened, and if the chairman permits, I would like to have that entered into the record. Your counsel, Lauren Fuller, has a copy of that statement.

 

Chairman Fawell. Fine, and, without objection, it shall be a part of the record.

 

Mr. Benson. The U.S. Labor Department has been erratic and weak and undependable as an enforcement agency, and the law has hardly even touched the basic problem in the construction trades where it is safer in many unions. It's safer to criticize the President of the United States than it is to criticize your own business agent. In some unions, workers are still black-listed and deprived of work or threatened or beaten for criticizing their union officials. Local police look on violence in the union hall in the same way they used to look upon, and maybe still do, violence in the home, as a family affair.

The Labor Department fails to enforce section 610 of the Labor Management and Reporting Disclosure Act which is supposed to protect union members from violence and the threat of violence for exercising their rights under the law. Section 105 of the Landrum-Griffin Act which provides, very simply, that unions are supposed to inform their members of the provisions of this act. That section is completely, totally, and permanently violated and never enforced. It remains ignored, violated, and unenforced. Not one single union is in compliance with section 105 of the LMRDA.

Many unions still enforce dependence provisions which bar over 90 percent of their members from running for office despite court decisions which would render those provisions void. Public employees' unions which organize workers in State and local governments and represent an increasing section of the labor movement are totally unprotected by the provisions of LMRDA.

Trusteeships are still imposed on various pretexts to suppress critics. The U.S. Labor Department has never challenged a trusteeship until 18 months has elapsed. The law provides that a trusteeship is presumed valid for 18 months. The Labor Department has never challenged a trusteeship until that 18 months has expired and in one instance, the Painters' Union, even when a Federal judge found that a trusteeship had been imposed for the specific purpose of defending a criminal and corrupt official in that union, the Labor Department recommended to the judge that that trusteeship be continued and its validity be presumed for 18 months. The judge overruled the Labor Department; looked at the trusteeship, and ordered a federally supervised election. That was many years ago, but that policy of the Labor Department remains unchanged. I think I'm wondering if it's any clearer here. I don't think the Labor Department has ever in a single instance in its whole history challenged any trusteeship until 18 months have expired.

In conclusion, and I see the red light is on here, I would just like to add one quintessential consideration for your committee: union democracy does mean a strong labor movement, but, conversely, you will never have robust union democracy unless unions are secure and members are aware of that fact. We know that if our country is secure, the Nation's democracy prospers, but when the Nation is under attack, democracy suffers, and, similarly, when union members fear that their unions are under attack and in danger, they will rally around their officers, good or bad, and they are not likely to permit even justified criticism of even the worst officials. In that sense, impediments to strong unionism will surely become impediments to union democracy. Thank you.

[The statement of Mr. Benson follows:]

STATEMENT OF HERMAN BENSON, Founder and Former Executive Director Association for Union Democracy, BRROKLYN, NEW YORK - SEE APPENDIX C

[The information follows:]

ASSOCIATION FOR UNION DEMOCRACY DOCUMENT PREPARED FOR THE DUNLOP COMMISSION - SEE APPENDIX D

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

iamlistman@yahoo.com
In reply to this post by bill lebo
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM S. LEBO, CARPENTERS FOR UNION DEMOCRACY, baldwin new york

 

 

Mr. Liguori. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Congressmen, Congresswoman. I started in construction in 1977 with a house frame on Long Island. In 1985, I joined the Carpenters' Union. Since then, I've worked in many phases of carpentry. I've been a worker, a foreman, a super, and a shop steward. I've been the Vice President of a local union, and I'm now the Vice President of Carpenters for Democracy of New York City.

I want you to understand I'm not here today to hurt my union but to help it regain or gain its democratic governance by its rank-and-file membership. In June of 1996, our International President placed our district council into trusteeship. I believed at the time the UBC had come to help our district council rid itself of mob influence but have since learned there was much more to Douglas McCarron's motives than helping the working carpenter.

I also would like to mention before I go any further that our Council is under a consent decree with the U.S. Government, and the UBC was assisted by the IRO, Kenneth Conboy to obtain the trusteeship. I also would like to note the IRO's tenure under the consent decree was about to expire at the time UBC took over the Council. The UBC extended its tenure at the time of the takeover at a cost of $65,000 a month. Ever since, the IRO has been writing shining reports to the court regarding Mr. McCarron's actions, and it seems every time he writes a report he get another extension of his tenure. Just recently, in June, his tenure again expired in time for a court battle we are having with the UBC regarding elections the trusteeship. Again, he wrote a shining report and again he got an extension; this time for one year on a bill as necessary basis plus expenses. In my opinion, this shows collusion and corruption between the IRO and the UBC.

Douglas McCarron has been taking over district councils throughout the United States as well as Canada and merging them and the local unions without a vote or the membership's consent and forming what he and the UBC Constitution call Regional Councils. I believe the New York City District Council's takeover had less to do with fighting corruption and more to do with Douglas McCarron's methodical creation of his personal and publicized goal of restructuring our union which is no more than a building of his own private empire.

In New York, it seems corruption in the form of members being intimidated into submission is at its worse. Men and women are in fear of losing their jobs or of being brought up bogus union charges as I was. In April of 1997, at my local union meeting, I seconded a motion to hold elections for our local union officers regardless of the fact that the UBC's position was opposed to this. The elections were never to take place, and charges were filed against me on May 12, 1997 for seconding that motion. I have submitted copies of these charges to your committee.

These charges were causing dissention; advocating separation; improper harassment of any member of the United Brotherhood violating the obligation and violating section 34 which are the duties of the Vice President. This is not even a charge in our Constitution. A trial on these charges were held on March 19, 1998, nearly a year later, and after the UBC had won a court battle against the New York local unions that are opposed to Mr. McCarron's restructuring plan. The trial committee which was appointed by the UBC and consisted of members who were appointed by the UBC, the paying jobs in the district council and local unions as business agents, organizers, officers, and shop stewards. This court found me guilty of all the charges, of course, and fined me a maximum of each, totalling $1,500. These charges and the fines were no more than one of the many intimidation tactics the UBC has been inflicting on our membership. I have become a major target because of my letter writing and my outspokenness, as well as that I am one of the leaders of the New York City Carpenters for Democracy.

Our dissident group, the UBC cronies and the Federal court-appointed IRO, the honorable Kenneth Conboy, holds meetings monthly and sometimes bi-monthly. The UBC's people have taken steps to intimidate our members so they would be afraid to come to our meetings. A business agent has been told by the UBC's daily supervisor of the New York City District Council that if said agent's local union officers were seen at our meeting again, they would be removed, and that if he couldn't keep his people, quote, "in line," unquote, he would lose his job as well. Another member from a different local was told by his business manager that if he went to our meetings he would never be a shop steward again. Another member who got involved and became an officer of our organization and who is a wounded Vietnam War veteran was removed as a shop steward from his job by the UBC's cronies for bogus reasons. He has since filed suit against the council with the National Labor's Relations Board and filed union charges against the UBC's appointee who removed him.

All the affirmation parties have contacted the Department of Labor as well as the court-appointed IRO about these violations but, to date, have received no relief. I and my attorney have written complaints to the United States Attorney, Mary Jo White about this, as well as the Honorable Judge Charles Essay, Jr. who rules on the consent decree our council is under, and, to date, we have received no answer or any form of relief.

The United States Constitution guarantees every America citizen the right to freedom of speech and assembly. The Landrum-Griffin Act and the Bill of Rights for members of labor organizations within also guarantees us these rights and is supposed to protect us from this intimidation that is no less than labor racketeering, yet it goes on, and it goes unchecked.

Many members are afraid to come forward, not just in New York but all around the United States of America for fear of being blackballed by the UBC's appointed army. This is well demonstrated by a letter of complaint of the UBC's actions in an issue of Hard Hat News from a member from Ohio who signs anonymous for fear of reprisals. I have submitted a copy of this to your committee.

I have been brought on charges. I've had my life threatened, and I was physically attacked during a local union meeting by beneficiaries of the UBC's dictatorship in front of the IRO's agent, Jack Mitchell. I cannot and will not give in to this intimidation, but I and others like me are the exception not the rule. Rank-and-file members have no internal remedies to fight this. It seems as if the Department of Labor has turned its back on our membership in favor of the leadership who controls our money and political assets. It even seems as if Lady Justice is not only blind, but deaf as well.

Mr. McCarron and his cohorts who include construction bigs Ronald Tutor, Bob Georgine, and investment magnet, Richard C. Blum, who is Senator Diane Feinstein's husband, are doing very well for themselves by investing our pension and annuity money in real estate and construction investments. McCarron, Tutor, and Blum are all on the board of directors of PRE Corporation, one of the largest construction funds in the United States of America. For Mr. McCarron to be on that board of a contract seems to be a direct conflict of interest. How can he represent the worker to the boss if he is the boss? Also, I would like you to know within the last election year in California the inordinate amount of money that was paid to Richard C. Blum for his work investing their money was a way of steering union funds to his wife's campaign. I believe the amount was in the area of $4 million.

I ask Congress to close the gaps in the LMRDA that allows a union's constitution to overwrite. I ask that the Congress do away with delegate bodies in the LMRDA in favor of the "one man, one vote" referendums. We have no say in our union affairs and governance. Lastly, I ask the Democrats to start thinking about the workers instead of the union boss. It is after all the workers' money that the union bosses have been giving you for your campaign funds.

The Landrum-Griffin bill passed on the floor of the Senate 90 to 1 on April 25th, 1959. The House adopted the bill on August 6, 1959. Today, we stand before you in 1998, some 39 years later, asking you to help us get those same rights back. Our country prides itself on its democracy. We send our children to war to fight and die protecting the democracy of people worldwide. Our President will appraise their governments for their newfound democracy and yet allows his fellow Americans to suffer under a dictatorship such as the one we face.

I find it hard to believe our Government has led its own people in our county's labor organizations like ours fall prey to this corruption and autocratic rule, yet our union's democracy is gone. One man has complete autocratic rule even though Congress passed the Illinois VA and the Bill of Rights for members of labor organizations within in 1959. Thank you.

[The statement of Mr. Lebo follows:]

 

written STATEMENT OF WILLIAM S. LEBO, CARPENTERS FOR UNION DEMOCRACY, baldwin new york - see appendix f

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

iamlistman@yahoo.com
In reply to this post by bill lebo
STATEMENT OF CLEMENS WITTEKIND, CARPENTERS FOR DEMOCRACY IN UNIONS, Royal Oak, Michigan

STATEMENT OF JOHN DURCAN, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 608, Wappinger Falls, New York

STATEMENT OF SALVESTER ZARZANA, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS IN AMERICA, Brooklyn, New York

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

iamlistman@yahoo.com
In reply to this post by bill lebo
Then there's this:

STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS MCCARRON, GENERAL PRESIDENT, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, washington, DC


Mr. McCarron. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee...........................

Over the past 30 years, our industry has become regional, but while the industry changed, we did not. While contractors expanded their range, pursuing work in an area that might encompass several cities or even several States, we were restricted by boundaries and procedures set 50, 75, or even 100 years ago. Without a regional structure to match the industry, the power of the membership became splintered and ineffective

" we were restricted by boundaries and procedures set 50, 75, or even 100 years ago."



SO WE NEED THE OLD ROBBER BARON PRINCIPALS BACK. IT SIMPLY MADE US TOO ACCOUNTABLE TO THE MEMBERS ! WEREN'T THE ROBBER BARONS EXPLORING REGIONS YET UNTAMED.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

iamlistman@yahoo.com
In reply to this post by bill lebo
Then there's this:

STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS MCCARRON, GENERAL PRESIDENT, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, washington, DC


Mr. McCarron. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee...........................

Over the past 30 years, our industry has become regional, but while the industry changed, we did not. While contractors expanded their range, pursuing work in an area that might encompass several cities or even several States, we were restricted by boundaries and procedures set 50, 75, or even 100 years ago. Without a regional structure to match the industry, the power of the membership became splintered and ineffective

" we were restricted by boundaries and procedures set 50, 75, or even 100 years ago."



SO WE NEED THE OLD ROBBER BARON PRINCIPALS BACK. IT SIMPLY MADE US TOO ACCOUNTABLE TO THE MEMBERS ! WEREN'T THE ROBBER BARONS EXPLORING REGIONS YET UNTAMED.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

iamlistman@yahoo.com
In reply to this post by bill lebo
Mr. McCarron. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee..........................................

For more than 30 years, we have witnessed a steady decline in membership and market share. As a union, it's our obligation to address both of these concerns fairly and effectively. To do that, we have undertaken a general restructuring of our international union. Let me be clear, this was initiated in response to a specific region, local, or individual. It was initiated nationwide in response to problems which were hurting our entire membership. Throughout the U.S. and Canada, we have established 65 regional councils that operate on a uniform structure that provides for participation of the effective day-to-day operations.

Mr. Mc: GET IT MASTER CEREMNONY !
"For more than 30 years, we have witnessed a steady decline in membership and market share"

BECAUSE I SAID NO RESIDENTIAL, - I WANTED NOTHING UNDER 12 STORIES, PLA'S, I LET THE MOB RUN THESE AFFAIRS.

Mr. Mc:
" To do that, we have undertaken a general restructuring of our international union."

I WANT TO SUPPLY A CHEAP HIRING HALL FOR MY CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES SWEETHEART DEALS
LIKE THE VA HOSPITAL IN FLA. THINK OF WHAT HE'S MADE OVER THE YEARS SINCE HE SAID THIS

Mr. Mc:
" Let me be clear, this wasn't initiated in response to a specific region, local, or individual. It was initiated nationwide in response to problems which were hurting our entire membership."

BULLSHIT YOU  CONGRESS, I STARTED IT IN CALI WAY BEFORE THIS WITH FIENSTEIN.
AND SINCE THE MEN SEEM TO BE HURTING I PUT THE SONS OF MOBSTERS IN CONTROL OF LOCALS I INTENDED TO DISSOLVE ANYWAY, HAVE AT IT BOYS IT'LL BE ENOUGH FOR YOU & YOUR FAMILIES TO COVER ANY TIME IN THE BIG HOUSE DOWN THE ROAD.

Mr. Mc:
"At the same time, our council structure recognizes the democratic rights of our members and encourages meaningful participation in the policy and governments of our union."

TELL THAT TO DERRICO AND THE 157 EBOARD,
FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER, SIT THE FUCK DOWN AND SHUT UP.

Mr. Mc:
"Members attend meetings; elect officers, and conduct the affairs of their local on a ``one man, one vote'' basis, much as they have always done, but, in addition, they now elect rank-and-file delegates to their regional council. Those delegates elect council officers; assist in negotiations and ratify contracts, and oversee council operations. The elected delegate body provides active members a meaningful role in the policy decisions"

LOOK AT THE MATH DOUG.  SPEAK NOT OF PLACING THE POWER OF FIRING ANTONE WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH YOU, NOW CONSIDER THERE'S MORE OF THEM THAN THE ELECTED SO CALLED TRUE VOICE OF THE MEN AND VIOLA...........................NO VOICE

Mr. Mc
"To ensure an expanded opportunity for rank-and-file participation, the number of delegates is proportional to the local's membership. In New York City, for example, this will now provide representation by more than 150 elected rank-and-file members. Previously, the entire council operated with only 16 delegates, 1 from each local."

BUT WHAT DOUG IS INTENTIONALLY MISGUIDING CONGRESS WITH IS THIS.
ONCE THEY'RE DRAWN UNDER THE COUNCIL AND SPECILAIZED AS IS BEING MANDATED IN TRUE RICO SENSE IS THAT AFTER THAT YOUR CORPORATIST MINDESET RUNS WILD EVICERATING THE RIGHTS WE NEEDED TO PROTECT OURSELVES FROM ROBBER BARON TYPES. BECAUSE THATS THE WAY YOU NEED IT TO BE TO PLAY THIS ELITIST GAME. YOU ARE NOT A UNION MAN McCARRON.


Mr. Mc
"Our locals are representative_our councils are a representative democracy, not unlike the system that brings each of you to the House of Representatives. Within the council, delegates debate and decide policy. Their decisions are then implemented by administrative structure that's accountable. Under our previous structure, inattention, comfort and status quo, and personal interest resulted in ineffectiveness at best, and too often squelch debate."


PREVIOUS STRUCTURE. WHAT DOES HISTORY DO FOR HINDSIGHT.
GET McCARRON OUT AND CLEAN THE COUNCILS WHILE WERE AT IT.
SQUELCH DEBATE, -NO VOICE FOR YOU !

Mr. Mc
"While the direct democracy of the local union hall, which some of our critics insist on is a democratic ideal, in practice, the system too frequently resembles ward healing at its worst. Let me explain. It is a business agent's job to represent the interests of every member, but in a local of 1,500 members, only a few hundred vote regularly. It's easy to see how the needs of a few men who can assure your election, your job, could take priority. Members too busy raising a family to take an active could be largely ignored, and in the worst cases, members who spoke about, again, the system, like Jack Durcan, were punched. They found themselves at the bottom of the work list again and again"

THERE IS NO INTELLECT LEVEL THEY POSSESN TO RUN THE AFFAIRS OF THEIR UNION.
 THEY'RE ALL HOMER SIMPSONS AND THEY WORK & LIVE IN WARDS.

Mr. Mc:
"The ward healing system failed American democracy, and it's failed union democracy. It's wrong. Our union has a responsibility to represent every member. As part of the restructuring, we've computerized hiring procedures to ensure that every member has equal to work that they're qualified for."

DOUBLE TALK. AND THE COMPUTERIZED LIST WAS MANIPULATED FOR THE NEXT 14 YEARS.
HOLY SHIT I MEAN, - WTF. IF McCARRON AINT OUT IN LESS THAN SIX MONTHS WE'RE SERIOUSLY KIDDING
OURSELVES.


Mr. Mc:
"Members like Jack shouldn't be punished for taking an active role. Under this system, they won't be. Instead, they'll be encouraged to bring their day-to-day concerns to their local's discussions and the council through their elected delegates. As employees of the council, business agents are free to do their job representing the interests of every member without concern about reelection. They get clear policy direction from council delegates and are accountable for doing their jobs. This structure is in place throughout our brotherhood. Wherever possible, we have worked closely with local leaders to ensure a smooth transition. We have encouraged prompt local union and council delegate elections. Most have been completed within a year of restructuring including those in northern California and Michigan where, by the way, far more members voted than before supporting the restructuring. In place like New York, widespread corruption and mob influence left us no choice but to implement the policy."


NO-ONE ENCOURAGED, - BUT INSTEAD PROMOTED FEAR & ANXIOUSNESS.
WHEN YOU CAN'T RELECT, - THEY'RE YOUR STOOGES DOUG.
THE ONLY POLICY DIRECTION IS, - SIT DOWN SHUT THE FUCK AND THE COMPANY GETS WHAT THEY WANT. BECAUSE THEY'RE IN IT ------LA MUERTA----------US, - NOT YOU THE MEMBERS.

YOU WORKED SO CLOSELY WITH THE LOCALS LEADERS AS YOU SAY, LOOK WHERE DERRICO GOT DUE TO THE "TRANSITION" THAT YOU HAD FORDE THROUGH CALLAHAN COOK UP THE 157 SCANDAL.

AND AS TO THE SPEED OF RESTRUCTURING,  THE TERM WEHRMACHT SOUND FAMILIAR


Mr. Mc:

"With most of the legal challenges finally resolved, we've set delegate elections for the fall of next year. That allows us to complete restructuring and ensures safeguards that prevent the return of corruption. In northern California, only 1 of 35 locals opposed restructuring. That restructuring is completed, and delegate elections have been held."

DELEGATIONS, THEN FIRING OF PAID EMPLOYEES OPPOSING.
IT DIDN'T PREVENT THE RETURN OF CORRUPTION AND THIS SHOULD BE SOMETHING TO NAI;L HIM WITHM WITH HE SAID IT AND WE CAN'T TRUST HIM AFTER 15 MORE YEARS SINCE HE SAID THESE WORDS.
 NO ACCOUNABILITY, NO DISCLOSURE AND HE CAN'T RESTRUCTURE THIS UNION WHEN CONTEMPTIOUS MEN WERE WELL AWARE OF THIS.


Mr. Mc:
The restructuring of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters was done to protect the interest of the members. It was done entirely within the framework of the union's constitution and Federal law. As different industries vary in character and structure, so must the unions that represent their members in those industries. The representative democracy of elected delegates we've established is well-suited to represent our members and today's construction industry. And in a rough, competitive economy, the union the bargains effectively offers its members the best protection,


YOU MADE CHANGES TO BOTH THE CONSTITUTION AND MADE THE COUNCILS CHANGE THE AGREEMENTS SURE IT WAS UNDER FEDERAL LAW, YOU PAY DECARLO & CO MILLIONS AND THE CONVENTIONS WHERE THESE CHANGES SECRETLY TAKE PLACE, BECAUSE DERRICO WON'T SPILL THE BEANS. IF YOU DON'T WEAR THE RIGHT COLOR T-SHIRT IT MAKES IT EASIER TO PICK OUT WHO'S OUT THE DOOR.


THIS IS THE LAST OF IT ,
Mr. Mc:
"and any just labor law much allow unions to change themselves with the changing world, and that is what the carpenters have been doing. Thank you.

THIS IS WHAT I WANT, THIS IS MY CHANGING CONSTRUCTUION COMPANY, BOARD OF DIRECTOR CORPORATIST MINDESET AND BE DAMNED ANY COLLECTIVE VOICE TO STOP ME.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

mike
In reply to this post by bill lebo
That "5th year apprentice" you just called out was a Golden Hammer Winner and a working mechanic. Enough about carpenter skills.  This person also has her College Undergrad from a Ivy school and A Master Degree.  Has spend the majority of those five years volunteering time to all aspects of this union.  MOST important question???? IS This person QUALIFIED? YOU BET YOUR ASS!!!!!!!!  And in top of it all, the most honest and ethical person I have ever worked with.  The fact that you, a "season" person does not know steward qualifications, says plenty.  Anyone outside NYC knows the 5 year at "journey level" pre-steward qualification is the most backward and unfair stipulation.  So an asshole can buy their book and five years be a steward, but the apprentices that we pay to educate have wait ten years?  AND in top of all that, the qualifications to be a steward I had as a third year apprentice. Complete joke! Yet people can't seem to stay on top of these certs.  I tell you what you need as a steward: BIG SET OF BALLS to stand up and put your ass on the line.  How many of those do we have these days?   Bill, your observation is full of bitterness.  Ask the right questions: Who can work the best for this union?  And you could not find a better person that this 5th year apprentice!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

shocked
bullshit this cunt didnt do a thing for the brotherhod .maybe some carpet munching on miss elly who paraded her around like a show dog.all she cares about is the womens commitee and the latino club,which only divides the members. also she didnt win the golden hammer she was second place and if the judgeing was real she would have been last.its amazing where you can get when you shake your tits at spencer at the convention . a fourth year rep,with no pratical carpenter experince.she coundnt even hold a job as a carpenter
atm
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

atm
In reply to this post by mike
mike ,if thats your real name(probably more like michele),your not gonna get to bang her no matter how much smoke you blow up her ass.are you saying that after 4 years of making believe shes a carpenter she should get a chance to make believe she an agent.fuck that. there are more qualified people out there who arent sucking frankie boys dick. she wont last the six month probation if she is really held to the standard that cost so many their jobs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

albert-mcguire1876
In reply to this post by bill lebo
As a rule, not requiring more work experience to be a BA than a steward doesn't make sense. But targeting a bilingual union sister who completed her apprenticeship and has been selected to potentially become a BA is bad form! The District Council already has a BA who is not a mechanic, and was with the Unity Team; his name is Paul Pietropaolo. The sister "bill lebo" refers to may be a committed unionist, and possess specific skills required by our organization. I ask my fellow Carpenters to have heart, and think before you post. We need persons with strength of character and a sense of solidarity to represent and protect the interests of the membership. There are obvious examples of men who worked in the field going on to establish decade spanning, corrupt father-son political dynasties within the NYCDCC. What do we prefer: quality or quantity? Condemnations may be better directed at persons who did not pass the grade, and are already ensconced in positions of power, but that requires courage. Meanwhile let's all congratulate, not alienate, the sister who did stick with the union; for she stood up for herself, and may now be in a position to stick up for us.      
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Newly hired business reps, qualifications?

The Comm / The SU
In reply to this post by bill lebo
NYS Employment Discrimination Laws

http://www.dhr.state.ny.us/mission.html
12