Reply – Re: THE CEMENT (CONCRETE) LEAGUE & ALJ Greens 5-21-15 Decision & the...
Your Name
Subject
Message
or Cancel
In Reply To
Re: THE CEMENT (CONCRETE) LEAGUE & ALJ Greens 5-21-15 Decision & the NLRB Boards 2-16-16 Decision & Order; EXCLUSIVE NYCDCC Hiring Hall, the HARTE, McMURRAY & CLARKE legacy vs. 50-50%, 67-33% & 90%-10% vs. the McCarron, Walsh, Berman & Torrance Conversion of the BLUE CARD to the WHITE CARD 8(f) to illegal 9(a) Agreement w/o Proof or the req'd. NLRB Board Election
— by Ted Ted
YJ.AJ'.ACSIM!U!: & FIE.ST CJ..ASS MA!J-.
Honorable .foe! p, Biblr>witz
Associ at<: Chief Admin i.struti:ve Law Jtll:lge
.120 West 45•Ji Slrpet, 11 'h Floor
Now Yo1·k, NY 10036

Re: Northeast Regional Council of Carpenters "The Cement League
t)LRBJ;;_~se No. 03-CA-12.§23a_. __ _ -----------


Dear Judge Blblowitz:

1l1is Firm is counsel to Ille NC>rtheast Regional Counci,I of Carpenters, the Charging Party
in the~ above"captioned matter. I am in receipt 0f c0rrespo.udcnce dat0d March 20, 20 J 5, from
the Cou11sel to the New York City District Council of Carpenters sc~king a postponement of the
March 25, 2015 hearing. The request iB premised on. the Oi-de1· of the Honorable Riobard Bennan
scheduling, oral argument 011 March 30, 201 S, in l\ew Yol'k Ptv and Yici.9.iJy Distric\ Cg:µJ!cil J_
Th..s.8_~~9ciJ!tion oCYi.9'11-Ceiilng_'lf!Q.J;;illJi~:ntry_Lll.9.Jb~.!lis.eJU.l!ew Y_q,tl<,, Case No. J 4 CV609).
Please be advised that the Charging Part;• opposes the postpo11erne11l request.
11ie issue before Judge .Berman, which has bccn pending since· Augu~t 5, '.!.014, is
whether an arbitration award i3sued by A(bitrator H<iward Edehnan should be confinned. The
issue before Arbitrator Edelman was wbeth"l' the hiring provision of the collective bargaining
agreement between t))e Association of Wall-Ceiling and Carpe11l1·y lndusll'ies of New York and
t·hc United .Brotherhood of Carpenters superseded the Joc"I collcct.ivo ba.rgaining agr~emcnl
between the Wall ond Ceiling AssociatiOll and the New Yo1·k City Dislrict Council of
Carpenters. nic arbitration aw~rd pending enfbrc~mont before .hidg~ Bennan does not raise
any issues concerning tl)e cliscrimiµatory nature of the hi.ring provi11io11 .in the agreement at issue
in the instant ca.-i::.
In support nf its rr'quest, the District Council argues that the Charging Party is not
prejudiced because it is not currently seeking a monetary remedy against the Cement League.
However, the Northo:ast'Rcgional .Co1mcil of Carpen tern is continuing lo reccive transfer rcqucsrs
from its members wh<' m·e uansfcning ~heir memborshi.p to the New York City District Council
to prevent the lo~'I of work oppo11unitie~ under the Cement League agreement. Tl:tus, tho
discriminator)' impao\' eofthe hiri>Jg provision in the Cement League ag;1·ccrncnt ;, ongoing.
General Counsel's Exhibit 1 ( Y"'
\
' }
JA 161
Case 16-495, Document 80, 06/30/2016, 1806555, Page11 of 283
03/20/2015 11:12 732491212f) l<H PAGE 03/0J
Accord.ingly, lhc Charging Party regue$lj that the I rial continue lo be scheduled for Marcb 25, 2015.
RGH:sm
cc: William Banfteld (via facsimile)
Rhonda Levy (via facsimile)
James M ..Murphy, E$q. (via facsimile)
Michael Salgo, Esq. (via facsimile)
Jolm Grunert (via facsimile)
Michael Cape.I.Ii (via facsimile)

_______________________

<b>Incompatible systems; nevertheless, the 2015 ltr. by KROLL, HEINEMAN & CARTON, A.A.L. above is the cruxt of their position (the UBCJA International, the NRCC & the Cement League).

Murphy's latest legal brief is lame and clearly depicts he has zero knowledge on NLRB, Appellate or U.S. Sup. Ct. precedent in that he had to come here; to 157 blogspot and to this thread to steal his base idea's & strategy in his attempt to defend the UBCJA International, the mob infested NRCC, the Cement League and the NYCDCC's side of the case.
   However, his brief is not even close to a high school level, let alone a first year law student. Hey Jim, who did the stand in for you for the bar exam? How much did you pay them?

NYC rank & file members have until September 29, 2016 to submit their briefs in opposition as amici curie or ex-parte letter to the court - or, forever hold your peace & welcome to McCarron's 50-State RIGHT TO WORK UBCJA.

The irony of this case is simply this:

The UBCJA International, the NRCC, the Cement League and the NYCDCC; to defend their 'position' and that of former R.O. Walsh & USAO Bhararra/Torrances illegal grip & ongoing racketeering over NYCDCC members via the abortion known as the RICO Consent Decree, wherein rank & file members have no legal rights or standing in Federal Court - the aforementioned parties now fully support the Non-Union RIGHT TO WORK state mantra, the very position we as UBCJA members fight at every turn in every new state proffering such change to their law(s), whereas here, to defend the continued & un-prosecuted criminal racketeering being driven chiefly by the UBCJA International and it's corporate puppet-masters; to have any defense at all, the International, NRCC & the Cement League are now all for RTW state law(s).

The 50-STATE RIGHT TO WORK UBCJA, God Bless America & to hell with Douglas J. McCarron!