UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Index No. Plaintiff, : 90 Civ. 5722 (CSH) • -against- • DISTRICT COUNCIL OF NEW YORK CITY AND VICINITY OF THE UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, et. al., • • Defendants.
THE SIXTH INTERIM REPORT OF
KENNETH CONBOY INVESTIGATIONS AND REVIEW OFFICER LATHAM & WATKINS 885 Third Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 906-1200 Dated:. March 4, 1997 New York, New York
Benefit Funds. Supplemental Complaint in United States v. District Council, et al., 90 Civ. 5722 at 15. 3. Letter Complaints About The Trusteeship The International's supervision of the District Council, still strongly opposed by some union members, has progressed to the point where major changes contemplated in the structure of the District Council by the International are expected to be implemented shortly.1 Under the International's current plan:
1. The International has communicated with the rank and file by resuming publication of the union newspaper, The Carpenter. See two issues attached hereto as Exhibits 5 and 6.
This office has received a total of 12 letters from some rank and file members of the union expressing concern over certain of the reforms being considered by the International for the District Council. See letters collected and attached hereto as Exhibit 7. Most notably, members have criticized a plan to eliminate the so called "50/50 clause" from collective bargaining agreements, whereby half of all union carpenters on a job are in effect designated by the employer as "company men" and employed directly by the contractor. The other half are designated under the Court's job referral rules by the local union. The IRO has in the past viewed the 50/50 rule with concern, since under it half of the jobs of the District Council are outside the reach of the Consent Decree's job referral provisions, and the clause is subject to abuse under certain circumstances. It is indeed not beyond the realm of possibility that local officials do not deal at arm's length with certain contractors, and obtain, out of referral list order, jobs for relatives or favorites by pressuring or ingratiating themselves with employers. Not surprisingly, there has been some opposition expressed against this reform. Members have signed petitions against the proposed change. The Devine faction has sought to galvanize opposition to the Trustee through this controversy. Apparently sensitive to the controversial nature of reforming the "50/50 clause," the International has recently informed the membership that it is deferring for further study its plan to eliminate the rule. 9
There are four other recurring complaints which have been lodged by members about various elements of the International's reform program. These reforms relate to a) the selection of shop stewards; b) the compensation and accountability of business agents; c) the merger of local unions; and d) the removal of Devine and his slate despite their election victory by direct vote of the rank and file in 1995. Members have complained that the selection of shop stewards by the District Council will lead to cronyism, and that members sympathetic to the International will be favored for such service. This complaint ignores the fact that the Court-ordered Job Referral Rules are still in force, and will be for years to come. The Rules, and my formal decisions interpreting the Rules, require that shop stewards be selected, in proper order, from the out-of-work list and that the first individual on the list qualified to serve as a steward be selected for the position. Members have complained that they do not want to lose their elected business agents. The complaint ignores the fact that business agents are not being removed, but simply reassigned as supervised employees of the District Council, at uniform and fair wage levels commensurate with the realities of the fiscal constraints facing the District Council. Members have complained that they do not want their locals to be merged with other locals. However, there is ample legal precedent in the history of the District Council, and in other unions, such as the Teamsters, supporting mergers that are 10
designed to reduce costs and more efficiently organize work sites, in the best interests of the union as a whole. In any case, merger and reorganization policy are matters appropriately consigned to the sound business judgment of those directing the union's affairs. Finally, members have claimed that their right to be represented by the officers elected in the Court-ordered District Council election in 1995 has been abrogated by imposition of the trusteeship. The complaint fails to understand that, in imposing supervision over the District Council, General President McCarron acted pursuant to well-settled federal labor law, which allows the imposition of such a trusteeship to eradicate fiscal and integrity deficiencies, such as those that have been endemic in the New York District Council, and which have been repeatedly documented in previous reports to this Court, in the confirmation hearing conducted by the International, and by the public media. The 1995 District Council election and the certification of Devine and his slate as the winners of that election did not insulate them from the oversight power of the International under the Union's Constitution. 4. Organized Opposition to the Trusteeship Business agents of the various locals have recently held at least three meetings, apparently to stimulate opposition to the International and to gauge the willingness of certain business agents to fight or impede any changes which may be imposed on the District Council by the International. Many of 11
Laborers for JUSTICE© 1997-2005 All
Rights reserved. Not for republication on the internet without permission. |