Reply – Re: Harrington Brief, on appeal...
Your Name
Subject
Message
or Cancel
In Reply To
Re: Harrington Brief, on appeal...
— by John Musumeci John Musumeci
I have emailed Review Officer Dennis Walsh, asking him if he has been following the discussion on Harrington v. Chao. At the February 8, Court hearing Conboy indicated that the UBC believes delegates should elect council officers. I asked Walsh if Harrington v. Chao, would be something he would challenge and show the Court that the Councils have become the Locals and are thus subject to the provisions of the LMRDA & OLMS.

This is his reply to me:

"I mentioned my interest in Harrington v. Chao at the RO Forum on February 23rd. When the LMRDA was passed in 1959, local unions performed the functions now performed by the District Council. As I said in my first report, local unions have been fiefdoms for corruption and serve no purpose in the context of the full-service District Council. They collect dues and purport to inform the members by delegates reporting back at local meetings, but do not engage in collective bargaining, handle grievances, refer members to work or employ personnel who engage in these functions. I will be interested to see the theory underpinning any argument that the District Council still functions as an intermediate body as originally contemplated by Congress. I will of course review any proposal objectively, but must take the foregoing into consideration."

Dennis M. Walsh