CONFIDENTIAL: NOT FOR PUBLIC FILING PENDING COURT REVIEW EXHIBITS TO TRANSITION REPORT TO INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR UNITEL INTELLIGENCE GROUP, INC. REGARDING SHOP STEWARD ISSUES
BOOK I EXHIBITS 1 THROUGH 3
Exhibit No. Description
1. Transcripts of Anthony Arguelles depositions 1. December 15 , 2004 PDF version of file 2 January 7, 2005 PDF version of file 2 . Transcript of Stephen Arguelles deposition 3 Transcript of Robert Defeo deposition
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, x Plaintiff, 9 0 CIV 5722 -against- (CSH) DISTRICT COUNCIL OF NEW YORK CITY AND VICINITY OF THE UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, et.al., Defendants. Independent Investigator Deposition x December 15 , 2004 5 :00 o'clock p.m.
DEPOSITION of ANTHONY ARGUELLES, taken by the Independent Investigator, Walter Mack, Esq., pursuant to letter subpoena, at the offices of Doar, Rieck & Mack, Esqs., 217 Broadway, 7 th Floor, New York, New York 10007-2911, before Stewart Nissenbaum, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public of the State of New York. ORIGINAL TANKOOS REPORTING COMPANY, INC. 3 05 Madison Avenue 14 2 Willis Avenue Suite 4 49 P.O. Box 3 47 New York, N.Y. 10165 Mineola, N.Y. 115 01 (212 )3 4 9 -9 6 9 2 (516 )74 1-5 23 5
APPEARANCES:
DOAR, RIECK & MACK, ESQS. 217 Broadway, 7 th Floor New York, New York 10 007 -2 9 11 BY: WALTER MACK, ESQ. Independent Investigator
O'DWYER & BERNSTEIN, ESQS. Attorneys for District Council 5 2 Duane Street New York, New York 10 007 BY: GARY ROTHMAN, ESQ.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. Attorney's Office Southern District of New York 8 6 Chambers Street New York, New York 10 007 BY: LISA ZORNBERG, ESQ. Assistant U.S. Attorney
DINO J. LOMBARDI, ESQ. Attorney for Witness 5 2 Duane Street New York, New York 10 007 *
1 3 2 MR. MACK: Let's go on the 3 record. 4 Mr. Arguelles, good evening. My 5 name is Walter Mack, and I want to take 6 a few moments just to go through what's 7 happening tonight. And although most of 8 the people in the room, besides you and 9 I will tune out of this, and the court 10 reporter, there are important messages 11 in what I'm going to say. It is 12 important that you understand what is 13 happening, what your rights are, various 14 aspects of what we are going to do 15 tonight. It is important that some of 16 these matters be raised; and if you have 17 any questions about them, although 18 you're represented by experienced 19 counsel, so experienced that I will give 20 you a special little part which I will 21 talk to you about, what I call a 22 conflict; so it is important that you 23 listen. 24 If there are any questions that 25 you might have, please raise them. And
1 4 2 what I always say, or try to say, early 3 on, is, that if at any time you would 4 like to leave the room and have some 5 private moments with Mr. Lombardi to 6 discuss anything, that's your right to 7 do so, and I would encourage you to do 8 so, rather than guess or make an 9 assumption. You have the benefit of 10 counsel at your side, you might take 11 advantage of that when necessary; and I 12 will excuse you and give you whatever 13 time is necessary for you to get the 14 benefit of his advice. 15 To start from the beginning, my 16 name is Walter Mack; I'm the Independent 17 Investigator. I'm an agent of the 18 Court, Federal District Court Judge 19 Charles S. Haight, Jr., and although 20 there are representatives here who I 21 will introduce you to in a moment, from 22 the Government and from the District 23 Council, this is a proceeding conducted 24 at my request and pursuant to my rules 25 as an agent of the Court.
1 5 2 I have no independent authority 3 to discipline you, to prosecute you, or 4 to take adverse action against you 5 directly. So what I do have are 6 specific rights set forth in an Order 7 appointing me. And the right and the 8 authority that I have, most pertinent to 9 what we are doing tonight, is that when 10 I receive complaints about the conduct 11 of a carpenter, I have the ability to 12 choose to question that person under 13 oath, and you are amongst many. I want 14 you to understand that I didn't pick 15 your name out of a hat. It is because 16 your name has been given to me through 17 the operation of a hotline as to a 18 number of complaints, and you are among 19 many individuals as to whom I felt it 20 was important to hear from directly. 21 And once I hear your information, it is 22 very likely that it will be part of a 23 shop steward' report to Judge Haight in 24 which I comment on various practices and 25 things that I have found.
1 6
2 So that's a very general way of 3 telling you what we are about tonight, 4 and trying to put you at ease; you're 5 not alone here. The fact that you have 6 been singled out to spend the evening 7 with me, you are amongst an august 8 crowd; and the reason you're here is not 9 because your talent and skills as a shop 10 steward are at issue. There are some 11 questions that need to be dealt with, 12 and no matter what my personal opinions 13 may turn out to be, I have really no 14 authority to impose those; and whatever 15 decision, if any, would be made at the 16 conclusion of my work, will be made by 17 the judge with the help and maybe with 18 the participation of the Government, and 19 most importantly, the District Council, 20 who is responsible for conducting their 21 own disciplinary process and conducting 22 and managing the union. 23 The most important thing I say to 24 you to tonight is coming right now. You 25 will be placed under oath in a few
1 7 2 moments, and if there's some experience 3 to my approximately two years that I 4 have been at it, one stands out, and 5 some of the people in this room, 6 excluding your counsel, have been privy 7 to, recently, a whole series of 8 individuals who made the mistake of 9 lying under oath about subjects they 10 thought would never come out. The one 11 promise I make to everyone that lies 12 under oath or seeks to deceive me, is 13 that if I can resolve that, and it 14 appears to me after a pretty thorough 15 inquiry that an individual came in and 16 did not honor their oath, it is my 17 commitment that I will recommend that 18 that person be charged with perjury or 19 obstruction of justice. You're not 20 being singled out. I say this in one 21 form or another to every carpenter or 22 witness who appears here under oath. 23 There are times when I get frustrated 24 because some people are smart enough to 25 tell the truth, no matter who it helps
1 8 2 and hurts, no matter what the situation 3 may appear to be, and those people are 4 always better off than those individuals 5 who, in their first run-through, lie; 6 because the likelihood is, that in time, 7 one way or the other, the truth will 8 come out; and for each and every 9 individual who has lied under oath, it 10 is my commitment to them that I will 11 recommend -- I'm not a prosecutor, I 12 used to be a prosecutor -- I'm a defense 13 lawyer, so I understand both sides, to a 14 pretty good extent, about the issues. 15 What I really try to emphasize is 16 that it is far better for the witness, 17 for the carpenter, that when the 18 question is asked and answered, that the 19 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 20 the truth be the result. We've had 21 pretty close to ten, we'll have ten more 22 people who did not follow that advice, 23 and who, in order to avoid being 24 prosecuted for perjury, have returned to 25 correct the record and apologize to me,
1 9 2 and through me to the judge, for 3 dishonoring their oath. I'm not going 4 to dwell on this, I'm not singling you 5 out. It is just a level of frustration 6 with me that individuals, who when they 7 had the first opportunity to deal with 8 the subject matter, have chosen to lie, 9 for whatever reasons. 10 The reasons appeared to be good, 11 and they are reasons such as, I'll get 12 kicked out of the union if I admit this, 13 I'll lose my job if I do this, I won't 14 be able to feed my family, I have to be 15 employed to deal with my 16 responsibilities. These are good 17 reasons, but when placed against lying 18 under oath to a federal officer or an 19 agent of the Court, all of those things 20 are in far greater jeopardy if the 21 person lies under oath. 22 I want to appeal to you. I'm 23 trying to be as clear as possible, so 24 you will tell me the truth. 25 One carpenter this week said,
1 10 2 Mr. Mack, if you were in the same 3 position as I was, if I told the truth, 4 I'll lose my job, wouldn't be able to 5 work in the industry again; and tears 6 welled up in his eyes when he was 7 speaking about it. 8 I said to him, in those 9 circumstances where you feel that the 10 issue is so significant, that's why you 11 have a lawyer to go to, to try to in 12 some way work out a method of trying to 13 protect that carpenter's livelihood and 14 what's happening, and deal with whatever 15 pressures and stresses may be out there. 16 What I said to him, and I say to 17 you, is this: There's no excuse for 18 lying under oath. I don't expect you to 19 lie under oath, but I want to make 20 certain I've done my level best to 21 ensure that should you lie under oath, 22 the potential penalty is a jail 23 sentence, and all of the things that may 24 be motivated for lying under oath, when 25 you put that against leaving and being
1 11 2 in the custody of the State or Federal 3 Government, it is not worth it. 4 There's always an answer to those 5 pressures, and you have an experienced 6 lawyer at your side should that be a 7 situation. I'm not suggesting that it 8 is, you can find a way to deal with that 9 challenge. 10 The other part of that, and 11 again, I don't want you to think that 12 I'm really throwing this on you, I try 13 to say this to every witness who 14 appears, I've had too many people lie 15 under oath. I'm recommending in the 16 very near future, in January, that some 17 people be indicted for perjury; not only 18 perjury, but obstruction of justice. 19 Obstruction of justice means that 20 if I'm conducting an investigation and 21 somebody withholds information from or 22 seeks to deceive me, lies to me, tells 23 me 6 0 percent of the truth, with intent 24 to prevent me from working out whatever; 25 that's obstructing a judicial officer,
1 12 2 and that is a federal offense. 3 I'm going to get off this topic, 4 because I expect you to tell me the 5 truth, and I expect you to honor your 6 oath. Sometimes my expectations have 7 not been fulfilled; I'm hoping and 8 begging and praying that in this 9 situation, they will be. 10 I do want to stress, I can only 11 recommend there will be a criminal 12 prosecution. There have been situations 13 where people have come in and felt that 14 is what the District Council, maybe the 15 Government, have said, that maybe what 16 Mack thinks, but basically, we have a 17 different viewpoint and we'll speak to 18 the judge about our viewpoint. The 19 lawyers for the individuals, it is not 20 Mr. Lombardi, at least, will have their 21 opportunity to speak to the judge as 22 well, about my recommendations. All I 23 can do is recommend. 24 Let me go through another thing. 25 Mr. Lombardi has probably covered this
1 13 2 topic with you. You have a Fifth 3 Amendment privilege as you sit here 4 today. I'm going to ask some pretty 5 broad questions that Mr. Lombardi has 6 heard before with respect to other 7 clients of his, and I'm going to get to 8 that. And you, because this is a 9 judicial proceeding, and not a 10 proceeding of the District Council, you 11 can determine, and I would encourage you 12 to have the benefit of Mr. Lombardi's 13 advice, that you don't want to answer 14 that question because it might tend to 15 incriminate you. That means that you 16 have gotten the benefit of legal advice, 17 because these are difficult questions, 18 not really that difficult, but it is 19 always better to have a lawyer's advice. 20 And so if I ask a question, if you know 21 your answer to it, an accurate answer, 22 would tend to incriminate you 23 personally, not somebody else, it is 24 yours not a right of yours not to 25 incriminate yourself, you can say: With
1 14 2 all due respect, you know, Mr. Mack, I 3 just don't want to answer that question 4 because it might tend to incriminate me. 5 You have that right, it is a 6 constitutional right. This is not a 7 criminal proceeding. I am not a 8 Prosecutor. But if it's a choice of 9 taking the Fifth Amendment or lying, 10 take the Fifth Amendment, because if you 11 lie, you are committing a crime. 12 So I will tell you this: You 13 should be aware, in all fairness, that 14 if you take the Fifth Amendment on a 15 topic which I think is of significance 16 to dealing with an issue within my 17 jurisdiction, such as wrongdoing on a 18 jobsite or something of that nature, the 19 likelihood is, very, very shortly 20 thereafter, that I will refer the matter 21 to-a prosecutor for their own 22 information and evaluation, because I 23 have an obligation, should there be some 24 evidence of criminal wrongdoing, and 25 sometimes that may be all it is, but
1 15 2 that's up to me, but I don't want you to 3 think that the topic ends there, once 4 you take the Fifth. 5 The District Council, although 6 I'm not entirely clear of their policy 7 on this topic, because it seems to 8 evolve, I think it is evolving in the 9 right direction, that they have the 10 right to ask you to appear before them, 11 and they do, or may not, maybe that's a 12 better way of putting it, recognize a 13 Fifth Amendment privilege, that if it's 14 carpenter business, I believe it is 15 their position they are entitled to have 16 that information in order to see that 17 the unions are run without criminal 18 involvement. 19 I'm going to let Mr. Rothman, if 20 he wishes to speak to that topic, speak 21 to it. I don't want you to think: I 22 take the Fifth Amendment and I can go 23 home. There' would be follow-up by me, 24 because I would try to persuade your 25 counsel rather than going that route, it
1 16 2 is better to tell me about the topic in 3 some way so the truth can be found. 4 My job is finding facts and 5 reporting them. It is not like you're 6 through with the issue, in fact, that 7 may just be the beginning. In terms of 8 evaluating: Should I lie to Mr. Mack or 9 take the Fifth Amendment? Take the 10 Fifth Amendment. Do not lie under oath, 11 because that's a crime, it is as 12 complete as of the moment that you say 13 something untrue. 14 I don't want you to be overly 15 concerned about this, because it is 16 really just the reality of a proceeding 17 conducted by a judicial officer. 18 This is a lot less formal than 19 being in a courtroom, and I'm acting as 20 his agent, and I'm trying to do what he 21 would expect me to do. If you do take 22 the Fifth Amendment, and let's say I 23 have information that certain conduct 24 occurred on the jobsite in which you 25 were shop steward, and I have a lot of
1 17 2 evidence about one site, and I say, 3 well, I want to know what Anthony has to 4 say about this topic, I want to hear his 5 side. You say, I'm taking the Fifth 6 Amendment, Mack, I'm not telling you my 7 side. I have the authority and I can 8 exercise my discretion and say, Anthony 9 had his, choice and therefore I'm going 10 to decide to infer that the guys who are 11 on the other side, telling me all this 12 stuff about the job, Anthony had his 13 chance, I'm going to conclude in my 14 report that in fact what the other 15 people on the jobsite said is true, is 16 true. That's basically permitting me to 17 draw an adverse inference to you, 18 because when you had the choice of 19 explaining, you took the Fifth. 20 Some of these subjects are 21 complex. I'm just a lawyer, not a 22 carpenter, but I'm trying to at least 23 raise the issue, so if you have a 24 question about the subject, you can talk 25 to Mr. Lombardi about it or raise it
1 18 2 with me, because the one thing that I 3 know the judge would be very unhappy 4 about, is if you were misinformed or had 5 a wrongful idea of your rights. 6 Finally, we'll get off what is 7 preliminary, I don't think this is news 8 to you, but it may be a novel concept, 9 and that is: Mr. Lombardi represents a 10 number of carpenters, and those 11 carpenters have appeared, and I'm sure 12 he has exercised his discretion and 13 utilized his professional skills to 14 represent them. While he is here today, 15 though, the only person that he has to 16 have concern about is you, that you 17 weather this inquiry and go through it, 18 as he's done with others, and it's at 19 least theoretically possible that one of 20 his other clients might have an adverse 21 position or have something to say about 22 a job that you were on that's not 23 consistent with your testimony. 24 So in the first instance, he 25 needs to evaluate, under the ethical
1 19 2 rules that the lawyers in this state run 3 by, whether he can represent you and not 4 be conflicted out. In other words, if 5 he had a client which you were 6 testifying against, I'm on this jobsite 7 and so-and-so did this, he would have a 8 real problem in trying the figure out 9 whether he can continue to represent you 10 or not. I don't know, nor do I want to 11 know, what you and he talk about, that's 12 his decision to start with. That's 13 called a conflict, hypothetical 14 conflict. Unless I knew all the 15 conversations he had with his clients, 16 which I don't know, I really can't make 17 that judgment. If there comes a point 18 where I realize you're testifying 19 against somebody, he can't possibly not 20 have a conflict. I don't know that. It 21 is up to him in the first instance. 22 The next obligation of his is to 23 discuss that issue with you, and for you 24 to decide, okay, I understand, 25 Mr. Lombardi has conflicts, but I think
1 20 2 he can represent me, I have confidence 3 in his defending me. Let's say you had 4 information about a contractor, let's 5 pick for instance, because it is one of 6 my favorites, okay, and if he had 7 represented a Prince person, or 8 something of that nature, he would have 9 a hard time not being in a conflict 10 position. Even I can figure that out 11 once I knew that he represented somebody 12 from Prince. 13 I'm not saying any of this is 14 true. In essence, I'm trying to give 15 you a hypothetical to recognize that he 16 has to be careful about: Don't say 17 anything about. Prince, Anthony, you can 18 talk about everybody else; Prince is my 19 guy, you can't talk about it. He would 20 have an ethical problem, and you would 21 have a significant criminal problem. 22 This area can be complex, it is not 23 really that difficult, it is really 24 common sense in many ways. I want to 25 make sure you discussed it with
1 21 2 Mr. Lombardi. If you haven't, you 3 should discuss it with him, and I want 4 to make sure you're content, given that 5 type of scenario, with proceeding today. 6 Have you discussed this potential 7 conflict with him, the situation? You 8 should say yes or no. If not, you 9 should -- 10 MR. ARGUELLES: I think we did. 11 MR. MACK: Do you want to talk 12 about it one more time? 13 MR. ARGUELLES: Sure. 14 MR. MACK: Step out and take a 15 moment. We'll wait for you to come 16 back. Take your time. 17 (Pause.) 18 MR. MACK: You've had a few 19 moments to discuss it with Mr. Lombardi. 20 Do you have any questions you want to 21 ask about the subject at all? That's 22 the first thing I should ask. 23 MR. ARGUELLES: No. 24 MR. MACK: Second of all, having 25 had the discussion, having thought about
1 22 2 it, are you willing to proceed tonight 3 with Mr. Lombardi as your lawyer? 4 MR. ARGUELLES: Yes. 5 MR. MACK: Fine. I'm going to 6 come back to you in a minute about 7 another topic. I want to introduce 8 everybody and ask Mr. Lombardi for his 9 wisdom, and any comment he would like to 10 impart before we begin. 11 MR. LOMBARDI: Nothing at this 12 time. 13 MR. MACK: You're content with 14 your situation on conflict? 15 MR. LOMBARDI: Yes. 16 MR. MACK: Fine. 17 Let me introduce the people. 18 Gary Rothman is a lawyer for the 19 District Council. He is here as my 20 guest, as is Lisa Zornberg, an Assistant 21 United States Attorney with the Civil 22 Division of the U.S. Attorney's Office, 23 but she , she's not a criminal Prosecutor, 24 does represent, as does Gary, the 25 parties in this litigation before Judge
1 23 2 Haight, which has gone on under the 3 Consent Decree for a long period of 4 time. And both of them, as parties, 5 have consented to my appointment, 6 resulting in the judge's Order. 7 They are here, both of them are 8 here to represent their clients, in 9 Gary's situation, the District Council, 10 the broad group. He doesn't represent 11 you directly, but you may wish to, with 12 your counsel, discuss issues about the 13 District Council with him. 14 Ms. Zornberg and Gary are here as 15 my guests. They will be given 16 opportunities to question, if there's 17 something that I have omitted or 18 something they feel that needs to be 19 clarified. 20 My main reason for doing that is 21 because many of my investigations take a 22 series of months. I have been talking 23 to shop stewards now pretty much during 24 the year 2004 , and I'm going to write a 25 shop steward report eventually. Rather 24 1 24 2 than causing them to be in ignorance of 3 my concerns about topics, by having them 4 as my guest, not only do they see I 5 don't overlook something or raise points 6 that should be raised that the judge 7 should hear, but they also have that 8 information available to them much 9 earlier than they would have if they 10 have to wait for my report. If there's 11 are changes that need to be made, they 12 - have the same information and are able 13 to use it. That's why they are here and 14 they are here at my invitation. They 15 may ask you some questions if there's 16 something that needs to be clarified. 17 Having made that introduction, 18 let me ask Mr. Rothman if he has any 19 comments he would like to make. 20 MR. ROTHMAN: Your right to 21 exercise your Fifth Amendment privilege 22 against self-incrimination, Mr. Mack 23 explained to you that if you do that, 24 and certainly it is your right to do so; 25 I would add that the likelihood is, if
1 25 2 you do that, that you would soon be 3 asked to come in to talk to the District 4 Council. The District Council, from 5 where you are appointed as a shop 6 steward, if you take the Fifth Amendment 7 here with respect to your duties as a 8 shop steward, the District Council would 9 be interested in talking to you about 10 that. 11 At the District Council, you 12 would not have the same Fifth Amendment 13 right, because you couldn't put yourself 14 in a position for criminal prosecution 15 from the District Council. One other 16 individual has exercised his right to 17 his Fifth Amendment privilege here, and 18 the District Council has suspended that 19 member's shop steward skill, pending the 20 completion of an investigation, or until 21 that person provides answers to the 22 questions so that the District Council 23 can determine whether it is appropriate 24 to continue to assign that person out as 25 a union shop steward.
1 2 6 2 So that you should just be aware 3 of that, and that could be something you 4 might factor into your consideration 5 with Mr. Lombardi, if the situation 6 presents itself. 7 MR. MACK: I'll add to that, I 8 think I said it, I want to reiterate it 9 in light of what Gary just said. 10 At any time tonight, not only can 11 you go out and talk to Mr. Lombardi 12 about any subject, but should you two 13 wish to discuss with Gary Rothman as the 14 attorney for the District Council, 15 hypotheticals or particular situations, 16 that's fine. He represents the District 17 Council and there may be information or 18 questions you may have. That's a right 19 I would give you, that opportunity, 20 during questioning tonight. 21 Anything else, Gary? 22 MR. ROTHMAN: That's it. 23 MR. MACK: Ms. Zornberg, anything 24 you would like to add or mention 25 concerning our preliminary proceedings
1 2 7 2 here? 3 MS. ZORNBERG: No. 4 MR. MACK: I want to cover a 5 couple of other things that may be 6 important. 7 These six files represent 8 complaints that have been made about 9 you, is what it boils down to, and the 10 various subjects, and I will tell you 11 what they generally are, and don't be 12 scared by the paperwork. We copy large 13 quantities to intimidate you. I'm 14 joking. There are various matters that 15 were put together. I want to say this. 16 There have been a number of people, most 17 of them anonymous, although some we know 18 who they are, who have made reports 19 about your activity as a shop steward. 20 I'm going to tell you the gist of what 21 those complaints are. And the reason I 22 say that is, I think it is very 23 important that the likelihood of my 24 knowing an accurate answer on questions 25 I ask you, some of the individuals have
1 2 8 2 come in and sort of gambled that I would 3 not figure it out, but the reality of it 4 is that, sooner or later, maybe not 5 immediately, you know, the truth comes 6 out. That's been my experience after 7 many, many years in the investigatory 8 area. 9 In your case, there are many 10 people that have had things to say about 11 you. That doesn't mean anything; that 12 may mean they're jealous of your 13 proficiency and honesty, what have you. 14 I'm going to give you the nature 15 of what they say, so that you have some 16 idea. Besides the most recent 17 interaction, which I'm going to ask you 18 about in a moment, the general subject 19 matter has been that your time as a shop 20 steward frequently was shorter than it 21 should be, that you would leave a job 22 early, or would not be present, and that 23 you would bestow favors upon the 24 contractors or give them benefits that 25 they were not entitled to have. That's
1 2 9 2 the general nature. Plus the fact, 3 significant complaints about your moving 4 from one, the Bloomberg Building, to 5 another Prince job. 6 I just wanted to point out to 7 you, a lot of questions are going to 8 deal with your service as a shop 9 steward. I think it is very, very 10 important that you listen to the 11 question, and make sure you answer 12 truthfully. I would say this: 13 Virtually every shop steward here has 14 gotten into trouble with me because they 15 have lied about questions I've asked 16 them. They have felt they didn't want 17 to admit something that happened, they 18 wanted to describe it in a way that 19 wasn't accurate. And so, I mean, I 20 really want to reach out to you and say, 21 that you're far better off in a 22 situation of just saying this is what 23 happened, because there's considerable 24 question, based upon my investigation, 25 about what's the right way to do things;
1 3 0 2 was this system the way it should be; 3 who told you what the system is. So if 4 it happened a certain way, it is for 5 other people to resolve whether that was 6 wrong at the time it happened or not. 7 And there's considerable question about 8 whether things -- whether this is the 9 right way, this is how you do something 10 or not. 11 So I guess what I'm saying is, 12 frequently, the subject matter is not 13 worthy of a lie. You just dig yourself 14 into a far deeper hole by talking about 15 something which there's considerable 16 question as to whether the matter was 17 wrong or incorrect at the time, or 18 something has changed. But by lying 19 about it and not being forthright and 20 saying yes, you're right, I did do this, 21 you know, this was the reason, those 22 people are far better off than the ones 23 who come in and try to tell me a 24 statement that's not true. 25 I guess that's part of my appeal,
1 31 2 again, that in this case, you have been 3 a shop steward for a long period of 4 time, on many different jobs, have a 5 record of a lot of things I'll ask you 6 about. If my tone indicates that it 7 doesn't sound right, I have no authority 8 to decide, going off a job for a day or 9 two, which is clearly in your record, 10 the District Council takes the position 11 that it is perfectly okay for the guy to 12 get the job he wants. It is far better 13 to say, this is what happened, Mr. Mack. 14 It is far better to tell the truth than 15 to make up a story or come up with 16 something, because in many cases, what 17 is right and what is wrong is yet 18 undecided, and is a matter of debate and 19 a matter of resolution. That's a final 20 appeal to say, let it all hang out 21 there, and be as accurate as you can be. 22 Any questions, anything else that 23 has come up, anything you want to ask, 24 at all, about the situation? 25 MR. LOMBARDI: Anything for me?
1 3 2 2 MR. ARGUELLES: No. 3 MR. LOMBARDI: Anything about 4 what Mr. Rothman said? 5 MR. ARGUELLES: No. 6 MR. LOMBARDI: You understand 7 that whether you invoke your Fifth 8 Amendment right in response to one or 9 more of Mr. Mack's questions, or even if 10 it's a matter in which you don't invoke 11 a Fifth Amendment right, that the 12 District Council can ask you essentially 13 for responses to the same questions that 14 Mr. Mack will ask you today? 15 MR. ARGUELLES: Right. 16 MR. LOMBARDI: And that there is 17 no Fifth Amendment right before the 18 District Council. All right? 19 MR. ARGUELLES: Yes. 20 MR. MACK: One thing that I may 21 have assumed is true. In many cases, 22 the District Council and I, .of course 23 I'm an investigator, we share 24 information; in other words, where 25 there's efficiency of investigate
1 33 2 effort, I would like to think that the 3 District Council and I are working 4 together to find out what the facts are. 5 And sometimes there are situations where 6 people go to the District Council and 7 they lie to the District Council and 8 tell a different story to me, vice 9 versa. The truth is the truth. 10 Although the words might be different, 11 the essential facts should be the same. 12 Mr. Rothman, I can't speak for what the 13 District Council will do, we are hoping 14 that whatever Anthony Arguelles has to 15 say tonight, this is the only time that 16 we need to do this. That there 17 shouldn't be any difference. If that's 18 a possibility to be gained, since 19 frequently the District Council and I 20 share exactly the same goals, have 21 exactly the same purpose, we may have 22 differing views; but the facts, whether 23 they are explained to the District 24 Council or explained to me, should be 25 pretty close to the same. If there's a
1 34 2 difference, it is just because of 3 wording or maybe how the question is 4 asked. It is not like you have to go to 5 the District Council, and since Gary is 6 sitting here, he's hearing the same 7 information, and I would say most of the 8 time it is my desire and hopefully his, 9 that we work together to find out 10 whether there's an issue so it can be 11 resolved and explained and reported on. 12 I want you to understand that there's 13 not necessarily competition. In many 14 respects, I hope we are working towards 15 the same goal. 16 Anything else we need to say? 17 MR. LOMBARDI: We can get 18 started. 19 MR. MACK: Let me ask that the 20 witness be sworn, if I may. 21 ANTHONY ARGUELLES, the 22 witness herein, was duly sworn by Stewart 23 Nissenbaum, a Notary Public of the State of 24 New York. 25 EXAMINATION BY
1 Anthony Arguelles 35 2 MR. MACK: 3 Q Mr. Arguelles, we are going to 4 proceed in a pretty simple format tonight, in 5 which I will refer to certain exhibits which 6 I have given you copies of, we'll take time, 7 we'll take breaks from time to time. Mr. 8 Nissenbaum, the handsome gentleman sitting to 9 your left, is the hardest working person in 10 here, he will be given an opportunity every 11 now and then to take a break. 12 Anytime you need to take a break, 13 please do so. Anytime my questions are 14 unclear, as I've said, please speak out. 15 This is a relatively informal proceeding. 16 The main reason there's a transcript is that 17 I speak to so many people that when I'm 18 writing this, I want to make sure I have 19 exactly what the witness said, and 20 recognizing the most important person to be 21 reading this will be the judge; he wants an 22 accurate record. He wants to ensure I'm 23 doing my job and 'he can think about what the 24 witness has said. 25 You received a notice, and I
1 Anthony Arguelles 3 6 2 think it is actually in front of you right 3 now, for your appearance today, and I want 4 you to look at it. I have the original of 5 these exhibits. They have AA numbers on 6 them. AA, I'm sure you can figure out, are 7 your initial, and then a series of numbers. 8 The fact of the exhibit number and letters 9 means nothing, it is simply an effort by me 10 to keep track of the documents. 11 As we go along tonight, I will be 12 referring to specific Exhibits, AA-2 , AA-1. 13 AA-1, let me ask you, I see you do have a 14 copy in front of you, that should be a copy 15 of the letter you received requiring your 16 presence at some time to visit with me and 17 discuss these topics, is that true? 18 A Correct. 19 (Notice to Appear marked Exhibit 20 AA-1; job referral history marked 21 Exhibit AA-2 .) 22 Q Now, one of things that you were 23 asked for were certain records, and my 24 question is to find out whether you brought 25 any records with you tonight that are
1 Anthony Arguelles 37 2 required by the notice AA-1. 3 MR. LOMBARDI: You didn't bring 4 any with you tonight? 5 THE WITNESS: No. 6 MR. LOMBARDI: You didn't have 7 any in your possession prior to getting 8 the letter; right? 9 Q If you have them under your 10 possession, custody and control, what I would 11 ask you to do is to provide them to 12 Mr. Lombardi, who can make copies for me. 13 Maybe you don't have any records, I would be 14 surprised if you don't have records, but 15 there are some fairly specific records 16 requested there, shop steward reports, for 17 instance, pay stubs and records, and 18 certifications for carpentry skills. I'm 19 going to be asking you about certain skills. 20 Do you have with you any of your 21 skill certifications in your wallet? 22 A Not with me. 23 Q At least with those, you're going 24 to have to look in your own records or 25 records maintained by family, friends, they
1 Anthony Arguelles 38 2 have to be your records, that are described 3 in this notice, they need to be provided to 4 Mr. Lombardi, because I know you would like 5 to come down here and spend another evening 6 with me. Hopefully we can avoid that. 7 Mr. Lombardi will provide me a 8 copy of all of those. 9 MR. LOMBARDI: I will. 10 Q So that my hope is that they will 11 not change any of what I'll ask you tonight; 12 and they probably won't, to be perfectly 13 honest. But it is important that I take a 14 look at them. There are some questions that 15 I do have about shop steward reports which 16 we'll talk about tonight, and obviously with 17 the benefit of them, that might have made the 18 questioning easier. My hope is we'll get 19 through that. I'm sure you're a careful 20 person, and hopefully, you may remember some 21 of the topics I'll talk to you about. That's 22 something for Mr. Lombardi to do, and see 23 they get transmitted to me. 24 MR. MACK: Is that agreeable? 25 MR. LOMBARDI: Yes.
1 Anthony Arguelles 39 2 MR. MACK: Is that agreeable to 3 you, Mr. Arguelles? 4 THE WITNESS: Yes. 5 Q Before we get started in really 6 what is a chronological trip, I know you have 7 been recently removed as shop steward from 8 your current position, and so I want to 9 briefly ask you about that and what happened. 10 Have you ever been questioned 11 about your being on the out-of-work list and, 12 you know, working at the same time, in, let's 13 say, the last five years? 14 MR. LOMBARDI: By anybody? 15 Q By anybody? 16 A No. 17 Q You were recently removed -- I 18 want to say one thing. I'm not making 19 comment why it happened, or should. I don't 20 have the authority to remove anybody. 21 Carpenters call me up and say I should remove 22 so and so. I have no authority to remove 23 anybody. I'm not in any way saying -- I have 24 strong views about removals, but I don't have 25 the authority to do anything other than
1 Anthony Arguelles 4 0 2 express my views. 3 Given your removal, were you 4 questioned as to whether you had put yourself 5 on the out-of-work list while you were 6 working? 7 MR. LOMBARDI: In connection with 8 this recent removal? 9 MR. MACK: Yes. 10 A Have I been questioned, like by 11 who? 12 Q Let me start either way. When 13 were you removed as shop steward for the 14 Prince job that you currently are working at? 15 A I think it was sometime in 16 November. 17 Q We are going to get there as we 18 go through it, but prior to that removal, 19 were you questioned by any representative of 20 the District Council? 21 A No, not that I recall. 22 Q Think about it, because it is not 23 too long ago. In other words, that means -- 24 A Before I got removed? 25 Q Correct.
1 Anthony Arguelles 4 1 2 MR. LOMBARDI: In connection with 3 that job? 4 Q In connection with that job. 5 A No. 6 Q Think about it. I don't know 7 whether you were or weren't. I just want to 8 make sure. 9 A No, not that -- that specific 10 question, no. 11 Q Let me tell you what I'm getting 12 at, and maybe I'm not asking the question 13 correctly. If a representative of the 14 District Council, when I say representative, 15 that means, did a business agent or somebody 16 who holds a position of authority at the 17 District Council office, by telephone or in 18 person, say Anthony Arguelles, were you at 19 work when you added yourself to the list on 20 such and such a date, concerning your recent 21 assignment as a shop steward. 22 A That question, I don't think so. 23 Q Was there any questioning of you 24 prior to your removal, that you can remember, 25 on any topic?
1 Anthony Arguelles 42 2 A I think the guy Mike Murray came 3 down. 4 Q To? 5 A My job. 6 Q Did he question you? 7 A I forgot what he said. Honestly, 8 I forgot what he said. 9 Q I want to make sure. If you're 10 nervous tonight, I want you to know this, all 11 the stuff I've said to you, I say to 12 everybody, so don't be nervous about that. 13 It is my job to make sure that you use your 14 resources, and you think. And so you're not 15 being singled out for any harsh warning. The 16 reason I do it, I want to make sure the 17 person doesn't lie to me. That's what I'm 18 doing. I do it to everybody. That's a 19 no-no, I'm not going to go through that 20 anymore. If you're nervous or you need to 21 think -- this couldn't be any more than a 22 month or two ago, so I want you to take your 23 time, because I would have expected that that 24 situation, removal as a shop steward, would 25 be something that would stick in your mind.
1 Anthony Arguelles 4 3 2 So I'm trying to figure out the 3 process that resulted in your removal, 4 whether or not you were ever confronted with 5 what the problem was and asked whether it was 6 true or false. I'm going to do that tonight. 7 The point is, I'm trying to figure out -- 8 A The only inquiry is that somebody 9 from the District Council, Mike Murray, came 10 to my job. 11 Q Do you know what he inquired of 12 you, what he asked you? 13 A Honestly, I don't -- I mean, I 14 really don't remember what directly he asked 15 me. 16 Q Do you remember indirectly what 17 he asked you? 18 A Honestly, I don't. 19 Q We have a lot to cover tonight. 20 A Okay. 21 Q I want to make sure that I give 22 you a setting in which you can think and use 23 your mind, because some of this stuff you're 24 going to have to remember, it happened to 25 you, it is your life, your job history, and
1 Anthony Arguelles 44 2 things of that nature; so I want to make sure 3 you take your time, if you want to take a 4 break, I want you to think about the subject. 5 I'm going to continue on the topic a little 6 bit longer. 7 To your knowledge, have you been 8 charged by the District Council with any 9 offense or something that is worthy of 10 discipline, as you sit there today? 11 A No. 12 Q To your knowledge, you have not 13 been? 14 A No. 15 Q Third of all, I think you 16 answered this already, but I want to make 17 certain, has anyone sat down with you and 18 said, okay, Anthony, we have your job history 19 and we have your benefit records, and gone 20 through them to find out whether you were on 21 the list when you're referred out; has that 22 ever happened? 23 No. 24 Q That's what we are going to do 25 tonight. But I want to make certain that if
1 Anthony Arguelles 45 2 there has been some prior time, it would save 3 us time if that happened, and it clearly has 4 not happened; correct? 5 A Right. Correct. 6 Q Have you, in any way, protested 7 or taken steps to question as to whether or 8 not you should have been removed as a shop 9 steward on your current job? 10 A No. 11 Q We are going to get to that, 12 eventually. We are going way back. , What 13 you'll need in front of you -- let's take our 14 time; have you ever gone through your job 15 referral history to see what types of records 16 the District Council keeps about you and 17 every carpenter? 18 A No. 19 Q Let's pull out, if we could, your 20 Exhibit AA-2 I know you may have had just a 21 couple of minutes before we got started, but 22 this is what is known, at least for me, as a 23 record from a period of your work referral 24 history. What happens at these events, 25 that's so much fun that goes into the night,
1 Anthony Arguelles 46 2 is that we go through your work referral 3 history and I ask questions about why did you 4 do this, what happened here, what do you 5 remember about that. 6 So there are a couple of things, 7 I don't know whether you've ever read or 8 looked at it, you know, we can do on-the-job 9 training, as it were, as we go through it; 10 but Mr. Lombardi is an expert, he's done this 11 enough, we may ask him to explain, but maybe 12 not this time, a couple of idiosyncrasies or 13 things that you should look at. 14 If you look, for instance, on 15 really what is the third page in on AA-2 , 16 you'll see at the very top it says Page 1 on 17 the fax, work referral history. If you look 18 in the upper left-hand corner, it says 05 19 November 2004; that just means when they ran 20 it off the computer, that's what that means. 21 Beneath that, you will see, like, a series of 22 columns. 23 And that first entry there tells 24 me that on August 31, 1998 , -- the time says 25 9 :12 , but because the District Council would
1 Anthony Arguelles 47 2 like to confuse everybody whose job it is, 3 that actually is California time, because 4 their computer database is run out of the 5 West Coast and the actual time is three hours 6 later. So that's just a complication that we 7 have to deal with. 8 In your case, the time really 9 doesn't mean a lot in the course of my 10 inquiry; but it may mean something. Your 11 member ID number, your name with reference 12 that it is you. It says "add list." That's 13 an entry that I always go to, because it 14 means that your name has been added to the 15 out-of-work list, and to my view, at that 16 time, my question is going to be, were you 17 really out of work when the name was added. 18 All right? 19 What I use to help me ask a 20 proper question is another exhibit, which you 21 have, and let me get my copy of that out so I 22 can refer to it. These are the exhibits that 23 are going to be most consequential to you. 24 Just let me find it. Once I get 25 my copy, I'll tell you how to look at it.
1 Anthony Arguelles 48 2 Here it is. 3 (Benefits record marked Exhibit 4 AA-3 .) 5 Q AA-3 is a computer record 6 maintained by the Benefits Fund which 7 reflects reported hours by various employers 8 for the periods of time that are designated 9 there. It is a computer run which I always 10 make a point of obtaining, because what I do 11 is, I take a look and see, are hours being 12 reported for a carpenter when they are on the 13 out-of-work list, and so that's my first 14 level of inquiry. 15 In some cases, I want -- I'm sure 16 your employer may have mentioned this to you, 17 there's at least a possibility that the 18 contractor is reporting hours incorrectly or 19 they are reporting hours for a period that's 20 shown on the record, but at the same time, 21 are not for hours actually worked at that 22 period. All right 23 And so what I say is, in the 24 first instance, it is the carpenter himself 25 or herself who should know or have a pretty
1 Anthony Arguelles 49 2 good idea whether they are working or not. 3 It is them, they are working on the job, and 4 they should know that. Let's say there's a 5 situation where there's some uncertainty. 6 What I'm willing to do, and I say this to 7 everyone, if you challenge, hey, I know it 8 says I'm working for these people and those 9 hours, but I don't think I was, Mr. Mack, and 10 you can call me Walter, doesn't make any 11 difference what you call me; I'm called a lot 12 of things. 13 The point I'm making is, if you 14 identify a particular employer and say I 15 think they are reporting those late or those 16 aren't the times; I will subpoena them and 17 get the payroll records. I don't accept this 18 as the final answer, but I would be upset 19 with you if you know that you were working at 20 the time. The employer is not going to be 21 happy to receive a subpoena from me and. Judge 22 Haight for employment records if it's pretty 23 clear that you were working there. I will 24 encourage you only to do it when there's a 25 legitimate question. I'm willing to subpoena
1 Anthony Arguelles 5 0 2 the records, but I would ask you to think 3 carefully about whether you want me to do it 4 or not. It is an Order from a Court. I have 5 subpoena power with the judge's permission, 6 that's all. 7 My feeling is, I'm willing to do 8 that, but I probably will ask for other 9 records when the time comes, but I wanted to 10 make certain I'm accurate. So where you 11 think, as we go through, that the report is 12 inaccurate, and you think I should get the 13 employment records on the subject, you tell 14 me and I'll listen. 15 Since I'm going, probably in the 16 next few days, to the judge for subpoenas, I 17 can add that to the subpoenas necessary. 18 That means a subpoena gets served on the 19 company, it will ask for employment records 20 for the time period, and there will be a 21 judge telling them to do it. 22 My process may be different from 23 the District Council's process, I'm less 24 patient than they are, I would like to know 25 the realities quickly, and this subpoena
1 Anthony Arguelles 51 2 gives an opportunity to do that. 3 I would like you to take a brief 4 look to AA-3, so you are comfortable with how 5 the document is prepared. 6 (Pause.) 7 MR. MACK: Dino, let me know when 8 I can proceed. After I finish with the' 9 next exhibit, we'll take a five-minute 10 break, since Mr. Nissenbaum is working, 11 and then we'll go right down the list. 12 (Document, dispatches, marked 13 Exhibit AA-7 .) 14 Q One of the things that I'd like 15 to do, for instance, I've noticed there are 16 certain time periods in your job referral 17 history that you go onto a job, you stay a 18 very short period of time, a day, two days, 19 you're off, and then eventually you end up on 20 a different job and stay for a while. Again, 21 the District Council and my views about that 22 may differ. My view in many ways is 23 inconsequential. In order for me to keep 24 track of the circumstances of particular 25 referrals and who refers you and how long you
1 Anthony Arguelles 52 2 are there, another document, an exhibit which 3 you have in front of you, marked AA-7 , you 4 might pull that out, it is the thicker 5 document underneath that. In a sense, pretty 6 completely AA-7 , it is almost complete, 7 starting in September, 1998 , the specific 8 jobs that you are referred to, and what is 9 called, as part of that, the manning request 10 form, which is a record of who calls and what 11 they called about and certain other items, 12 what time, what skills are needed for the 13 job, and we are pretty complete in going 14 through that. 15 So that's another source of 16 information, and as you go through it, and 17 we'll go through it pretty thoroughly 18 tonight, and there are jobs that you are on 19 for a short time, some for longer. I'm going 20 to ask you questions about some of those 21 jobs. I'll ask you why are you on that job 22 one day, why did you leave it. It doesn't 23 mean there's anything wrong with that; in 24 fact, the District Council has taken the view 25 that that is perfectly fine and appropriate.
1 Anthony Arguelles 53 2 I want to make certain that when we go 3 through it, I may ask you about a job, why 4 did you stay there. 5 These are records, they are 6 business records of the District Council, 7 wouldn't be the first time, although it 8 happens very seldom, that the record is 9 wrong, sometimes the record - 10 wanted a 157 job and they are sent, to 608 , 11 they are there and the job hasn't started. 12 I'm being trained to recognize there maybe 13 factors, but what's important to you is, tell 14 it like it is, as best you can. 15 A Right. 16 MR. MACK: Let's give 17 Mr. Nissenbaum a few minutes to recover 18 from our long instruction, five minutes. 19 Take the time, look at the documents. 20 We are going start at the top when we 21 come back in five minutes. 22 (Short recess taken.) 23 MR. MACK: Let's go back on the 24 record. 25 MR. LOMBARDI: Mr. Mack, before
1 Anthony Arguelles 54 2 we proceed, I believe you inquired of 3 Mr. Arguelles whether in sum and 4 substance he contested his removal. 5 MR. MACK: Or has; I did. 6 MR. LOMBARDI: Has. It is my 7 understanding that he did not contest it 8 in any way yet, or any form or way. To 9 be absolutely responsive, Mr. Arguelles 10 did, and can tell you about inquiries he 11 made, if you wish to know, as to the 12 reasons and circumstances of his 13 removal. 14 MR. MACK: What I would suggest 15 is this: Well, in fairness, unless -- 16 to the questions I've asked, that I 17 should do it now, if you think that's 18 right, I'm glad to do it now, but I'm 19 going to give him an opportunity as to 20 every job. Since the topic has been 21 raised, why don't I inquire so I don't 22 have to worry about it at the end. 23 MR. LOMBARDI: I'm not sure 24 whether you asked any more like that, in 25 addition to not contesting.
1 Anthony Arguelles 55 2 MR. MACK: Okay. We are on the 3 record here and you're still under oath, 4 Mr. Arguelles. 5 Q I want to make certain that I 6 have captured anything you wish to say about 7 your recent removal as a shop steward at the 8 job that-we will get to. What's the location 9 of the job? 10 A I think it is 22 Chrystie. 11 Q Why don't you, in your own words, 12 tell me how you were removed and what you did 13 after you were removed. Maybe that's the 14 best way to do it. 15 A I got called down to my Local 16 unit and my business agent told me I was 17 being removed, District Council is removing 18 me from the job. 19 Q Let's stop there. You notice, 20 after a while you'll be an expert in this, 21 your local union is 157? 22 A Correct. 23 Q Give me the name of the person so 24 we have it. 25 A: Bill Hanley.
1 Anthony Arguelles 56 2 Q What did he say? 3 A He says the District Council is 4 removing you as a shop steward at 22 5 Chrystie. 6 Q What did you say? 7 A I said why? And he said there 8 were several violations. And I said, what 9 were they? And he didn't know. He said you 10 can go talk to Moe Leary about it. When I 11 went to talk to Moe Leary, he wasn't 12 available. 13 Q I'm very big on what I call the 14 five principles: Who, what, when, where, 15 how. You went to the District Council 16 offices? 17 A Yes, I did. 18 Q I'm a very detailed person. You 19 went immediately down to the District Council 20 offices? 21 A Correct. 22 Q What did you do when you were 23 there? 24 A I asked for Moe Leary. 25 Q Did you see him?
1 Anthony Arguelles 57 2 A No, I didn't. 3 Q Tell me what happened; that's all 4 I'm asking you. 5 A And then I still didn't know why 6 I was removed, so then I spoke to Billy 7 Hanley again. 8 Q On the phone? 9 A On the phone. 10 Q Tell me about that conversation. 11 What did you say, what did he say? 12 A I asked him, I still don't know 13 why I was removed; I was told several 14 violations but I still didn't know why. I 15 says, can you find out for me? 16 Q To Billy? 17 A To Billy. 18 Q Then what happened? 19 A And then I think he called you 20 personally. 21 Q Well, I'm not going to testify 22 here. He and I talk frequently, I don't 23 recall the conversation. You tell me what 24 you were told. 25 A He says because you were on the
1 Anthony Arguelles 58 2 out-of-work list. 3 Q Okay. All right. What happened 4 next? 5 A That was it. 6 Q Did you go back to Moe Leary or 7 try to find out any more data? 8 A No. 9 Q Are you contesting that you were 10 on the out-of-work list when you were 11 assigned as shop steward to that job? 12 A I was on the out-of-work list. 13 Q At least the records that I have 14 seen, indicate that you were being paid by 15 Prince during that time period. Are those 16 records incorrect? 17 A No. 18 Q So you were working? 19 A Right. 20 Q So, whether you contest the topic 21 or not is up to you. I want to say, although 22 I talk to Bill Hanley frequently, I don't 23 recall, I'm just telling you that, and I 24 certainly did not have any direct role in the 25 decision to remove you. I don't have
1 Anthony Arguelles 59 2 authority to remove you. And in fact, I have 3 no disciplinary authority of my own. I can 4 recommend disciplinary action; I have made no 5 recommendation with respect to you, at least 6 as of this time. 7 So I just want you to understand 8 that whatever questions you may have about 9 the process, are ones that you need to raise 10 in any way you wish to, whether you do or not 11 is entirely up to you, with the District 12 Council. Is that clear? 13 A That's clear. 14 Q We are going to get back to that 15 job, anyway. We are going to start 16 chronologically, and what I want to make 17 certain is that as we proceed along tonight, 18 that you feel free to refer to the exhibits 19 we've talked about earlier, because they are 20 the basis of my questions. And they raise 21 questions, and what I will ask you, you know, 22 you need to testify about the subject matter, 23 and these records may be of help to you in 24 doing that. Once you work with them for a 25 few minutes, I was going to male a joke, but
1 Anthony Arguelles 60 2 it wasn't the time to make the joke, that you 3 will find that you will be able to predict my 4 questions. 5 One topic that you may not be 6 able to predict, but certainly will be a 7 question, so I -- Mr. Lombardi, I'm sure, 8 anticipates this area of questioning. 9 I have taken a strong view with 10 the District Council that if a shop steward 11 gets paid for work or hours that they are not 12 on the jobsite, that the shop steward report 13 has to note that. There may be a perfectly 14 good reason. I take the view that if anybody 15 is paid four hours that they are not actually 16 working, and for a shop steward, they have 17 opportunity to do their union business, that 18 often in my view, they are being given 19 something for which they have not earned it. 20 Therefore, I will ask broad 21 questions tonight about specific jobsites, 22 did you receive anything of value in return 23 for some service, or for some act, and when I 24 talk about being given property, I'm talking 25 about -- we've just had a case here in which
1 Anthony Arguelles 61 2 the shop steward took cash, you know, 3 regularly, in order to keep it going. When I 4 talk about property being given for 5 consideration, it could be cash, it could be 6 a trip to Atlantic City, a vacation for the 7 family, it could be don't show up Saturday, 8 I'll pay you for the day. Because I take the 9 view that the shop steward report should be 10 accurate. Let's say, and I know we have had 11 the discussion, there's nothing wrong with a 12 decision being made, if there's a health 13 issue, take a couple of hours off, I'll pay 14 you. 15 My position is, in that 16 situation, the shop steward notes they are 17 only working five or six hours but they are 18 being paid for the full day, or that was the 19 decision of the foreman or GC. 20 What I have found in my 21 investigation, that when shop stewards 22 frequently work for the same people, early on 23 in my tenure, they would say you can believe 24 this, that I've worked on four R&J jobs one 25 after the other. I don't believe that. It
1 Anthony Arguelles 62 2 can't happen under the system, if it's 3 working, it's not a random choice. Maybe I'm 4 wrong. I have yet to see a situation where I 5 felt it was just a coincidence. I guess it 6 could be, but it is unlikely. 7 I'm concerned about if the same 8 shop steward works with the same contractor, 9 there are sort of agreements and methods that 10 go between them that sometimes push the 11 envelope or go beyond the envelope on 12 following the union rules. I found that so 13 many times such that I want to find out. 14 I'll ask you some questions on that topic 15 tonight. I just wanted to give you my 16 interpretations of that, so when I ask the 17 question, you know what I'm asking about. 18 Obviously, if it's unclear or you 19 need to talk to Mr. Lombardi about it, you 20 will be given that opportunity. They are not 21 designed to be trick questions. My view of 22 the subject is making sure the shop steward 23 report is a reliable, accurate indicator of 24 what carpenters are there, how many hours 25 they worked, and basically ensuring that the
1 Anthony Arguelles 63 2 union's Collective Bargaining Agreement is 3 enforced as written. 4 Is that reasonably clear? 5 A Yes. 6 MS. ZORNBERG: Mr. Mack, I had 7 some follow-up questions on just this 8 issue of inquiries about his removal. 9 Shall I save that for the end? 10 MR. MACK: I would save it for 11 the end. I think it will make more 12 sense chronologically. 13 MS. ZORNBERG: Happy to do that. 14 MR. MACK: The exception, if you 15 would like to leave early and may not be 16 around at the end. I'm not suggesting 17 that's what you're doing. 18 MS. ZORNBERG: I'll be here the 19 whole time. 20 MR. MACK: That being the case, I 21 think it is easier if we proceed 22 chronologically. 23 Q My purpose was to find out if 24 there had been inquiry, or you were given a 25 statement about certain of these topics that
1 Anthony Arguelles 64 2 I have. 3 You should have AA-2, AA-3 and 4 AA-7 close at hand, and I think one thing I 5 should point out to you, that we haven't 6 spent some time on, is, on the second page of 7 AA-2 , there's a list of all of your skills 8 that are listed as of the date that is shown 9 there, which happens to be 5 November 2004 . 10 These are the skills that are listed for you 11 at the District Council. 12 It may be my inability, but one 13 skill that you had from the very beginning 14 that I didn't see added, was acoustical 15 ceilings. You'll see you have the skill 16 there, I think you have the skill throughout 17 the time period that we are involved with. 18 didn't see where you put that on. It may be 19 that I just missed it. It is not a big deal. 20 But do you recall when you added acoustical 21 ceilings to your skill set? 22 A No. 23 Q Do you have any recollection 24 whether it was before 1998 or after? 25 A Probably after, because when the
1 Anthony Arguelles 65 2 list started, I really didn't know all the 3 detailed breakdown of the requirements of the 4 list. How can I say it? I didn't know the 5 breakdown of each individual requirement and 6 qualification on the list. Sous I became 7 more familiar with the list, I added. 8 Q There's a certain-period where 9 you add a lot of skills. I'm going to ask 10 you, did something- happened at that time to 11 cause you to add the skills. With respect to 12 acoustical ceilings, what does that mean? 13 A That's an acoustical ceiling. 14 Q Above us? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Do you get special training in 17 order to be able to list that skill? 18 A No. 19 Q Are there different types of 20 ceiling skills, and if so, what do you recall 21 about them, or where you obtained those 22 skills? I'm talking about ceiling skills. 23 A Ceiling skills. Are there 24 different types of ceilings? 25 Q You take a look.
1 Anthony Arguelles 66 2 A There's drywall ceilings, this is 3 acoustical, drywall bar ceiling. This is 4 grid ceiling, drywall would be fastened to 5 Chicago bar. Acoustical is just a tile grid 6 system. 7 Q There's ceiling-concealed, 12 by 8 12 ; what's that? 9 A When there's no grid involved, it 10 is one-by-one tile, there's no grid involved. 11 It is a different type of system. 12 Q Did you go to school to learn 13 that, ceiling school? 14 A You don't have to. You can take 15 the course, they have a course there, but, 16 you know, you can do it on the job. 17 Q Have you ever had a conversation 18 with another carpenter or another person in 19 which you were encouraged to put down your 20 ceiling skills? 21 A Not that I recall. 22 Q Because you'll see here that 23 ceiling skills are definitely an important 24 part of dispatches for you. Nothing wrong 25 with that. I'm just trying to find out
1 Anthony Arguelles 67 2 whether or not you ever had a conversation 3 with someone as to say put down ceiling 4 skills, or put down acoustical ceiling, 5 that's a good skill to have in your skill 6 set. Did that ever occur? 7 A No. 8 Q I would suggest you turn to what 9 is basically the third page of AA-2 . If you 10 take AA-3 and you added -- you may not 11 remember this, let me ask it. Do you 12 remember how you first came to be added to 13 the out-of-work list? In other words, did 14 you, like, say, hey we are going to run or 15 manage or administer an out-of-work list, all 16 carpenters should list their names. I'm 17 guessing. You tell me how you got to be on 18 the out-of-work list. 19 A When the list first started, they 20 said this is the way you obtain your work 21 now, through the out-of-work list. 22 Q Do you remember who told you 23 that, or was it a written document? 24 A No, I don't know if it was at the 25 local union or -- could have been at the
1 Anthony Arguelles 68 2 local union. 3 Q Were you given any assistance or 4 advice, that you can recall, about adding 5 your name to it, and how the list was 6 supposed to work? 7 A Well, I guess they told you you 8 have to call up this number and then you have 9 to wait, and you get the job. 10 Q Now, did anyone say to you, or 11 were you ever informed, this sounds like a 12 stupid question, it may be stupid, that you 13 have to be out of work before you put 14 yourself on the out-of-work list? 15 A Right, you have to be out of 16 work. 17 Q That's not a question that was 18 unclear; were you ever confused or ever 19 unclear about whether you could be working 20 and still be on the out-of-work list? 21 A No. 22 Q So a lot of my questions tonight 23 are going to deal with when you're on the 24 list, are you out of work or not. Let me say 25 this: There are some situations that the
1 Anthony Arguelles 69 2 District Council has taken the view that you 3 can work and still be on the out-of-work 4 list. I'm not going to tell you what those 5 are. There may be a couple of instances, I 6 may be wrong, but there may be a couple of 7 instances where you could be working and 8 still be on the out-of-work list. We are 9 going to get to those as we move along. 10 Although it sounds simple -- 11 A I never heard of that. 12 Q Good. It is not intuitive, and 13 that's something the District Council will 14 have to deal with in the future, at another 15 time. But it may not be prevalent today. 16 That's for the future. 17 In any event, my first question 18 is this: Take a look at AA-3 , and when you 19 listed, or your name was listed on the 20 out-of-work list, on August 31, 1998 , were 21 you out of work? 22 Of course what I'm asking you 23 about is, if you take a look at your benefit 24 records, there's at least a possibility that 25 in August of 1998 that you were working. The Laborers for JUSTICE © 1 Anthony Arguelles 70 2 reason I say that is, I look at entries for 3 Cord Contracting and New Amsterdam. Here's 4 the first question, which is, when you were 5 added to the out-of-work list for that entry, 6 were you working or not? 7 A I'm not sure. I mean, that's a 8 long time ago. 9 Q Okay. Think about You know, 10 you were working for Cord, do you remember 11 working for Cord? 12 A Yeah, I worked for Cord in the 13 past. 14 Q: I want you to think about it. 15 This is some time ago, but we are going to 16 move our way through, you know, right through 17 the process. I want -- when I ask you a 18 question like that, you have some help for 19 your recollection, you have a job referral 20 history, you have a benefit history and you 21 also will have from AA-7 , the actual dispatch 22 which describes the job that you're sent to. 23 In this case, you don't have that; because it 24 is the initial entry. 25 MR. LOMBARDI: We don't have it
1 Anthony Arguelles 71 2 on this job. 3 Q You don't remember, one way or 4 the other, whether you were working on August 5 31, 1998 ? 6 A No. 7 Q You stay on the list, through -- 8 on September 8 , 1998 , you are referred to 9 Eurotech Construction. If you look on the 10 very first page of AA-7 , you will see that 11 you are referred on that date to a Eurotech 12 job at B-e-n, I guess Benjamin Hotel, 50th 13 and Lexington Avenue. Do you remember that 14 job, going to that job? 15 A Eurotech? I think I do remember 16 going there, and I think there was another 17 shop steward there. 18 Q Let's go slowly, because there 19 are no hours reported for you --- 20 A Right, I didn't work -- 21 Q Wait until I finish the question. 22 MR. LOMBARDI: Let him finish the 23 questions. 24 Q Then tell me what your 25 recollection is. What happened on that job
1 Anthony Arguelles 72 2 when you went there? Do you have a 3 recollection of going to that hotel at 50th 4 and Lex? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Tell me what your recollection 7 is. 8 A I was sent to that job and there 9 was another shop steward there already. I 10 think I was referred there as the shop 11 steward. 12 Q Think to yourself and then give 13 the best answer you can. 14 A I'm not even that sure. I didn't 15 get hired. 16 Q Didn't get hired because there 17 was another steward there, or they didn't put 18 you on, or there wasn't a steward there? 19 A I wasn't sure if I got referred 20 as the steward or as a regular worker. When 21 I got there, there was another steward there, 22 and I don't think the guy put me on, because 23 he didn't need any workers. I think it was a 24 wrong call on the dispatch. 25 Q That may be true. I'm going to
1 Anthony Arguelles 73 2 go quickly through '98 and '99 , because I 3 think they are at least -- you have to go 4 through them to make sure that you have the 5 system down. Once you do this a few times 6 we'll move quickly, because we'll be getting 7 more and more current. 8 I do want to point out to you 9 here, there are benefits paid for you of a 10 total for -- it appears in the month of 11 September, 1998 , so it is not a secret, from 12 Jacobson Godsell and Absolute FI. I don't 13 know what Absolute is. We may get to that. 14 Recognize that you have a significant number 15 of hours reported for work for you during 16 this period. So it may help you remember. 17 The next referral is, you were 18 out on September 9, September 9, 1998 , and 19 that job appears that you're sent to Jacobson 20 & Company, 599 Lexington Avenue. Do you 21 remember that job? 22 A: No, I don't. 23 Q I'm going to cut some of this 24 short, but basically you're back on the 25 out-of-work list on September 22 . So the
1 Anthony Arguelles 74 2 question that at least I'm asking, are you 3 truly out of work during that period? You 4 know, you're back, referred out again on 5 September 23rd and you're sent to Godsell. 6 And so there's a Godsell job at 65 East 55th 7 Street. Do you remember that job? 8 A Yes. 9 Q I guess the question I'm asking 10 you is, do you remember a New Amsterdam job? 11 A New Amsterdam? 12 Q Whose benefits were -- I don't 13 have you on that job unless there's something 14 that I don't know. And then I have another 15 three, over three days, three days at 16 Absolute FI. So you're there September 3 0th, 17 '98, another 24 hours. I don't know where 18 that is. I'm trying to figure out is that 19 work you were doing in September '98, that 20 you were working? 21 A New Amsterdam? 22 Q And then Absolute FI. I don't 23 know what that is. 24 A There's so many companies over 25 the years, it is hard to --
1 Anthony Arguelles 75 2 Q You may not recall. 3 A I don't. 4 Q Do you have any explanation that 5 you can give me for either that New Amsterdam 6 56 hours, or Absolute FI, it could be PI, 7 whatever it is, but do you know what those 8 jobs were or whether you were working at that 9 time for those companies? 10 A I remember New Amsterdam: I'm 11 just trying to picture where that was. I 12 remember working for New Amsterdam. 13 Q Do you remember a jobsite, or 14 anything about it? 15 A No. 16 Q The question I'm asking you is, 17 you know, we'll be moving closer to the 18 present, but when you put your name on the 19 out-of-work list, were you really out of 20 work? 21 MR. LOMBARDI: On September 22nd? 22 MR. MACK: Well, whether it is 23 August 31st or, in this particular case, 24 your back on, on September 22 . 25 MR. LOMBARDI: You already asked
1 Anthony Arguelles 76 2 him about August 31st. 3 MR. MACK: Right, I wonder by 4 going through the benefit record, if I 5 can refresh his recollection. 6 A I don't recall. It is so long 7 ago. 8 Q Let's keep going. On October 9 28th, you're added to the list. I am going 10 to go -- you see you're added on October 28 11 to the 157 list, to be precise, at 4:38 p.m. 12 and 608 , same time, and then on the next day, 13 October 19th, 1998, you're referring out to 14 another Godsell job. 15 I would tell you, if you look at 16 AA-7 , you are specifically requested, if you 17 look at the fax, on October 29, by Godsell, 18 you'll see your name and number there. 19 My question is: Do you miss a 20 day of work, I mean, when you put yourself 21 back on the out-of-work list, I mean, I take 22 it it is theoretically possible if you look 23 in October, Godsell reports 112 hours for you 24 for the month of October, so the question -- 25 A: When?
1 Anthony Arguelles 77 2 Q October 31. Mathematically, it 3 is possible, but I'm asking you, were you 4 working when you put yourself back on the 5 out-of-work list on October 28, 1998; because 6 the very next day, you go to another Godsell 7 job. Were you actually out of work at the 8 time you put yourself on the list? 9 A I could have been. My daughter 10 was born, I remember; October 22 , I left 11 Godsell. I might have went back to them. 12 Did I get requested from them? 13 Q You are requested. And the 14 request is there. 15 A That could have been it. 16 Q Just run it through me again. 17 A When did I leave Godsell? 18 Q You told the out-of-work list, on 19 October 28th, that you were out of work. 20 A Okay. 21 Q You may have been out of work, 22 but that's the question, were you working for 23 Godsell when you put yourself back on the 24 list, because you are requested out -- this 25 is not an unusual thing, by the way -- the
1 Anthony Arguelles 78 2 very next day you're referred to another 3 Godsell job, you're requested out, to be 4 direct, and the request is right there, 5 you'll see it if you take a look at 7, it is 6 this document, it looks like a fax. 7 A From what I can recall vaguely, 8 is that my daughter was born October 22 nd, I 9 think I was working for Godsell, and I left, 10 and I don't know, I must have took some time 11 off. Then I called them back to see if they 12 had work. 13 Q Your answer to that, as best as 14 you can recall, is that you were not working? 15 A Right. 16 Q And you were legitimately on the 17 out-of-work list? 18 A Right. 19 Q Because your daughter was born? 20 A Right. 21 Q I don't want to put words in your 22 mouth. 23 A I'm going back so long, that I 24 think that was the scenario there. 25 Q Think about it. Because, I mean,
1 Anthony Arguelles 79 2 you're the only one, you're the one best 3 qualified, sitting in this, room to answer 4 that question. And if you have a 5 recollection, when was your daughter born? 6 A October 22nd. 7 Q Do you remember taking time off 8 from work? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Were you being paid by Godsell, 11 even though you were not working? 12 A No. 13 Q How much time did you take off to 14 honor your daughter's birth? 15 A I mean, I would say at least 16 week, maybe, three, four -- I would say maybe 17 a week, as best as I can remember. 18 Q In that week, you were not 19 working and not being paid? 20 A Right. 21 Q Then what; did you have 22 communications with Godsell about going back 23 to work for Godsell? 24 A Right. I think so. I called 25 them up to see if they had work.
1 Anthony Arguelles 80 2 Q As far as you can recall, when 3 you put your name back on the list on October 4 28, 19 98, were you in fact out of work; is 5 that right? 6 A Correct. 7 MR. LOMBARDI: Are you sure? 8 THE WITNESS: It is so long ago. 9 I know my daughter was born in that 10 period; I know I took some time off, a 11 day here, a day there; I mean -- 12 MR. LOMBARDI: Be careful. If 13 you think you may have, say it that way. 14 I think Mr. Mack wants you to be sure, 15 or to tell him if you are not sure. 16 THE WITNESS: I'm not really 17 sure. 18 Q There are going to be other 19 situations that are clearer in terms of the 20 facts, but I mean, also, I don't want you to 21 be warned off here. Your daughter's birth is 22 something that's hard to forget. 23 The point I'm trying to get at 24 is, if I go back and subpoena shop steward 25 reports, am I going to see you on Godsell's
1 Anthony Arguelles 81 2 shop steward or payrolls on October 28 ? 3 A I'm not really sure. 4 Q So I could, it is possible? 5 Anything is possible. In other words, I 6 don't want to make more of this than what's 7 there. If you're actually not at work when 8 your daughter is born, that would be natural. 9 If you're paid and listed on a shop steward 10 report as working, if I decide to subpoena 11 Godsell's records, that would be inconsistent 12 with the explanation. I want you to think 13 about it. 14 A Dates, I don't remember too well. 15 I know my daughter was born, and I missed a 16 few days. 17 Q Let's start a different subject. 18 This is 1998 There may be a pattern here 19 that I want to make sure I get correctly. 20 Do you recall not working when 21 your daughter was born? 22 A Correct. 23 Q Do you recall taking a period of 24 days off when your daughter was born? 25 A Correct.
1 Anthony Arguelles 82 2 MR. LOMBARDI: After she was 3 born? 4 Q After she was born? 5 A Correct. 6 Q Do you have a recollection of how 7 many days you took off? 8 A No, I don't. 9 Q Do you have a recollection as to 10 whether or not you were paid by the 11 contractor, even though you were taking days 12 off? 13 A No, I wasn't paid. 14 Q Do you recall whether or not you 15 were on a shop steward report during that 16 time period that you were taking time off? 17 A I'm not sure. 18 Q I don't want to dwell on it. We 19 are going to have other situations. But 20 that's the kind of questioning that we'll get 21 to. It will be more current. 22 MR. ROTHMAN: Mr. Mack, I think 23 we can observe for the record that Mr. 24 Arguelles was not sent as a shop steward 25 for that job.
1 Anthony Arguelles 83 2 MR. MACK: True. October 29th he 3 was simply requested. 4 MR. ROTHMAN: Nor for the prior 5 Godsell job; is that right? It was not 6 a shop steward request. 7 MR. MACK: Feel free to look at 8 anything that's here. I'm more 9 interested, and more focused -- 10 Q These documents have a lot of 11 information on them. If you need to look at 12 them, you can tell whether you were sent as a 13 shop steward or not by simply looking at the 14 manning request form and the underlying 15 dispatch, or the record of the referral 16 dispatch. It will tell you whether you go 17 there as a shop steward or not. That 18 information is there. 19 I'm trying to find out whether 20 there are times where you're on the 21 out-of-work list and in fact working. That's 22 why we'll keep going. I don't want to dwell 23 too long on October '98, because we have more 24 years to cover. 25 Let's go to the next, December
1 Anthony Arguelles 84 2 18th, 1998 You'll see you're added to the 3 out-of-work list on December 18th, 1998 In 4 that time period, adding the three hours, 5 4:29 in the afternoon. If you turn to your 6 benefit record, you will see that for the 7 month of December 1998, there is a total of 8 138 hours reported for you for that month. 9 So it would at least appear from those 10 records, -- but your memory -- that you were 11 working for Godsell or Nastasi during the 12 time that you added yourself to the list. 13 The question is -- again, these 14 are the records, they may not mean what they 15 appear to mean, but at least they cause me to 16 ask you the question: On December 18, '98, 17 when you were added to the list, were you 18 working? 19 Take your time and go through and 20 see why I'm asking that question. Take a 21 look at AA-3 for the time period, you'll see 22 the hours reported for you for the month of 23 December both by Nastasi and by Godsell. 24 (Pause.) 25 MR. LOMBARDI: I believe it is a
1 Anthony Arguelles 85 2 total of 143 hours. 3 MR. MACK: That's why I'm so 4 happy you're here. 5 See how lucky you are, Mr. 6 Arguelles? Whatever the hours are, they 7 were certainly -- 143 , all we need to do 8 is take a look at the right-hand total 9 hours for that month, you would also get 10 that number. 11 MR. ROTHMAN: Mr. Lombardi is 12 masquerading as a mathematician. 13 THE WITNESS: For the month? 14 MR. MACK: For the month. Just 15 looking at that, I know, unless you 16 worked tremendous overtime, during that 17 period, it would appear to me that you 18 certainly worked enough hours to be 19 employed every week during the month of 20 December 1998 . 21 MR. LOMBARDI: Walter, let me 22 take a moment with my client. 23 (Short recess taken.) 24 MR. MACK: Let's go back on the 25 record.
1 Anthony Arguelles 8 6 2 Mr. Nissembaum needs to be home 3 by midnight so I want to be able to 4 proceed. 5 MR. LOMBARDI: If you've ever 6 seen Stew turn into a pumpkin. 7 Mr. Arguelles is going to say 8 something on the record in response to 9 some of the recent questions. 10 MR. MACK: Okay. 11 THE WITNESS: In the beginning, 12 when the list first came out, I 13 frequently put my name on the list when 14 I was working. Honestly, nobody knew 15 how the list actually worked. I needed 16 to go to work. To sit home and wait for 17 a job when you have bills to pay, you 18 know, -- 19 Q Let me -- 20 A -- that just enhanced trying to 21 get a job. 22 MR. LOMBARDI: I want the record 23 to be clear. That is clearly the 24 situation, and yet I want to be clear, 25 because we are talking about late '98,
1 Anthony Arguelles 87 2 now moving into early '99, because I've 3 asked Anthony in breaks, do you have 4 specific recollections about the dates 5 that Mr. Mack has asked you so far, 6 about actually whether you did put your 7 name on the out-of-work list on that 8 particular date while you were still 9 working. And he is having what I 10 believe is a genuine difficulty 11 remembering those individual instances, 12 yet he can tell you, so for the sake of 13 general accuracy, he can tell you with 14 some frequency in the early years of the 15 list, he put himself on the list when 16 working. 17 MR. MACK: Nobody can remember 18 five, six years ago, what they were 19 doing on a particular day. You know, it 20 is not so much what you're doing on a 21 particular day, it is really the 22 principle of the situation. 23 You'll see these records as we go 24 through. You're in plenty of company in 25 this area. It is just important, I
1 Anthony Arguelles 88 2 think it is important that you be 3 accurate about the situation. And, you 4 know, it helps us, and the significance 5 or consequences of that, I have no idea 6 what they are, because there's so many 7 people in that category, to be perfectly 8 honest, that sat where you sit; and 9 whether they start off admitting it or 10 end up admitting it, the reality comes 11 out sooner or later. 12 I appreciate your candor. I know 13 the District Council has, itself, 14 indicated that there's a certain time 15 period where they are saying, gee, 16 that's too long ago, that was the 17 beginning of what we were doing; you 18 know, I'll let them speak for 19 themselves. It is far, far better that 20 rather than -- this is just the tip of 21 the iceberg situation. There are many 22 examples of where the records appear to 23 support the concept, gee, you had to be 24 working at the time, even though you're 25 on the out-of-work list.
1 Anthony Arguelles 89 2 Let's proceed from that testimony 3 of yours, and let me ask you some 4 general questions about the situation 5 back in that time period. 6 Again, you may need 7 Mr. Lombardi's assistance in answering 8 these questions. If you do, walk 9 outside and take the time, because some 10 of these questions, you know, may not be 11 clear, or you may need to think about 12 it. I would much rather you have the 13 benefit of Mr. Lombardi's counsel than 14 to stick to a sort of situation of 15 describing the situation in an 16 inaccurate way. 17 Clear enough? 18 THE WITNESS: Yes. 19 Q Now, the reason that you would, 20 from time to time, put your name on the 21 out-of-work list, even though you had work, 22 was just -- say it in your own words, why did 23 you do that, what was going through your 24 mind, what were you thinking when you put 25 your name on the out-of-work list and were
1 Anthony Arguelles 90 2 working at the time? 3 A Probably because the job looked 4 like it was coming to an end, and I just 5 wanted another job, you know, when that one 6 ended. I didn't want to have to wait, 7 because this whole system was new to us, so 8 you didn't know if you were going to get 9 called or if they needed the District 10 Council, they forgot you, or if you were 11 going to get the call, you weren't going to 12 get the call. You try to plan ahead and give 13 yourself time to count on a job. 14 Q All right. We are going to cover 15 some specific jobs in a moment. But, why 16 wouldn't you be concerned that you would be 17 caught on the out-of-work list and given some 18 form of sanction, so therefore it was a risk 19 not worth taking? What's the answer to that 20 question? 21 A Because nobody really knew if 22 this list was going to work or not. This was 23 all brand new to everybody. I mean, it was 24 either to feed your family, get a job or risk 25 taking, you know, discipline. You know, your
1 Anthony Arguelles 91 2 family comes first. 3 Q You're not the first person to 4 say that. Again, I want you to recognize 5 that this is sort of an information-gathering 6 process for me. I'm not sitting here in 7 judgment; that's not my role, to make 8 judgments and make rulings. My job is to 9 gather facts, and I'll let others worry about 10 their significance and consequences. From 11 that point of view, I'm not going to sit here 12 and pass judgment upon your decisionmaking, 13 but I want to understand it. 14 Why weren't you concerned that 15 somebody from the District Council would do 16 what I'm doing right now, although maybe back 17 in '98 or '99 , and say, look, gee, Nastasi 18 and Godsell just reported 143 hours for 19 Anthony Arguelles, and he is on the 20 out-of-work list. Why weren't you worried 21 that somebody would do that? 22 MR. LOMBARDI: May I interject 23 that I don't think Mr. Arguelles's last 24 answer said that he wasn't concerned 25 that he might or might not be
1 Anthony Arguelles 92 2 disciplined; but that was outweighed by 3 his concern for having ready work and 4 feeding his family. 5 You may answer the question. 6 Q Although Mr. Lombardi would like 7 to be testifying today, it is your words that 8 are important. Don't -- I'm interested in 9 your state of mind and the mental process 10 that goes through your making a decision when 11 you put your name or permit your name to be 12 there, there's some calculus going on, or 13 decisionmaking process in your brain that is 14 saying, I'm willing to take certain risks in 15 order to feed my family or to keep working, 16 or whatever the reason is. 17 Now, if there was a policy in 18 place that you would be, you know, publicly 19 criticized as a carpenter for doing something 20 like that, and dumped out of the union, and 21 basically on the front page of the Daily 22 News, it might have affected your judgment. 23 I'm not trying to make light of the fact, I'm 24 trying to understand, when you're deciding, 25 I'm willing to take this risk, how are you
1 Anthony Arguelles 93 2 assessing, you know, the appropriateness of 3 the risk that you're taking? 4 MR. LOMBARDI: That's a better 5 question. 6 MR. MACK: Okay. I'm not sure it 7 is, but I would rather hear from your 8 client than you, on the question. 9 MR. LOMBARDI: I understand that, 10 Walter, but we don't want to 11 mischaracterize his testimony. 12 MR. MACK: I certainly don't. 13 The judge would be unhappy with you and 14 me if we do that. 15 Q Do you understand the question? 16 A Yes. 17 Q What went through your mind: Why 18 did you decide this was worth the risk? 19 A I needed a job. 20 Q If I remember, there was somebody 21 from the District Council saying, wait a 22 minute here, you're on the out-of-work list 23 and you're working for Nastasi and Godsell; 24 there's going to be a sanction. Were you 25 concerned about that?
1 Anthony Arguelles 94 2 A Sure, I was concerned, but I 3 needed a job, so I took the risk. 4 Q Did you ever get any advice from 5 anyone at 157 or anywhere else, gee, Anthony, 6 it is worth it, put your name on the list, 7 you know, and take your chances? Or, this is 8 the way to keep yourself at work? 9 A No. 10 Q Do you understand my question? 11 A Right. 12 Q Was this entirely your own 13 calculation of risk/reward? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Without anybody advising you or 16 telling you, gee, do what everybody does. I 17 don't care what they may have said, the point 18 is this, is this entirely your own judgment? 19 A Yes. 20 Q No advice or recommendation from 21 anyone else? 22 A No. 23 Q Did you, at that time, know of 24 anyone who had been caught and disciplined 25 for doing what you were doing; that is, being
1 Anthony Arguelles 95 2 on the out-of-work list when you were 3 working? 4 MR. LOMBARDI: We are talking 5 about the time period from the beginning 6 of August '98, to the end of, I guess -- 7 MR. MACK: We are up to early 8 '99 . 9 MR. LOMBARDI: Early '99 . In 10 that time frame. 11 A Not that I know of. 12 Q Let's expand it. Let's go up to 13 the present. Are you aware of anybody who 14 has been caught and disciplined for what is 15 known in the trade maybe as riding the 16 out-of-work list? 17 A Yes, you hear people getting 18 called down. 19 Q What do you hear? Tell me what 20 you hear. Called down to me? 21 A No, called down to the District 22 Council. 23 Q What do you hear about it? 24 A Some people get fined. You know, 25 I guess all cases are different.
1 Anthony Arguelles 9 6 2 Q When did you start hearing about 3 that? 4 A It's been a few years, I think. 5 Q So is there any particular person 6 who you are aware of, who was caught riding 7 the out-of-work list, who received a sanction 8 of some kind; can you name anybody? 9 A No; as far as names, no. 10 Q So let's continue with the 11 subject matter here. I'll go a little bit 12 more quickly. Let me ask you about this job 13 here, this particular job here. 14 I see you were added to the list 15 on December 18th, 199 8 , and it appears to me 16 that you were working at that time. 17 Do you have a specific 18 recollection of that month and the job, for 19 instance, what you were doing for Nastasi; do 20 you remember? 21 A No, I don't. 22 Q You add yourself to the list on 23 December 18th, and you stay on the list until 24 you're referred to work on January 21 st, 25 1999 .
1 Anthony Arguelles 97 2 Let me ask a question, which I 3 should have asked from the beginning. When 4 did you get your first shop steward skill? 5 In other words, so that you had -- you were 6 able to be sent out as a shop steward. What 7 is your recollection of that? 8 A When we started going to the 9 classes, it was '99 or 2000. I forgot when I 10 started going to the classes. In that time 11 area, '98, '99, 2000. In that area. 12 Q I just don't see, until later on, 13 a shop steward skill being added; so I'm 14 trying to figure out if you remember when you 15 were first qualified to be assigned as a shop 16 steward from the District Council. 17 A '98, '99, In that time, we were 18 going for the classes. 19 Q Does this mean that you attended 20 a class at the carpenter school? 21 A Correct. 22 Q Do you recall, or believe, maybe 23 that's a better way of putting it, that you 24 attended somewhere in '98, '99, , that school? 25 A I think it was in that time area,
1 Anthony Arguelles 98 2 '99, 2000, '98 It is hard. In that time 3 area. 4 Q Do you remember going back to the 5 school for additional shop steward classes at 6 a later time, closer to the present? 7 A Present being when? 8 Q Today. In other words, later 9 than 1998, '99, 2000; 2001, 2002 , '03 , '04 . 10 MR. LOMBARDI: Specifically for 11 shop steward certification? 12 MR. MACK: Yes. 13 A I think there was renewal of CPR, 14 and renewal of first aid. 15 Q You're on the out-of-work list 16 from December 18, '98 through January 21, 17 '99 Needless to say, if you look at the 18 benefit record, you appear to be employed 19 fully at that time period, for Nastasi or 20 Godsell. Do you remember what you were doing 21 for Nastasi during that time period? You see 22 there's 28 hours for Nastasi in December '98 . 23 Let's move on. If you don't 24 remember, it may be something you'll see as 25 we go. Is it fair that you don't remember at
1 Anthony Arguelles 99 2 the moment? 3 A Right. 4 Q Is this a time period where you 5 believe that you were working, even though 6 you were on the out-of-work list? 7 A It could have been. 8 Q Let me say this: You have said 9 that you would put yourself on the list even 10 though you were working, because you needed 11 to feed your family? 12 A Right. 13 Q These records, as you will see, 14 at least appear to me to say that you did 15 that pretty routinely. I'm going to give you 16 each one, but if there's a particular time in 17 which you have a recollection that you were 18 in fact not working, you should tell me, 19 because the records themselves, almost every 20 single time, you can look at them, will 21 reflect that although you're on the list, you 22 were working. If there's a time which you 23 have a memory that you were not working, such 24 as the birth of your daughter or something 25 like that, a trip or something of that
1 Anthony Arguelles 100 2 nature, I don't want -- I'm going to ask you 3 to give me a specific recollection that you 4 were not working. 5 I'm going to read the records as 6 they appear to me. 7 A Right. 8 Q If there's an exception or 9 something you think needs to be brought out, 10 in fairness to you, you should do it. Fair 11 enough? 12 A Right. 13 Q Now, on January 21st, you are 14 referred out to P.S. 21, CM Interiors. And 15 you'll need to look at that. 16 A I remember that. 17 Q Do you remember going there? 18 A No, I didn't go. I called up -- 19 because I put my name, I think, on the Queens 20 Local. 21 Q You did. Take a look right there 22 on December 18, 1998 You're added to Local 23 45 . 24 A Right. 25 Q Okay.
1 Anthony Arguelles 101 2 A I think the job required, you 3 needed a car to get there, and I didn't have 4 access to a second car because I -- my wife 5 needed a car, so I called up and I says I 6 couldn't make it. 7 Q So if you look at the list, 8 you'll see that the list actually documents 9 that for you. You are there, you are 10 referred out January 21st, 1999, and you go 11 back on the out-of-work list four days later. 12 See that next entry, January 25th, '99 ? 13 A Right. What's that "temp"? 14 Q That basically means that you 15 have served for those days, a temporary time 16 you have been there, and you're back on the 17 out-of-work list. Okay? 18 A Uh-huh. 19 Q Which is what that says. What 20 you're telling me is, you remember that, and 21 if you look at 7 , you will see that it tells 22 you the school, tells you where it is in 23 Queens, tells you who the foreman is. Your 24 start date appears to be January 25th, and if 25 you go -- I'm using this to tell you how much
1 Anthony Arguelles 102 2 information is available to us tonight; 3 you'll see that they actually have on the 4 manning request form, who called for the job, 5 the foreman's name, what the skills were, and 6 you were being sent as a shop steward; they 7 requested a shop steward. You see that? 8 A Yes. 9 Q What did you do when you got 10 there; was it your inability to travel that 11 caused you to say you couldn't take the job? 12 A Right. 13 Q What did you do, did you go back 14 on the out-of-work list? 15 A Probably, yes. 16 Q You did. It says right there on 17 January 25th, back on out-of-work list. 18 A Right. 19 Q I still see heavy hours being 20 reported for you for Nastasi during this time 21 period. Does that help you remember; were 22 you doing work for Nastasi during this 23 period? 24 A I don't recall. Are these hours 25 for the actual time period, or that's when it
1 Anthony Arguelles 103 2 was sent in? 3 Q That's the subject that I raised 4 with you when we started, that if you think, 5 gee, Nastasi is reporting time, I know 6 differently, I wasn't working for Nastasi 7 then, and these reported hours are 8 inaccurate, they don't reflect the time 9 period there. 10 A There's times when it doesn't get 11 reported till like a few weeks later. 12 Q I don't know if there are a lot 13 of times, but there are times when it 14 happens. That was what I was talking to you 15 earlier about. If you think this report is 16 for a time period or is wrong, and it is 17 actually -- I will subpoena for the payroll 18 record. If in fact you know or have a pretty 19 good recollection that you were working at 20 the time or had some job with Nastasi, you 21 know, it is something that may not, you know 22 be necessary. If you say, hey, I don't know 23 what the hell this job is for Nastasi and 24 maybe I wasn't working there, I'll subpoena 25 them. But I would encourage you not to ask
1 Anthony Arguelles 104 2 me to do that if in fact you do have some 3 recollection that you were working. 4 If you look at Nastasi, they 5 report for you, that's why I'm reasonably 6 comfortable that they are pretty close to the 7 right time period, because they report for 8 you in December '98, January '99, February 9 '99 and March '99 That's usually indicative 10 of a job that starts and continues for a 11 period of time. You're the worker. 12 A I'm trying -- so many companies 13 over the years, it is just hard to remember. 14 Q Why don't I leave that. If you 15 and your counsel, before we leave tonight, 16 want me to draw a subpoena for Nastasi's 17 record as to you, you let me know at the end 18 of the session; otherwise I'm going to make 19 the presumption that this was time, you may 20 not remember it, but it was fairly reported 21 and you were at work during this time period 22 on some project for Nastasi. If you want me 23 to get their employment reported, I have 24 authority to do that, and all you have to do 25 is ask me before the night is up. Fair
1 Anthony Arguelles 105 2 enough? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Let's keep moving here, although 5 we are not going to be quite as slow as this 6 as we move into more recent time periods. 7 The next job we have you going 8 out to during this time period is on January 9 25th, 1999, and you see you were sent to 10 Complete Construction Consortium, Inc., at 11 235 Park Avenue. There's a specific 12 referral. 13 Do you remember that job? 14 A No, I don't. 15 Q Okay. If you would go to 16 February -- you're back on the out-of-work 17 list on February 18th, 1999, and at least in 18 my way, that entry indicates that you are 19 telling the out-of-work list that you are out 20 of work on February 18th. Okay? 21 Now, if you look at the benefit, 22 you'll see that at least it appears again 23 Nastasi is reporting, it looks like 133 hours 24 for you as of February 23 , 1999 . 25 My question, again, is, do you
1 Anthony Arguelles 106 2 remember whether or not on February 18th, 3 when you put your name back on the 4 out-of-work list, whether you were in fact 5 out of work? 6 A Honestly, I don't remember. 7 Q Based upon some of my experience, 8 something that can help you remember, very 9 frequently, and your example of the birth of 10 your daughter is a good example, there will 11 be an incident that occurs, it could be a 12 vacation, a health challenge to somebody in 13 the family, it could be a birth, a wedding 14 that occurs on a particular date, that can 15 help you remember, gee, I really was out of 16 work; you know, I missed those days, or what 17 have you. 18 If there's something like that, 19 as we move closer to the present, that's 20 often a helpful way to help you remember 21 whether in fact you were out of work. I have 22 to tell you, as we go through the list, at 23 least if the Benefit Fund records are in fact 24 an aid; and they are an aid, they may not be 25 the best aid, that you are frequently on the
1 Anthony Arguelles 107 2 out-of-work list when hours are reported for 3 you. That's just the way the record looks. 4 And so I'm not prepared to presume that on 5 each and every instance, you're violating the 6 out-of-work list rules. 7 If you have a legitimate excuse 8 -for being there, the birth of your daughter 9 would be a good example, please articulate it 10 so that I have a basis upon which to conclude 11 that's not a fair example of your being 12 improperly on the out-of-work list. Is that 13 clear? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Let's keep plugging along here. 16 I see you "unable to reach," you're back on 17 the out-of-work list on February 22 nd. The 18 reason I ask you about that, I mean, you 19 weren't on that job, 235 Park Avenue, very 20 long. I'm trying to figure out why you left 21 that job. Was it over, if you remember: You 22 were there as a steward, too. 23 Take your time. 24 A What job was that, now? 25 Q You're out of work January 25th,
1 Anthony Arguelles 108 2 '99, you are referred, business agent is 3 Lawrence Derrico. You're out as a steward, 4 Complete Construction Consortium at 235 Park. 5 You see yourself go out there January 25th, 6 referred, and you're back on the list on 7 February 18th. 8 My question is: Do you remember, 9 was the job over, or why is it you went back 10 on the list at that time; if you remember. 11 A I don't remember. 12 Q Maybe there's something else that 13 might help you. I'm trying to see if any of 14 these help. Sometimes a company -- for 15 instance, it is going to be true at the 16 Bloomberg Building, that the company you 17 originally get assigned to has a problem, and 18 the substitute company comes in, and 19 therefore, the benefit report may not be the 20 name of the company that you actually got 21 referred to, because of some economic 22 reversal or some problem on the jobsite, and 23 another company is substituted, one way or 24 the other. 25 So that's an additional factor
1 Anthony Arguelles 109 2 that could assist you in trying to remember. 3 So, when you are a shop steward, you know, 4 and we are back in '99, but we are going to 5 get closer to the present here quickly, it 6 may not be the name, you know, paying the 7 benefit. It may be a company that succeeded 8 it. If that happens, think about it. 9 Because I think when you're first assigned to 10 the Bloomberg Building, you go out on behalf 11 of Complete? 12 A Yes. 13 Q And it becomes a Prince job? 14 A Right. 15 Q That maybe true on some of these 16 earlier assignments. Keep that in mind as 17 well. Let's keep going. When there's an 18 explanation that you know, you tell me. 19 You're back on the list on 20 February 18th, I don't know why you're back 21 so soon, but you get referred out again on 22 February 24th, 1999. If you go along, you'll 23 see you're sent to 445 Park Avenue, tenth 24 floor, the foreman is Rick. Here's the 25 question: You are back on the out-of-work
1 Anthony Arguelles 110 2 list approximately a week later, it is 3 approximately a week. I don't want your 4 counsel to count the days. 5 Why did you leave the job at 445 6 Park Avenue, if you remember? You're the 7 shop steward at 445 Park Avenue, and if you 8 go take a look at the Exhibit AA-7 , you will 9 see that -- you will see the call, you will 10 see the caller is Bob Dale from Preferred 11 Construction, skills are drywall, framing and 12 acoustical ceiling, and you're sent as the 13 shop steward. The call is approximately at 14 950 a.m. on the 24th, and the job starts the 15 next day at 7:00 a.m. you're only there 16 approximately six or seven days. So my 17 question is, what happened there, if you 18 remember? 19 A I don't remember Preferred 20 Construction. 21 Q Do you remember 445 Park Avenue? 22 It is on 66th Street. 23 A I'm sorry, I don't remember that 24 job. 25 Q We are still back in '99 We are
1 Anthony Arguelles 111 2 getting closer to the present. You're back 3 on the out-of-work list on March 2nd, 1999 4 I'll point out to you here, and you should 5 look at it, you can do this on your own, but 6 in March of '99, there are hours reported for 7 you from Premier, Jacobson and Nastasi for 8 the month of March. 9 So there's obviously the question 10 as to why you are on the out-of-work list, in 11 my mind, how you can go back in March, 12 because maybe those will explain, will help 13 you explain that to me. 14 I think what I'm going to do is 15 just keep going through March, and maybe some 16 of my questions will help you remember, 17 because on March 2nd, you are sent to 18 Tri-Built, or at least there's a dispatch. 19 Here's what the record tells me. See 20 attached. Tri-Built is something that I have 21 some interest and information about, but 22 "member" -- I'm not sure -- "calls back and 23 said he wasn't going." The site was 90 West 24 Street, so let me ask, maybe that will help 25 you remember, do you remember being
1 Anthony Arguelles 112 2 dispatched or receiving a dispatch to 90 West 3 Street? Take your time on this. I don't 4 want to rush you. 5 A I think I just had my own -- just 6 my Local down, I think they sent me to 608 . 7 Q '90 West Street would be 608 . 8 A I just had my local down. 9 Q Let's take a look and see. If 10 you actually look, it appears that you added 11 yourself to 608 as well as 157 . 12 MR. LOMBARDI: What date, Walter? 13 MR. MACK: March 2 . 14 A I might have done that and then 15 when I got the call for 608 , I just decided 16 not to go to -- 17 Q Was there a reason why you 18 decided not to go and take this job for 19 Tri-Built at 90 West Street? 20 A No, I just didn't -- I really 21 wasn't familiar with 608 , you know, so I had 22 been in 157, so I just decided to stay in my 23 own Local, and I took the 608 off. 24 Q You're back on the out-of-work 25 list. There's some I'm going to go through
1 Anthony Arguelles 113 2 and make sure I have it. 3 Did you have a problem with the 4 out-of-work list at all in March of '99 5 because of that; because you'll see on March 6 2, you are removed from the 157 list, you're 7 removed from 608 and you're back on the list 8 on March 4th, on 157 I could guess what 9 happened then, but -- 10 A Say it again. 11 Q If you just follow it, you will 12 see that you're referred out to the Tri-Built 13 job. 14 A Right. 15 Q You're back on the list, you are 16 referred out at 5:10 , looks like you don't 17 take it because there's no time, 810 p.m., 18 it looks like you refuse it on the phone. 19 A Right. I told them. 20 Q You're not going to a 608 job? 21 A Yes. 22 Q That's what the paperwork 23 reflects. But you are removed from both 157 24 and 608 That could simply have been an 25 error, or maybe it is something that
1 Anthony Arguelles 114 2 happened. In any even, on March 4, you're 3 back on the list. See on the top of the next 4 page? 5 A Right. 6 Q You are referred out immediately 7 again. 8 A Right. Yeah, I don't know why 9 they would take me off 157; it is probably a 10 mistake. 11 Q I'm showing you this to try to 12 refresh your recollection. On March 4, 13 you're sent to a Jacobson job at 277 Park 14 Avenue. My first question is: Do you 15 remember the 277 Park Avenue job, 31st floor. 16 A Yeah, I think I do remember that 17 job. I think it was a short job. 18 Q It certainly appears to be that 19 way, because you're back on the out-of-work 20 list in five days. 21 A Right. 22 Q Do you remember that job? 23 A Yeah, I do remember that job. 24 Q Here's the question: Was the job 25 really a five-day job, or did you decide to
1 Anthony Arguelles 115 2 leave the job? 3 A No, it was actually at the end of 4 the job, we are putting ceiling tile in, and 5 that was it; basically at the end of the job. 6 Q What happened to the shop steward 7 that was at the job, if you know? 8 A I don't know. 9 Q I don't want to put words in your 10 mouth, but is it your recollection you went 11 to 277 Park Avenue, 31st floor, there was 12 five days or four days of ceiling work left 13 to do? 14 A Right. 15 Q No shop steward on the job when 16 you got there? 17 A When I got there, no. 18 Q Do you have any recollection 19 about whether there had been a shop steward, 20 and why he left? 21 A No. 22 Q No recollection? 23 A No. 24 Q You did the job. Was the job 25 over when you left four days later or five
1 Anthony Arguelles 116 2 days later? 3 A Oh, yeah, pretty much so. 4 Q Was there a need for a steward to 5 stay on the job after you left? 6 A No. 7 Q You're back on the out-of-work 8 list on March 9th and you're referred out the 9 next day. This is Saks Fifth Avenue. Do you 10 remember this job? 11 A Saks, yes. 12 Q March 10 . What was the nature of 13 that job? 14 A What do you mean, the nature? 15 Q What kind of a job was it, you 16 know, were you doing, you know, offices, part 17 of the sails floor, what was the nature of 18 the job? 19 A Yeah, we are doing -- what were 20 we doing there? I think they were adding 21 escalators, we had to do some protection in 22 there, some drywall, framing, a couple of 23 offices. There was a lot of little stuff in 24 there. 25 Q Okay. Up to this time, are you
1 Anthony Arguelles 117 2 yourself making any decisions, based upon 3 jobs that you thought might be available in 4 the future? In other words, going on jobs or 5 leaving jobs with having in mind that there 6 were jobs coming along that you would like to 7 get. 8 MR. LOMBARDI: From the same 9 company? 10 MR. MACK: Or any company. 11 Q I'm trying to figure out as of 12 this time, in terms of your being on a job or 13 leaving a job,- are you making your decisions 14 with the idea that there may be a job that 15 you are particularly looking for, coming down 16 the road? 17 A No. 18 Q I'm going to stop and ask 19 Mr. Lombardi's favorite question: Up until 20 this time, on all the jobs we've discussed up 21 to now, up to March 10, 1999, was there any 22 situation in which you prepared a shop 23 steward report which you knew to be 24 inaccurate? 25 A No.
1 Anthony Arguelles 118 2 Q Do you understand the question? 3 In other words, if you're -- I'm going to ask 4 the question again as we move along, and it 5 will become more consequential in the future. 6 If you prepare a report and sign it as a shop 7 steward, and report hours, let's say for 8 yourself that are untrue, you know, and you 9 knew they were untrue when you filed them, 10 or, you keep carpenters who are working on 11 the site and don't list them on the shop 12 steward report, or you put down hours that 13 are incorrect, you know, when you sign in or 14 write there name in, you know that the 15 carpenter you're reporting, you are not 16 reporting an accurate description of their 17 hours. So the question is that broad. All 18 right? I'm only asking now the period we've 19 talked about, from, in essence, August '98 up 20 through March '99 ? 21 MR. LOMBARDI: Don't say. 22 anything. Let's go outside. 23 Thank you for your question. 24 MR. MACK: Okay. 25 (Whereupon, Mr. Lombardi and the
1 Anthony Arguelles 119 2 witness left the deposition room, and 3 then returned.) 4 MR. MACK: On the record. 5 Q Do you understand the question? 6 Because it is a question that I want to make 7 sure you understand, because I will repeat it 8 at various intervals tonight. The most 9 important thing is, is my question clear, or 10 do you want me to ask it again or, explain 11 something? 12 A Ask it again. 13 Q All right. 14 All I'm talking about at this 15 time are the jobs that we have described from 16 August 31st, 1998 through March -- let's take 17 through the Saks job, which I think is March 18 1999 . 19 The question is: At any job in 20 that time period, were the shop steward 21 reports that you prepared, accurate in all 22 aspects? I explained what I mean by 23 accurate. Your hours, were your hours 24 correct, were the hours of the carpenters on 25 the report accurate, and were all the
1 Anthony Arguelles 120 2 carpenters on the jobsite that were-there, 3 reported on the shop steward report that you 4 prepared? 5 A Everyone, to the best of my 6 knowledge, yes. 7 Q Now, I want you to be careful 8 with the best of your knowledge. Again, this 9 is an early time period. But the same 10 question is going to be asked, and so when I 11 hear the word "knowledge," I want to at least 12 go through what knowledge means. Some people 13 are under the impression knowledge means I 14 have to see records and have them directly in 15 front of me. We have had shop stewards who 16 are -- for instance, who card people and know 17 somebody is there, one way or the other, and 18 yet still cling to the view that that person 19 is there, or, I don't know how many hours, 20 because I didn't watch them walk on the site 21 or off the site. 22 I want you to know knowledge 23 means that a reasonably competent shop 24 steward who is acting consistent with his 25 obligation as a shop steward to the union,
1 Anthony Arguelles 121 2 has a reason to believe that the hours are 3 not correct or that not all carpenters are 4 being appropriately accounted for. 5 Do you understand when you use 6 the word "knowledge," that's how I ask the 7 question: Do you have reason to believe 8 either that the shop steward report as 9 |