Reply – BILELLO MOTION
Your Name
Subject
Message
or Cancel
In Reply To
BILELLO MOTION
— by Ted Ted
NLRA - PREAMBLE

It is declared to be the policy of the United States to eliminate the causes of certain substantial obstructions to the free flow of commerce and to mitigate and eliminate these obstructions when they have occurred by encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining and by protecting the exercise by workers of full freedom of association, self- organization, and designation of representatives of their own choosing, for the purpose of negotiating the terms and conditions of their employment or other mutual aid or protection.

NLRA Section 7 - ...."to bargain with representatives of their own choosing"....

Great job Mr. Bilello.

I find it amazing that this Judge allowed the UBC Counsel, Kenneth Conboy to come in mindlessly blather on & on about items that have nothing to do with the Motion.

Conboy is not a friend to the UBC rank & file. He was there for one reason, to divert attention from the subject of the motion, direct elections & to obfuscate the facts and to use delay tactics. Note how he first requested 30-days, then it became 60-days.

At this point, the only thing that the UBC can pull out of its bag of tricks is Harrington v. Chao, and the bullshit ruling for "representative democracy".

Nowhere in the NLRA or in the history of the Legislation or subsequent amendments did Congress use the phrase "REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY".

Moreover, Congress writes & passes Law(s), not the UBC International and/or the individual Councils within it.

Mr. Bilello's Attorney needs to make thes points in subsequent arguments/papers before the Courts as he & Mr. Biello have a unique opportunity here to put a chink in the armour of Harrington v. Chao - and to bring to light the actual text of the NLRA relevant to Voting Rights noted above. Harrington v. Chao needs a contrary ruling in another Circuit Court and needs to be fast-tracked to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The UBC cannot be allowed to legislate from the International in Washington DC what Federal Labor Law is, nor re-write legislation to suit McCarron's corrupt regime, yet that is exactly what the ruling in Chao gave them & the UBC needs to be called on it and it needs to be challenged in open Court.

                    POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES - EXCERPT FROM ABOVE

....."and by protecting the exercise by workers of full freedom of association, self organization, and designation of representatives of their own choosing, for the purpose of negotiating the terms and conditions of their employment or other mutual aid or protection".

Again Mr. Bilello, great job and if you read this, please have your attorney review it. Harrington v. Chao has not incurred a challenge since the ruling went down. You are in a unique position to preserve for NYCDCC Union members, the right to vote via direct elections, and to have the Judge in this case issue a ruling contrary to that handed down in Chao, thus effecting all UBC brothers & sisters nationwide.

McCarron & the UBC have used this one case, this set up case they invented to turn the UBC and every other Regional Council nationwide, less NEW YORK, into a Dictatorship. Right now, the only thing saving NYCDCC is the consent decree, otherwise, McCarron would have already implemented it there too.

I have repeated the Policy of the United States excerpt from the NLRA because all members need to know this & memorize it. The language is plain, clear & in ordinary terms and was intentionally written that way so the "any man-every man" could comprehend it.

Without a vote Democracy fails......and Dictatorships run amock.